Psychometric Assessment of the Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire: Comparing a Brief Version to the Original Full Scale

Authors

Lindsay S. Ham, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow
Sherry H. Stewart, Dalhousie UniversityFollow
Peter J. Norton, University of Houston
Debra A. Hope, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow

ORCID IDs

Debra A. Hope

Document Type

Article

Date of this Version

9-2005

Citation

Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 27:3 (September 2005), pp. 141–158.

doi: 10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

Comments

Copyright © 2005 Springer Science+Business Media. Used by permission.

Abstract

The current set of studies compared the psychometric properties of the original Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire (CEOA) to a 15-item version (B-CEOA) in a nonclinical undergraduate sample (N = 581), and attempted to replicate and extend the B-CEOA findings in an undergraduate sample referred to an alcohol intervention (N = 734). Psychometric assessment included construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity, using both “positive” and “negative” expectancy items in all analyses. Results provided further support for the empirical validity of the original CEOA, and provided support for the use of the B-CEOA despite the reduction in the number of items. The B-CEOA factor structures obtained using exploratory and confirmatory techniques provided support for a 4-factor structure of expectancies and 3-factor structure of valuations. Findings reveal potential problems with “positive” and “negative” expectancy items. Trade-offs regarding factor structure, internal consistency, and administration time should be considered in using the B-CEOA vs. the CEOA.