| Cocaine:
Self-Efficacy
Listed below are a number of situations that lead some people to drink.
Enter the numbers in the boxes that best corresponds to your present feelings of temptation and
confidence in each of the situations below.
1 = Not at all
2 = Not very
3 = Moderately
4 = Very
5 = Extremely
 |
When I am feeling angry inside |
 |
 |
When I am feeling depressed |
 |
 |
When I see others drinking alcohol |
 |
 |
When I am craving a drink |
 |
 |
When I am feeling really good |
 |
 |
When I have the urge to try just one drink |
 |
 |
When I am bored |
 |
 |
When I am worried about something |
 |
 |
When I think I have overcome my problems with alcohol |
 |
 |
When I want to test my willpower |
 |
 |
When I am celebrating a special occasion |
 |
 |
When I am lonely |
 |
 |
When I feel a physical need for alcohol |
 |
 |
When things are going really well for me |
 |
 |
When other people encourage me to have a drink |
 |
 |
When I see an ad about alcohol |
 |
 |
When I become overconfident about my sobriety |
 |
 |
When I am offered a drink by someone |
 |
 |
When I am passing a bar |
 |
 |
When I am with friends I used to drink with |
 |
 |
When I am feeling really positive about the way things are going
for me |
 |
 |
When I am nervous |
 |
 |
When I feel like having a good time |
 |
 |
When I go by a liquor store |
 |
 |
When I have a strong urge for a drink |
 |
 |
When I think I can drink again |
 |
 |
When I am in a situation I used to drink |
 |
 |
When I am really happy |
 |
 |
When I want to see how far I can push myself |
 |
 |
When it's late and an urge comes over me |
 |
Description
(taken from Matt Snow's Doctoral Dissertation)
Self-Efficacy Scale
The self-efficacy questionnaire consisted of 30 items generated to measure specific
situational confidence (to abstain from alcohol use) and temptation (to engage in alcohol
use) factors. Items were written to represent five constructs, including negative
affective situations, positive/social situations, craving or habit items, situational cues
(environmental), and testing personal control. The format for such a factor structure was
taken from work previously done in the smoking field (Velicer et al., 1990), and from
interviews of replapse situations proposed generally for addictive behaviors (e.g.,
Marlatt & Gordon, 1985).
The resultant 30x30 item matrices (Confidence and Temptation) were subjected to
principal components analysis using the MAP procedure. As previously stated, this program
offers a range of choices in the number of components to retain. Scree plots, MAP
(Velicer, 1976) and Horn's rule (Horn, 1965) were utilized to determine the number of
components to retain.
Due to the nature of the sample (mean length of sobriety at assessment = 5.93
years), both of these scales exhibited a considerable restriction of range in scores, as
the mean of the temptation items was quite low (X = 2.06 ; SD = 0.93), while confidence
was uniformly high across theoretically problematic situations (X = 4.35 ; SD = 0.75).
Once again, the similarity pattern across various addictive behaviors is noted, as this
closely represents what has been found in large groups of smokers, despite the fact
that the item content has markedly differed between the samples (e.g., Prochaska &
DiClemente, 1984; Rossi et al., 1989).
Recent investigations on self-efficacy in the smoking area have suggested that a
restriction in range may not represent a response bias, but may reflect an accurate
assessment of self-efficacy as a function of stage of change This type of
response pattern (with high inter-item correlations) has been identified as one in which
an obfuscation of distinct factors occurs, which might lead to an interpretation of a
single, general, underlying factor to these scales (Velicer & Steiger, 1990). Like the
processes of change, subjects were included in the final analysis only if complete
responses were present for all items. This resulted in an effective sample of 150 for the
temptation items and 163 for the confidence scales (listwise N = 143). These are
considerably smaller than the process scales (listwise N = 175) and possibly represents a
pitfall in conducting research on long-term maintenance. While process use represents what
individuals are currently doing, subjective ratings of efficacy with this group of
maintainers may be a less salient domain to measure for these individuals, although this
is speculative.
Confidence
Within the Confidence scale, the range of factors was from 1 (scree plot) to 2 components
suggested by both MAP and parallel analysis. Both 1 and 2 component PCA's were performed
on the matrix, and the resultant solutions examined for maximum clarity and
interpretability. From these analysis, it was clear that a single, general factor
emerged as the most interpretable of the solutions. All 30 of the confidence items leaded
at .53 or higher on the single general factor, with a mean loading of .70. An estimate of
internal consistency (coefficient alpha) was .97 for the 30 item scale. Table 9 provides
the means, standard deviations, reliability estimates, and intercorrelations between the
temptation and confidence scales.
| Variable |
Temptations |
Confidence |
Mean |
SD |
Alpha |
|
Temptation
|
1.00
|
---
|
2.06
|
0.93
|
.97
|
|
Confidence
|
-.60
|
1.00
|
4.35
|
0.75
|
.97
|
References
Martin, R.A., Rossi, J.S., Rosenbloom, D., Monti, P.M., & Rohsenow, D.J. (1992,
November). Stages and processes of change for quitting cocaine. Paper
presented at the 26th annual meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior
Therapy, Boston, MA.
Prochaska,
J. O., W. F. Velicer, et al. (1994). "Stages of change and decisional balance for 12
problem behaviors." Health Psychology 13: 39-46.
Rosenbloom, D. (1991). A Transtheoretical Analysis of Change Among Cocaine Users.
Unpublished dissertation, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI.
Rossi, J.S. (1992, August). Common processes of change across nine problem behaviors.
Paper presented at the 100th annual convention of the American Psychological Association,
Washington, DC.
|