I need this research paper to be completed step by step. All the instructions to follow is in the brows file. the article is in the brows file as well. Here is the Article topic am working on:    "Th

BRIEF REPORT The Interactive Effects of Personality Profiles and Perceived Peer Drinking on Early Adolescent Drinking Nina Pocuca, Leanne Hides, Catherine A. Quinn, and Melanie J. White Queensland University of Technology Louise Mewton, Nicola Clare Newton, Tim Slade, Cath Chapman, Gavin Andrews, and Maree Teesson University of New South Wales Steve Allsop and Nyanda McBride Curtin University Early adolescent drinking has been identified as an important risk factor for the development of alcohol dependence. Both perceived peer drinking and personality profiles have been implicated as risk factors for early adolescent drinking. However, research is yet to determine how these 2 factors may interact to increase such risk. This study aimed to determine whether personality profiles moderated the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking. Baseline data were utilized in the analyses, from 3,287 adolescents (M age 13.51 years,SD .58; 54% female; 78% born in Australia) participating in the Climate Schools Combined Study (a cluster randomized controlled trial with 75 schools located across Queensland, New South Wales, and Western Australia, Australia). Lifetime consumption of alcohol, perceived peer drinking, and personality profiles (Substance Use Risk Profile Scale) were measured. A moderated binary logistic regression found the personality profiles of impul- sivity, sensation seeking, and hopelessness were positively related to early adolescent drinking, whereas anxiety sensitivity had a negative association. A significant interaction revealed that adolescents with higher levels of sensation seeking and who perceived their peers to be drinking were significantly more likely to report early adolescent drinking (consumption of a full standard drink;OR 1.043; 95% CI [1.018 –1.069]). These results indicate that perception of peer drinking is more strongly associated with early adolescent drinking, when adolescents are also high on sensation seeking. Prevention and inter- vention programs could consider targeting both sensation seeking and perceived peer drinking in adolescents.

Keywords:drinking onset, early adolescence, peer norms, personality, sensation seeking Supplemental materials:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/adb0000322.supp Throughout the developed world people most commonly initiate drinking during mid-adolescence, with an average age of onset of approximately 15 years (Australian Institute of Health & Welfare,2014;Johnston, O’Malley, Miech, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2016;Kraus et al., 2016;Ministry of Health, 2016). Among the few methodologically robust studies that have examined the issue, This article was published Online First October 26, 2017.

Nina Pocuca, Leanne Hides, Catherine A. Quinn, and Melanie J. White, Centre for Youth Substance Abuse Research, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Psychology and Counselling, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology; Louise Mewton, Nicola Clare Newton, Tim Slade, Cath Chapman, Gavin Andrews, and Maree Teesson, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Mental Health and Substance Use (CREMS), National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC), University of New South Wales; Steve Allsop and Nyanda McBride, National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University.

Leanne Hides is now at the School of Psychology, University of Queens- land.

This article is based on data from the Climate Schools Combined Study and comprises part of a doctoral dissertation. The ideas appearing in this article have not been previously disseminated. The Climate Schools Com-bined Study is funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1047291). CREMS is funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council. NDARC is supported by funding from the Australian Government under the Substance Misuse Prevention and Ser- vice Improvements Grants Fund. Leanne Hides is supported by an Aus- tralian Research Council Future Fellowship. The authors acknowledge the Australian Government Department of Health, NSW Department of Edu- cation and Communities, WA Department of Education, Queensland De- partment of Education and Training, as well as all schools, teachers and students who have agreed to participate in the research.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Nina Pocuca, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus, School of Psychology and Counselling, O Block, B wing—level 5, Ring Road, Kelvin Grove QLD 4059, Australia. E-mail:nina.pocuca@hdr .qut.edu.au This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors© 2017 American Psychological Association 2018, Vol. 32, No. 2, 230 –2360893-164X/18/$12.00http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/adb0000322 230 it appears that individuals who initiate drinking before 14 years are significantly more likely to experience problematic drinking than those who initiate later. The likelihood of developing abuse or dependence significantly decreases with each year initiation is delayed (Grant, Stinson, & Harford, 2001;Hingson, Heeren, & Winter, 2006). Given the evidence for the deleterious effects of adolescent drinking, a large body of research has focused on identifying the associated risk factors.

Social norms theory posits that descriptive (perceived preva- lence of substance use) and injunctive (perceived social acceptance of substance use) norms influence adolescent substance use (Eisenberg, Toumbourou, Catalano, & Hemphill, 2014). Descrip- tive norms in particular play a significant role in adolescent drink- ing. Two studies from the United States and Australia found that adolescents who perceived a large proportion of their peers to be drinkers were significantly more likely to drink themselves, than those who perceived their peers to be abstinent (D’Amico & McCarthy, 2006;Kelly et al., 2012). However, individuals vary in the extent to which their environment influences drinking, indi- cating the presence of moderating individual factors, such as personality (Marschall-Lévesque, Castellanos-Ryan, Vitaro, & Sé- guin, 2014).

Personality provides one way of understanding differential sus- ceptibility to drinking in adolescence. The Substance Use Risk Profile Scale (SURPS) is a widely used measure of personality and assesses four personality risk profiles underlying substance use, namely (a) impulsivity (tendency to engage in risky behaviors without thought of consequence; IMP), (b) sensation seeking (de- sire to experience new and novel things; SS), (c) hopelessness (personality risk factor related to depression; HOP), and (d) anx- iety sensitivity (fear of physiological sensations related to anxiety; AS;Woicik, Stewart, Pihl, & Conrod, 2009). Impulsivity, sensa- tion seeking, and hopelessness have been positively linked to earlier age of drinking onset and increased alcohol use over a 3-year period, whereas anxiety sensitivity has been identified as a protective factor (Castellanos-Ryan, O’Leary-Barrett, Sully, & Conrod, 2013;Krank et al., 2011;Nair et al., 2016;Newton, Barrett, et al., 2016).

Studies including high-quality systematic reviews have consis- tently demonstrated that both perceived peer drinking (D’Amico & McCarthy, 2006;Jackson et al., 2014;Kelly et al., 2012;Leung, Toumbourou, & Hemphill, 2014) and specific personality profiles (Castellanos-Ryan et al., 2013;Nair et al., 2016;Newton, Barrett, et al., 2016;Stautz & Cooper, 2013) increase risk of early adoles- cent drinking. There has been limited investigation of how per- ceived peer drinking and personality profiles may interact to influence alcohol use in early adolescence.Stautz and Cooper (2014)examined the moderating effect of impulsivity on the relationship between perceived peer drinking and alcohol-related problems. A positive relationship between perceived peer drinking and alcohol-related problems was found among adolescents high in impulsivity, indicating that impulsivity significantly increases risk of alcohol-related problems in adolescents who perceived their friends to be drinking. Research is yet to examine the moderating effect of personality on the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking.

The aim of the current study was to examine the unique effects of the four SURPS profiles on the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking (consumption of a fullstandard alcoholic drink). It was hypothesized that there would be a positive relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking, such that those who perceived that a large proportion of their friends drink would be more likely to consume alcohol. It was anticipated that this relationship would be stronger for those high on impulsivity, sensation seeking, or hopelessness.

Conversely, it was hypothesized that an inverse relationship be- tween perceived peer drinking and adolescent drinking would be found among adolescents high in anxiety sensitivity. Method Participants Nonidentifiable data were drawn from the baseline survey of the Climate Schools Combined (CSC) study, a cluster randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of an online prevention program for substance misuse and anxiety and depression symp- toms in high school students (Teesson et al., 2014). The survey was conducted in 75 secondary schools across Queensland, New South Wales, and Western Australia. A combination of 43 gov- ernment, 19 Independent, and 13 Catholic Education Schools across regional and metropolitan areas participated (equivalent ages across states). Parental consent was sought for all participants (n 11,451) in all schools via either active (n 26) or opt-out (n 49) consent depending on ethics approval. A total sample of 7,018 adolescents (61%) provided consent and completed the baseline survey (M age 13.5 years,SD .56; 53% female; 81% born in Australia). Drinking rates (consumption of a full standard drink) did not significantly differ between active (M .69,SD .61) and opt-out (M .73,SD .62) consent participants t(6198) 2.539,p .308. Procedure Data were collected either online or via paper and pencil survey in classroom settings. Students were instructed to complete the survey without discussing their answers and research assistants or teachers (using detailed instructions) administered and supervised the survey. Participants were provided with a standard drinks chart to aid questions regarding lifetime drinking (adapted fromNa- tional Health and Medical Research Council, 2009). They were informed of the voluntary nature of the survey and were encour- aged to speak to peers, teachers or school counselors if any of the information made them feel uncomfortable, sad, or worried. They were also provided with the contact details for a free telephone counseling service for youth. Ethics approval for the CSC Study was obtained from all relevant education and university human research ethics departments and the trial was registered with the ANZCTP (ACTRN12613000723785). An ethics exemption was obtained for the use of nonidentifiable, CSC Study baseline data in the current study.

Measures Drinker status.Alcohol use was assessed through two ques- tions: “have you ever had a sip of alcohol?” (yes/no) and “have you ever had a full standard alcoholic drink?” (yes/no). Drinker status was defined as lifetime consumption of a full standard alcoholic This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 231 PERSONALITY PROFILES AND PERCEIVED PEER DRINKING drink rather than a sip or a taste, because of the unstandardized and unreliable nature, and considerable variability in what quantity of alcohol constitutes a sip (Adolfsen et al., 2014;Hingson et al., 2006;Jester et al., 2015). Sippers (n 3,713) were excluded from analyses to allow for direct comparisons between drinkers (i.e., those who had consumed at least a full standard drink) and non- drinkers (i.e., those who had never sipped or consumed a standard drink).

Perceived peer drinking.Perceived peer drinking was mea- sured through the item: “About what proportion of your friends and acquaintances drink any alcohol at all (even a sip)?” Partici- pants responded on a 5-point Likert scale ranging fromnonetoall or almost all.

Personality.Personality was measured via the 23-item SURPS. Example items from the scale include: “I often don’t think things through before I speak” (impulsivity); “I would like to learn how to drive a motorcycle” (sensation seeking); “I feel that I’m a failure” (hopelessness); and “I get scared when I experience un- usual body sensations”(anxiety sensitivity). Young people were asked to endorse how much they agreed with each statement on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree)to4(strongly agree). The SURPS has been found to be a valid screening instrument of personality risk profiles for substance use within an Australian adolescent sample (Newton, Barrett, et al., 2016). All SURPS subscales demonstrated acceptable to good levels of in- ternal consistency within the current sample (hopelessness .87; anxiety sensitivity .76; impulsivity .79; sensations seeking .72).

Control measures.Demographic information including age, gender, and birth country were collected. Truancy was assessed with the question: “How many days did you have off school last year without your parents’ permission?” Participants responded on a 5-point scale ranging fromzero daystoten or more days. School grades were measured with the question: “What grades do you usually get in school?” Participants responded on a six-point scale ranging from49% and belowto90 –100%.

Data Analysis A moderated logistic regression with forced entry was con- ducted using SPSS 23.0, to examine the moderating effect of the four SURPS profiles on the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking. Age, gender, birth country, truancy, and grades were controlled in the analysis because of their known influence on adolescent drinking (Ali et al., 2016;Crosnoe, 2006;Knyazev, Slobodskaya, Kharchenko, & Wilson, 2004;Mounteney, Haugland, & Skutle, 2010;Salas- Wright, Vaughn, Schwartz, & Córdova, 2016;Stone, Becker, Huber, & Catalano, 2012;White & Bariola, 2012). To reduce multicollinearity and obtain a parsimonious model, nonsignifi- cant interactions were progressively removed from subsequent models, until the final model was obtained (Dawson, 2014; Field, 2013). Gender, drinker status, and birth country were dummy-coded (male 0, female 1; nondrinker 0, drinker 1; Australian-born 0, other 1). All continuous variables were mean centered prior to analyses (Dawson, 2014).

Significant interactions were analyzed utilizing the pick-a-point approach, with simples slopes computed at one standard devi- ation above and below the mean of the moderator, via thePROCESS macro add-on for SPSS (version 2.16;Hayes & Matthes, 2009). Effect sizes are reported as odds ratios (OR), which is the most appropriate metric for effect size in logistic regression analyses (Field, 2013). Results Seventeen participants were excluded because of implausible responses. Ten percent of respondents (n 715) had not completed any items on the SURPS (interpreted as being likely due to time restrictions given that the SURPS was toward the end of the survey) and a further 60 participants ( 1%) had completed 80% of the measures. A small percentage of par- ticipants had missing data on alcohol use (n 83, 1%) and perceived peer drinking (n 84, 1%). Participants with missing data were significantly more likely to be older, male, have lower grades, be truant on more days, and have consumed a full standard alcoholic drink in their lifetime. Those with missing data did not differ from those with complete data on school type and birth country. Negligible amounts of missing data were recorded for age, birth country, truancy, and grades ( 0.05%).

No missing data were recorded for gender. Multiple imputation with 20 imputed data sets was utilized to impute missing data points and reduce sampling variability (Rodwell, Lee, Roma- niuk, & Carlin, 2014;Sterne et al., 2009).

The data met all assumptions for a binary logistic regression.

Thirty-eight percent (n 2,640) of the total sample never con- sumed any alcohol and 9% (n 647) reported consuming a full standard alcoholic drink in their lifetime. A further 53% (n 3, 714) reported having had a sip, but not a full standard drink of alcohol in their lifetime and were therefore removed from analy- ses. The final analytical sample consisted ofN 3,287 partici- pants who had either had a full serve or not consumed alcohol at all (M age 13.51,SD .58; 54% female; 78% born in Australia).

The analytical sample differed from excluded sippers by gender, birth country and grades. Sippers were more likely to be older, male, born in Australia, have higher grades, and be truant on fewer days; however, the two groups did not differ on perceived peer drinking. The means, standard deviations, and correlations be- tween study variables for the final analytical sample are reported in Table 1.

A Bonferroni-adjusted alpha (p .013) was applied to the final model in the regression analyses (Model 4,Table 2). This model revealed that control variables gender, age, truancy, and grades were significantly related to drinking; however, birth country was not. Perceived peer drinking and the four personality profiles were also significantly related to early adolescent drinking. Perceived peer drinking, hopelessness, sensation seeking, and impulsivity were positively related to drinking, whereas anxiety sensitivity was negatively related. The final model revealed a small, but signifi- cant interaction between perceived peer drinking and sensation seeking on early adolescent drinking (OR 1.043; 95% CI [1.018 –1.069],p .001;Figure 1). Simple slopes analyses re- vealed that the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking was significant at all levels of sensation seeking. However, the strength of the relationship was stronger for high (OR 3.808; 95% CI [3.691 – 3.931],p .001) compared to low (OR 2.779; 95% CI [2.699 – 2.861],p .001) sensation seeking. This model held when sippers were included in the This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 232 POCUCA ET AL. analyses as drinkers (OR 1.022, 95% CI [1.005 – 1.040],p .05; refer to the table available in online supplemental materials). Discussion The current study examined how personality profiles moderated the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early onset adolescent drinking (consumption of a full standard drink) in a large sample of early adolescents. As predicted, both perceived peer drinking and the four personality profiles were associated with early adolescent drinking. The strong effect of perceived peer drinking on early adolescent drinking is consistent with the resultsof other large-scale studies of early adolescents (D’Amico & McCarthy, 2006;Jackson et al., 2014;Kelly et al., 2012). A small but significant interaction effect qualified the main effects of perceived peer drinking and sensation seeking. This indicated the relationship between perceived peer drinking and adolescent drinking at 13.5 years was stronger when adolescents were high compared to low on sensation seeking. Contrary to the hypotheses, no significant interactions were found between perceived peer drinking and hopelessness, anxiety sensitivity and impulsivity.

Nevertheless, consistent with previous research, impulsivity and hopelessness were positively associated with adolescent drinking, Table 1 Summary of Correlations, Means/Percentages, and Standard Deviations of Study Variables Variable 1234567891011 1. Drinker a 2. Age .16 3. Gender b .12 .08 4. Birth country .05 .03 .00 5. Truancy .19 .02 .08 .00 6. Grades .18 .01 .06 .05 .14 7. PPD .62 .16 .09 .05 .15 .13 8. SS .20 .03 .06 .02 .05 .03 .15 9. IMP .28 .05 .05 .03 .11 .18 .25 .42 10. HOP .25 .08 .01 .02 .10 .26 .20 .27 .19 11. AS .02 .03 .16 .04 .00 .04 .04 .12 .39 .08 M13.51 78.45 15.51 10.56 12.76 10.76 SD.58 12.84 3.86 3.31 4.51 3.25 % 19.69 54.24 c 78.32 d 10.83 e 44.64 f Note.Means and standard deviations are reported only for continuous variables, and percentages are reported for categorical variables. PPD perceived peer drinking; SS sensation seeking; IMP impulsivity; HOP hopelessness; AS anxiety sensitivity, as measured by the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale.

aNon-drinker is coded as zero. bMale is coded as zero. cPercentage of females. dPercentage born in Australia. ePercentage that reported taking any days off school in the last year without their parents’ knowledge. fPercentage that reported any peer drinking. p .05. p .01. Table 2 Binary Logistic Regression Examining the Moderating Effect of Personality on the Relationship Between Perceived Peer Drinking and Early Adolescent Drinking VariableDrinker status Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 OR[95% CI]OR[95% CI]OR[95% CI]OR[95% CI] Gender 1.399 [1.071, 1.829] 1.399 [1.071, 1.829] 1.398 [1.070, 1.827] 1.404 [1.075, 1.834] Age 1.771 [1.428, 2.195] 1.772 [1.429, 2.196] 1.773 [1.430, 2.197] 1.771 [1.429, 2.194] Birth country 0.940 [0.876, 1.010] 0.941 [0.876, 1.010] 0.941 [0.876, 1.010] 0.942 [0.878, 1.011] Truancy 1.130 [1.060, 1.204] 1.130 [1.059, 1.204] 1.129 [1.059, 1.204] 1.130 [1.060, 1.204] Grades 0.984 [0.974, 0.993] 0.983 [0.974, 0.993] 0.983 [0.974, 0.993] 0.983 [0.974, 0.993] PPD 3.251 [2.893, 3.653] 3.228 [2.894, 3.600] 3.239 [2.908, 3.608] 3.240 [2.910, 3.608] HOP 1.193 [1.136, 1.253] 1.186 [1.148, 1.226] 1.186 [1.147, 1.225] 1.186 [1.147, 1.225] AS 0.938 [0.876, 1.005] 0.939 [0.876, 1.006] 0.935 [0.876, 0.998] 0.922 [0.882, 0.964] IMP 1.076 [0.995, 1.162] 1.077 [0.997, 1.163] 1.087 [1.031, 1.147] 1.087 [1.031, 1.147] SS 1.148 [1.072, 1.228] 1.142 [1.075, 1.214] 1.139 [1.074, 1.208] 1.143 [1.079, 1.210] PPD HOP 0.996 [0.969, 1.023] PPD AS 0.988 [0.953, 1.024] 0.987 [0.952, 1.024] 0.990 [0.958, 1.023] PPD IMP 1.007 [0.966, 1.050] 1.007 [0.966, 1.049] PPD SS 1.040 [1.001, 1.080] 1.043 [1.013, 1.075] 1.046 [1.019, 1.073] 1.043 [1.018, 1.069] Note.Nonsignificant interactions were progressively removed from analyses until the final model was reached, as perDawson (2014). PPD perceived peer drinking; HOP hopelessness; IMP impulsivity; SS sensation seeking; AS anxiety sensitivity. p .05. p .013. p .01. p .001. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 233 PERSONALITY PROFILES AND PERCEIVED PEER DRINKING whereas anxiety sensitivity was inversely related (Krank et al., 2011;Malmberg et al., 2010;Nair et al., 2016;Newton, Barrett, et al., 2016). These findings suggest that although these profiles contribute to early adolescent drinking, unlike sensation seeking, they do not significantly affect the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking.

Practical Implications The results of this study have implications for the prevention and treatment of adolescent drinking. Social norms interventions have been found to successfully decrease drinking in heavy drink- ing adolescents and slow the increasing trajectory of drinks con- sumed per week among nondrinking and light drinking college students (Lewis & Neighbors, 2006;Neighbors et al., 2011).

Current results indicate that it may also be beneficial to target adolescents with high sensation seeking, given the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking was stronger in this group.

Growing evidence supports the efficacy of personality-targeted interventions for addressing drinking in adolescence. High-risk adolescents who receive a personality-targeted intervention have been shown to report lower rates of drinking, binge drinking, and alcohol-related problems up to 3 years later, compared with con- trols (Newton, Conrod, et al., 2016;O’Leary-Barrett, Mackie, Castellanos-Ryan, Al-Khudhairy, & Conrod, 2010;O’Leary- Barrett, Castellanos-Ryan, Pihl, & Conrod, 2016).Lammers et al.

(2017)found personality-targeted interventions addressing indi- viduals high on sensation seeking to be particularly effective in reducing binge drinking and frequency of alcohol consumption 12 months later. These large-scale, randomized, controlled trials dem- onstrate the efficacy of personality-targeted interventions in Eng- lish (O’Leary-Barrett et al., 2010,2016), Australian (Newton, Conrod, et al., 2016), and Dutch (Lammers et al., 2017) early adolescent populations (Mage ranging from 13.4 to 13.9 years).

Ultimately, the results of this study suggest prevention and inter- vention programs may benefit from targeting adolescents who overestimate peer drinking and are also high on sensation seeking.

Future clinical research should focus on developing and evaluating the efficacy of this type of intervention among adolescents, com-pared to traditional social norm and personality-targeted interven- tions. Strengths and Limitations This study provides important insights into how the interactions between perceived peer drinking and personality profiles are as- sociated with early adolescent drinking. However, the strengths and limitations of the study need to be considered. There was a reliance on self-report measures, which are susceptible to the over or underreporting of behaviors. However, the reliability of self- reported drinking behaviors obtained in a class setting, under teacher supervision is well established (Lintonen, Ahlström, & Metso, 2004). Another limitation of the current study was that missing data were recorded for 13% of participants (n 942).

However, the effect of missing data was attenuated through the use of appropriate procedures (i.e., multiple imputation). The cross- sectional nature of this study impedes any conclusions about causal effects of the interaction between perceived peer drinking and sensation seeking, on early adolescent drinker status. Future research should examine this moderation model longitudinally in order to determine whether the observed interaction effect holds across time and whether it has an impact on adolescent drinking trajectories. Further research is also required to determine the moderating effect of personality on the relationship between peer consumption of a full standard drink and adolescent drinker status.

Whole school studies which identify the drinking status of adoles- cents and their friends using social network analysis may facilitate this.

This study also has several strengths including its large sample size and relatively even gender split (54% females). The recruit- ment of participants across three Australian states and both gov- ernment and nongovernment schools provided a broad geograph- ical and sociodemographic spread of students. Further, the use of a standardized measure of drinking onset strengthens the reliability of results. This study also controlled for a multitude of variables including age, gender, birth country, truancy, and grades, all of which have been linked to drinking in adolescence (Ali et al., 2016;Castellanos-Ryan, Rubia, & Conrod, 2011;Castellanos- Ryan et al., 2013;Hudson, Wekerle, & Stewart, 2015;Knyazev et al., 2004;Krank et al., 2011;Mounteney et al., 2010;Newton, Barrett, et al., 2016;Salas-Wright et al., 2016;Stone et al., 2012; White & Bariola, 2012). As a result, it is fair to conclude that the results obtained in the current study were not unduly influenced by any of these variables.

The current study examined the moderating effects of person- ality on the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking. Current findings indicate the relationship between perceived peer drinking and early adolescent drinking is stronger for individuals scoring high compared with low on sen- sation seeking. This suggests adolescents high in sensation seek- ing, who perceive a large proportion of their friends to be drinking, are a high-risk group for early drinking onset, that may benefit from targeted prevention programs. References Adolfsen, F., Strøm, H. K., Martinussen, M., Natvig, H., Eisemann, M., Handegård, B. H., & Koposov, R. (2014). Early drinking onset: A study Figure 1.Relationship between perceived peer drinking and drinker status at high and low levels of sensation seeking. Estimates are derived from the final model. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 234 POCUCA ET AL. of prevalence and determinants among 13-year-old adolescents in Nor- way.Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 55,505–512.http://dx.doi .org/10.1111/sjop.12151 Ali, A., Carré, A., Hassler, C., Spilka, S., Vanier, A., Barry, C., & Berthoz, S. (2016). Risk factors for substances use and misuse among young people in France: What can we learn from the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale?Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 163,84 –91.http://dx.doi .org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.03.027 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2014).National drug strategy household survey detailed report 2013(Drug Statistics Series No. 28).

Canberra: AIHW.

Castellanos-Ryan, N., O’Leary-Barrett, M., Sully, L., & Conrod, P. (2013).

Sensitivity and specificity of a brief personality screening instrument in predicting future substance use, emotional, and behavioral problems:

18-month predictive validity of the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale.

Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 37,E281–E290.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2012.01931.x Castellanos-Ryan, N., Rubia, K., & Conrod, P. J. (2011). Response inhi- bition and reward response bias mediate the predictive relationships between impulsivity and sensation seeking and common and unique variance in conduct disorder and substance misuse.Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 35,140 –155.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j .1530-0277.2010.01331.x Crosnoe, R. (2006). The connection between academic failure and adoles- cent drinking in secondary school.Sociology of Education, 79,44 – 60.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003804070607900103 D’Amico, E. J., & McCarthy, D. M. (2006). Escalation and initiation of younger adolescents’ substance use: The impact of perceived peer use.

Journal of Adolescent Health, 39,481– 487.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j .jadohealth.2006.02.010 Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how.Journal of Business and Psychology, 29,1–19.http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9308-7 Eisenberg, M. E., Toumbourou, J. W., Catalano, R. F., & Hemphill, S. A.

(2014). Social norms in the development of adolescent substance use: A longitudinal analysis of the International Youth Development Study.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43,1486 –1497.http://dx.doi.org/10 .1007/s10964-014-0111-1 Field, A. (2013).Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. London, UK: Sage.

Grant, B. F., Stinson, F. S., & Harford, T. C. (2001). Age at onset of alcohol use andDSM–IValcohol abuse and dependence: A 12-year follow-up.Journal of Substance Abuse, 13,493–504.http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S0899-3289(01)00096-7 Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implemen- tations.Behavior Research Methods, 41,924 –936.http://dx.doi.org/10 .3758/BRM.41.3.924 Hingson, R. W., Heeren, T., & Winter, M. R. (2006). Age at drinking onset and alcohol dependence: Age at onset, duration, and severity.Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160,739 –746.http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1001/archpedi.160.7.739 Hudson, A., Wekerle, C., & Stewart, S. H. (2015). Associations between personality and drinking motives in adolescents involved in the child welfare system.Personality and Individual Differences, 81,84 – 89.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.008 Jackson, K. M., Roberts, M. E., Colby, S. M., Barnett, N. P., Abar, C. C., & Merrill, J. E. (2014). Willingness to drink as a function of peer offers and peer norms in early adolescence.Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 75,404 – 414.http://dx.doi.org/10.15288/jsad.2014.75.404 Jester, J. M., Wong, M. M., Cranford, J. A., Buu, A., Fitzgerald, H. E., & Zucker, R. A. (2015). Alcohol expectancies in childhood: Change with the onset of drinking and ability to predict adolescent drunkenness andbinge drinking.Addiction, 110,71–79.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add .12704 Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Miech, R. A., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2016).Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2015: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use.

Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, The University of Mich- igan.

Kelly, A. B., Chan, G. C. K., Toumbourou, J. W., O’Flaherty, M., Homel, R., Patton, G. C., & Williams, J. (2012). Very young adolescents and alcohol: Evidence of a unique susceptibility to peer alcohol use.Addic- tive Behaviors, 37,414 – 419.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2011 .11.038 Knyazev, G. G., Slobodskaya, H. R., Kharchenko, I. I., & Wilson, G. D.

(2004). Personality and substance use in Russian youths: The predictive and moderating role of behavioural activation and gender.Personality and Individual Differences, 37,827– 843.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j .paid.2003.10.010 Krank, M., Stewart, S. H., O’Connor, R., Woicik, P. B., Wall, A. M., & Conrod, P. J. (2011). Structural, concurrent, and predictive validity of the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale in early adolescence.Addictive Behaviors, 36,37– 46.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2010.08.010 Kraus, L., Guttormsson, U., Leifman, H., Arpa, S., Monshouwer, K., Vicente, J.,...Hibell, B. (2016).ESPAD Report 2015: Results from the European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs. Luxem- bourg: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.

Lammers, J., Goossens, F., Conrod, P., Engels, R., Wiers, R. W., & Kleinjan, M. (2017). Effectiveness of a selective alcohol prevention program targeting personality risk factors: Results of interaction analy- ses.Addictive Behaviors, 71,82– 88.

Leung, R. K., Toumbourou, J. W., & Hemphill, S. A. (2014). The effect of peer influence and selection processes on adolescent alcohol use: A systematic review of longitudinal studies.Health Psychology Review, 8, 426 – 457.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2011.587961 Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. (2006). Social norms approaches using descriptive drinking norms education: A review of the research on personalized normative feedback.Journal of American College Health, 54,213–218.http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JACH.54.4.213-218 Lintonen, T., Ahlström, S., & Metso, L. (2004). The reliability of self- reported drinking in adolescence.Alcohol and Alcoholism, 39,362–368.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agh071 Malmberg, M., Overbeek, G., Monshouwer, K., Lammers, J., Vollebergh, W. A., & Engels, R. C. (2010). Substance use risk profiles and associ- ations with early substance use in adolescence.Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 33,474 – 485.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10865-010-9278-4 Marschall-Lévesque, S., Castellanos-Ryan, N., Vitaro, F., & Séguin, J. R.

(2014). Moderators of the association between peer and target adolescent substance use.Addictive behaviors, 39,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j .addbeh.2013.09.025 Ministry of Health. (2016).Annual Update of Key Results 2015/16: New Zealand Health Survey. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Health.

Mounteney, J., Haugland, S., & Skutle, A. (2010). Truancy, alcohol use and alcohol-related problems in secondary school pupils in Norway.

Health Education Research, 25,945–954.

Nair, N. K., Newton, N. C., Barrett, E. L., Slade, T., Conrod, P. J., Baillie, A.J.,...Teesson, M. (2016). Personality and early adolescent alcohol use: Assessing the four factor model of vulnerability.Journal of Addic- tion & Prevention, 4,1– 6. Retrieved fromhttp://www.avensonline.org/ medical/addiction-prevention/home-4/ National Health and Medical Research Council. (2009).Australian guide- lines to reduce health risks from drinking alcohol. Retrieved from https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/ds10- alcohol.pdf Neighbors, C., Jensen, M., Tidwell, J., Walter, T., Fossos, N., & Lewis, M. A. (2011). Social-norms interventions for light and nondrinking This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 235 PERSONALITY PROFILES AND PERCEIVED PEER DRINKING students.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14,651– 669.http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/1368430210398014 Newton, N. C., Barrett, E. L., Castellanos-Ryan, N., Kelly, E., Champion, K. E., Stapinski, L.,...Teesson, M. (2016). The validity of the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale (SURPS) among Australian adoles- cents.Addictive Behaviors, 53,23–30.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j .addbeh.2015.09.015 Newton, N. C., Conrod, P. J., Slade, T., Carragher, N., Champion, K. E., Barrett, E. L.,...Teesson, M. (2016). The long-term effectiveness of a selective, personality-targeted prevention program in reducing alcohol use and related harms: A cluster randomized controlled trial.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57,1056 –1065.http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/jcpp.12558 O’Leary-Barrett, M., Castellanos-Ryan, N., Pihl, R. O., & Conrod, P. J.

(2016). Mechanisms of personality-targeted intervention effects on ad- olescent alcohol misuse, internalizing and externalizing symptoms.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84,438 – 452.http://dx .doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000082 O’Leary-Barrett, M., Mackie, C. J., Castellanos-Ryan, N., Al-Khudhairy, N., & Conrod, P. J. (2010). Personality-targeted interventions delay uptake of drinking and decrease risk of alcohol-related problems when delivered by teachers.Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 49,954 –963. e1.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac .2010.04.011 Rodwell, L., Lee, K. J., Romaniuk, H., & Carlin, J. B. (2014). Comparison of methods for imputing limited-range variables: A simulation study.

BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14,57.http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/ 1471-2288-14-57 Salas-Wright, C. P., Vaughn, M. G., Schwartz, S. J., & Córdova, D. (2016).

An “immigrant paradox” for adolescent externalizing behavior? Evi- dence from a national sample.Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epi- demiology, 51,27–37.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1115-1Stautz, K., & Cooper, A. (2013). Impulsivity-related personality traits and adolescent alcohol use: A meta-analytic review.Clinical Psychology Review, 33,574 –592.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.03.003 Stautz, K., & Cooper, A. (2014). Urgency traits and problematic substance use in adolescence: Direct effects and moderation of perceived peer use.

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 28,487– 497.http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/a0034346 Sterne, J. A. C., White, I. R., Carlin, J. B., Spratt, M., Royston, P., Kenward, M. G.,...Carpenter, J. R. (2009). Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: Potential and pitfalls.British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.), 338,b2393.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2393 Stone, A. L., Becker, L. G., Huber, A. M., & Catalano, R. F. (2012).

Review of risk and protective factors of substance use and problem use in emerging adulthood.Addictive Behaviors, 37,747–775.http://dx.doi .org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.02.014 Teesson, M., Newton, N. C., Slade, T., Chapman, C., Allsop, S., Hides, L., . . . Andrews, G. (2014). The CLIMATE schools combined study: A cluster randomised controlled trial of a universal Internet-based preven- tion program for youth substance misuse, depression and anxiety.BMC Psychiatry, 14,32.http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-14-32 White, V., & Bariola, E. (2012).Australian secondary school students’ use of tobacco, alcohol, and over-the-counter and illicit substances in 2011.

Victoria, Australia: Cancer Council.

Woicik, P. A., Stewart, S. H., Pihl, R. O., & Conrod, P. J. (2009). The Substance Use Risk Profile Scale: A scale measuring traits linked to reinforcement-specific substance use profiles.Addictive Behaviors, 34, 1042–1055.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.07.001 Received June 12, 2017 Revision received September 6, 2017 Accepted September 7, 2017 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 236 POCUCA ET AL.