Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2011;6(10):e23748.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023748. Epub 2011 Oct 5.

Can simply answering research questions change behaviour? Systematic review and meta analyses of brief alcohol intervention trials

Jim McCambridge  1 , Kypros Kypri
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Can simply answering research questions change behaviour? Systematic review and meta analyses of brief alcohol intervention trials

Jim McCambridge et al. PLoS One. 2011.

Abstract

Background: Participant reports of their own behaviour are critical for the provision and evaluation of behavioural interventions. Recent developments in brief alcohol intervention trials provide an opportunity to evaluate longstanding concerns that answering questions on behaviour as part of research assessments may inadvertently influence it and produce bias. The study objective was to evaluate the size and nature of effects observed in randomized manipulations of the effects of answering questions on drinking behaviour in brief intervention trials.

Methodology/principal findings: Multiple methods were used to identify primary studies. Between-group differences in total weekly alcohol consumption, quantity per drinking day and AUDIT scores were evaluated in random effects meta-analyses. Ten trials were included in this review, of which two did not provide findings for quantitative study, in which three outcomes were evaluated. Between-group differences were of the magnitude of 13.7 (-0.17 to 27.6) grams of alcohol per week (approximately 1.5 U.K. units or 1 standard U.S. drink) and 1 point (0.1 to 1.9) in AUDIT score. There was no difference in quantity per drinking day.

Conclusions/significance: Answering questions on drinking in brief intervention trials appears to alter subsequent self-reported behaviour. This potentially generates bias by exposing non-intervention control groups to an integral component of the intervention. The effects of brief alcohol interventions may thus have been consistently under-estimated. These findings are relevant to evaluations of any interventions to alter behaviours which involve participant self-report.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Participant flowchart.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Meta-analysis of the effects of answering questions on total weekly drinking.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Meta-analysis of the effects of answering questions on quantity per drinking day.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Meta-analysis of the effects of answering questions on total AUDIT scores.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lopez AD, Mathers CD, Ezzati M, Jamison DT, Murray CJL. Global and regional burden of disease and risk factors, 2001: Systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet. 2006;367:1747–1757. - PubMed
    1. Rosnow RL, Rosenthal R. People Studying People: Artifacts and Ethics in Behavioral Research. W.H. Freeman and Company; 1997.
    1. Solomon RL. An extension of control group design. Psychol Bull. 1949;46:137–150. - PubMed
    1. Mayo E. The human problems of an industrial civilization. New York: MacMillan; 1933.
    1. Roethlisberger FJ, Dickson WJ. Management and the Worker. Cambridge, , Mass: Cambridge University Press; 1939.

Publication types