Meaning in life: investigating protective and risk factors for harmful alcohol consumption

Figures & data

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviations (SD) and range) of the total sample (n = 546).

	Mean (SD, range)
AUDIT	10.83 (±5.80; 1–31)
Alcohol-free reinforcement	6.19 (±2.62; 0–19.06)
Presence	23.76 (±7.02; 5–35)
Search	21.08 (±7.38; 5–35)
Depressive symptoms	6.57 (±5.39; 0–24)
Drinking to cope	1.80 (±0.73; 1–4.80)
Alcohol value (intensity)	5.68 (±2.65; 1–10)

Two-thirds of the sample (n = 364; 66.67%) were likely hazardous or harmful drinkers (AUDIT ≥ 8). AUDIT = Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (alcohol use and related problems; 1 UK unit = 8 g of alcohol; possible range of values = 0 to 40). Presence = presence of meaning in life; Search = search for meaning in life (possible range of values = 5 to 35). Alcohol value (intensity) = how many drinks would be consumed if they were free (possible range of values = 0 to 10). Alcohol-free reinforcement (possible range of values = 0 to 24). Depressive symptoms (possible range of values = 0 to 24). Drinking to cope (possible range of values = 1 to 5).

Table 2. Hierarchical regression predicting AUDIT scores, predictor variables are presence of meaning, search for meaning, and average alcohol-free reinforcement after controlling for age and gender.

Variable	Cumulative		Simultaneous
	R^2-change	F-change	B	B(SE)	β	p
Step 1
Age	.06	F(2, 538) = 15.56***	–.07	.02	–.18	p < .001
Gender			.23	.51	.02	p = .65
Step 2
Presence	.06	F(2, 536) = 18.96***	–.22	.04	–.26	p < .001
Search			–.02	.04	–.03	p = .53
Step 3
Alcohol-free reinforcement	.00	F(1, 535) = .21	–.04	.10	–.02	p = .65

Presence = presence of meaning in life; Search = search for meaning in life; Alcohol-free reinforcement = overall alcohol-free reinforcement (cross-product scores averaged across all activities). ***p < .001.

Figure 1. Direct and indirect relationships between meaning in life, alcohol consumption, alcohol-free reinforcement, alcohol value, depressive symptoms, and drinking to cope.

Table 3. Indirect effects from the structural equation model.

Association	β	p-value	95% Confidence Interval
Presence → alcohol-free reinforcement → AUDIT	.00	p = .95	–.02 to .02
Presence → alcohol value → AUDIT	–.13	p < .001	–.17 to −.08
Presence → alcohol-free reinforcement → alcohol value → AUDIT	.01	p = .20	–.00 to .02
Presence → depressive symptoms → AUDIT	–.01	p = .68	–.06 to .04
Presence → drinking to cope → AUDIT	–.04	p = .01	–.07 to −.00
Presence → depressive symptoms → drinking to cope → AUDIT	–.06	p < .001	–.09 to −.04
Search → alcohol-free reinforcement → AUDIT	.00	p = .95	–.00 to .00
Search → alcohol value → AUDIT	.02	p = .35	–.02 to .06
Search → alcohol-free reinforcement → alcohol value → AUDIT	.00	p = .64	–.00 to .01
Search → depressive symptoms → AUDIT	.00	p = .68	–.01 to .02
Search → drinking to cope → AUDIT	.04	p = .01	.01 to .06
Search → depressive symptoms → drinking to cope → AUDIT	.02	p < .001	.01 to .04

Standardized parameter estimates are presented. Presence = presence of meaning in life; Search = search for meaning in life. AUDIT = Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test.

Data availability statement

Data and analysis scripts are available and can be found on Research Box: https://researchbox.org/677