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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Nov;31(7):751-762.
doi: 10.1037/adb0000317. Epub 2017 Sep 28.

Dismantling motivational interviewing: Effects on initiation of behavior change among problem drinkers seeking treatment

Jon Morgenstern  1 , Alexis Kuerbis  2 , Jessica Houser  1 , Svetlana Levak  1 , Paul Amrhein  3 , Sijing Shao  1 , James R McKay  4
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Dismantling motivational interviewing: Effects on initiation of behavior change among problem drinkers seeking treatment

Jon Morgenstern et al. Psychol Addict Behav. 2017 Nov.

Abstract

Motivational interviewing (MI) is an efficacious treatment for alcohol use disorders. MI is thought to enhance motivation via a combination of 2 therapeutic strategies or active ingredients: 1 relational and 1 directional. The primary aim of this study was to examine MI's hypothesized active ingredients using a dismantling design. Problem drinkers (N = 139) seeking treatment were randomized to 1 of 3 conditions: MI, relational MI without the directional elements labeled spirit-only MI (SOMI), or a nontherapy control condition and followed for 8 weeks. Those assigned to MI or SOMI received 4 sessions of treatment over 8 weeks. All participants significantly reduced their drinking by Week 8, but reductions were equivalent across conditions. The hypothesis that baseline motivation would significantly moderate condition effects on outcome was generally not supported. Failure to find support for MI's hypothesized active ingredients is discussed in the context of the strengths and limitations of the study design. (PsycINFO Database Record

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Study flow and attrition.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Drinking trajectories by condition. Initial session happened at randomization. Dotted lines indicate treatment sessions at weeks 2, 5, and 8. Assessments occurred at Screen, Randomization, 5, and 8.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Aharonovich E, Amrhein PC, Bisaga A, Nunes EV, & Hasin DS (2008). Cognition, commitment language, and behavioral change among cocaine-dependent patients. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 22(4), 557–562. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aharonovich E, Stohl M, Ellis J, Amrhein P, & Hasin D (2014). Commitment strength, alcohol dependence and HealthCall participation: effects on drinking reduction in HIV patients. Drug Alcohol Depend, 135, 112–118. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.n.015 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Amrhein PC, Miller WR, Yahne CE, Palmer M, & Fulcher L (2003). Client commitment language during motivational interviewing predicts drug use outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71(5), 862–878. - PubMed
    1. Apodaca TR, & Longabaugh R (2009). Mechanisms of change in motivational interviewing: A review and preliminary evaluation of the evidence. Addiction, 104(5), 705–715. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Babor T, Higgins-Biddle JC, Saunders JB, & Monteiro MG (2001). The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): Guidelines for use in primary care (2nd ed.). Geneva, Switzerland: Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence, World Health Organization.

Publication types