Initial Factor Structure for Measures of Bystander Likelihood, Barriers, and Actions to Prevent Problematic Alcohol Use Among College Students

Background and Purpose: Problematic alcohol use (PAU) is a serious concern among college students, resulting in negative consequences such as injuries and death, sexual violence, and poor academic performance. Bystander Intervention (BI) is a potential solution that may capitalize on peer networks to prevent PAU. To implement BI for PAU, valid and reliable measures need to be developed. The purpose of the study was to 1) develop measures of BI for PAU, capturing the constructs of Likelihood to Intervene, Barriers to Intervening, and Actions and 2) explore the factor structure of developed scales.

Methods:

Twenty focus groups and nine interviews were conducted with 79 undergraduate students. Data was analyzed using deductive and inductive thematic approaches to create an initial pool of 182 items (likelihood items, barriers items, actions items). Feedback on initial items was solicited from content experts (n = 8) and undergraduate students (n = 208). Items were revised to create 61 items assessing the constructs of Likelihood (n=17 items), Barriers (n=22 items), Actions (n=24 items). Items were administered to a national sample of college students (n = 683), recruited via Prime Panels, to complete a 10-minute survey for exploratory factor analyses (EFA). The sample was randomly split in two and analyses were conducted on both groups to confirm results.

RESULTS:

Results from the EFA revealed a three factor structure for the Likelihood scale. Factors included situations that included Risk of Interpersonal Violence (6 items), situations where there was an Immediate Risk of Bodily Injury (5 items), and situations where there was a Concern about Overconsumption (6 items). A three-factor solution also emerged for Barriers to Bystander Intervention for PAU, including Situational Barriers (6 items), External Consequences (8 items), and Internal Factors (8 items). A one-factor solution was imposed on the Bystander Actions for PAU scale, consisting of 22 items. This was inclusive of both actions taken before going out with friends, and actions taken in response to witnessing something concerning. These results represent initial evidence for factor structure, which will be validated using confirmatory factor analysis on another national sample in the future.

Conclusions and Implications: Similar factor structures to existing bystander constructs in IPV emerged for BI for PAU. Specifically, likelihood to intervene was guided somewhat by the perceived severity of the situation. Barriers were informed by both internal and external factors, which has been documented (but not yet measured) in the IPV field. We expected to see a two-factor solution for the Bystander Actions for PAU scale (preventive and reactive), but this did not emerge in the data. Future research should be conducted to confirm the identified factor structures using a confirmatory factor analysis, as well as validate the measures using convergent and discriminant validity checks. These findings provide initial evidence of good factor structure for three measures of BI for PAU, which can be used to test theories and models of BI for PAU, as well as be used to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase bystander behavior for PAU among college students.