(2007) evaluated the efficacy of e-CHUG over 16 weeks in a volunteer sample of 106 1st-year university students reporting heavy episodic drinking.
Because e-CHUG is being used at so many colleges and universities and is often administered during 1st-year orientation for matriculating students, it is important to evaluate e-CHUG as a potential evidence-based strategy.
Participants were recruited from two 1st-year summer orientation sections at a large metropolitan university in the Northwest, The two orientation sections were randomly assigned by coin toss to either the e-CHUG group or assessment-only control group, All 1st-year students enrolled in the two sections and present during the baseline assessment (N = 350) were given an opportunity to participate in the study.
Of these, 167 (48%) were in the orientation section assigned to the e-CHUG condition and 183 (52%) were in the orientation section assigned to the assessment-only control condition.
Members of the research team (the four authors) joined orientation leaders to facilitate the administration of the baseline assessment and e-CHUG program.
Students in the intervention group were directed to take e-CHUG, a National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) recognized, evidenced-based, online alcohol intervention and personalized feedback tool developed by counselors and psychologists at San Diego State University.
(2007) provided evidence for the efficacy of e-CHUG in accelerating a reduction in drinking among 1st-year students, research that examined providing e-CHUG as part of 1st-year orientation or a 1st-year seminar has not been published.
The aim of the current study is to extend the literature by conducting a program evaluation to examine the efficacy of administering e-CHUG as part of the 1st-year seminar curriculum.
Six 1st-year seminar sections (N = 87 students) were randomly assigned to either the Web-based personalized normative feedback intervention (i.e., e-CHUG) group or the assessment-only control group.
The e-CHUG group completed the online alcohol intervention and social norming program during class.
Using this measure, 41% of the participants were classified as high-risk drinkers (37% of the e-CHUG group and 43% of the control group) and 59% were classified as low-risk drinkers.