Table 1 Hierarchical Regression Predicting Drinking to Cope Note. Model 1: R 2 =.169, p<.001; Model 2: R 2 =.174, p<.001. Model 2 is the preferred model (ΔR 2 =.005, p<.05). *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001. Table 2 Hierarchical Regression Predicting Enhancement Drinking Note. Model 1: R 2 =.04, p<.001; Model 2: R 2 =.043, p<.001. Model 1 is the preferred model (ΔR 2 =.003, ns). *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001. DO LIFE EVENTS AND SOCIAL SUPPORT MODERATE THE RISK OF PROBLEM DRINKING IN YOUNG ADULTS WITH SYMPTOMS OF DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY? Laura J. Holt 1, Stephen Armeli 2, Howard Tennen 3, Sarah A. Raskin 1, Carol S. Austad 4, Rebecca Wood 4, Carolyn Fallahi 4, Rivkah I. Rosen 5, Meredith K. Ginley 5, & Godfrey D. Pearlson 5 1 Dept. of Psychology, Trinity College, Hartford, CT, 2 Dept. of Psychology, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ, 3 University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, CT, 4 Dept. of Psychology, Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, CT, 5 Olin Neuropsychiatry Research Center, Institute of Living at Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT According to affect regulation theory, people who experience symptoms of depression and anxiety may use alcohol to modulate their emotions (Cooper et al., 1995). Previous research has shown that people who endorse drinking to enhance positive emotions and/or to cope with negative emotions are at higher risk for heavy drinking and alcohol-related problems compared to those who drink for social or conformity reasons (Cooper, 1994; Merrill & Read, 2010). Although previous research has shown that coping and enhancement motives are associated with problem drinking, less is known about social and environmental factors that might offset or exacerbate the risk of coping or enhancement drinking. Social-contextual models of depression (Cronkite & Moos, 1995; Holahan et al., 1999) and previous research (Holahan et al., 2004) suggest that vulnerabilities such as negative life events and lack of social support are associated with a greater risk of drinking to cope in people with depressive symptoms. Participants Participants were first year students (N=971; 54% female) from two demographically distinct colleges in Connecticut. The mean age was XX (SD=). Participants reported their race/ethnicity as: 79% Caucasian, 5% Asian American, 8% Hispanic or Latino, 6% African American, and 2% Multiracial/Other. Measures Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; 13 items,  =.89) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; 20 items,  =.93) Life Events Scale (LESS; 36 items) Perceived Social Support from Family and Friends (PSS; 14 items,  =.89) Motivations for Alcohol Use among Adolescents: Coping subscale (8 items,  =.93) & Enhancement subscale (5 items,  =.92) Procedure First year students were recruited on a voluntary basis from an ongoing, longitudinal NIAAA-funded study (Brain and Alcohol Research with College Students; BARCS). All data were self-reported during the initial interview. Participants had to report >1 drinking episode in the previous month in order to be eligible for inclusion. [I left justified this line.HT] Data Analytic Strategy Because they were highly correlated (r =.68), the BDI and STAI were summed to form a composite measure of negative affect. Separate hierarchical regression analyses examined main and interactive effects of mood, life events, and perceived social support on the dependent variables, drinking to cope and drinking for enhancement, respectively. All predictors were centered to eliminate nonessential multicollinearity. This study was funded by RO1 AA (BARCS Study) and RC1 AA to Dr. Godfrey Pearlson. ModelPredictor B (SE)  1Constant Negative affect composite (BDI & STAI) Perceived Social Support Life Events Score 1.77 (.03).02 (.00).00 (.00).02 (.01).37 *** *** 2Constant Negative affect composite (BDI & STAI) Perceived Social Support Life Events Score Negative Affect X Life Events Negative Affect X Social Support 1.76 (.03).02 (.00).00 (.00).02 (.01).00 (.00).00 (.00).36 *** **.08 *.01 Figure 1. Life events, but not social support, interacted with negative affect to predict drinking to cope. Figure 2. Neither social support nor life events interacted with negative affect to predict enhancement drinking. ModelPredictorB (SE)  1Constant Negative affect composite (BDI & STAI) Perceived Social Support Life Events Score 2.68 (.34).01(.00).00 (.00).04 (.01).11 ** *** 2Constant Negative affect composite (BDI & STAI) Perceived Social Support Life Events Score Negative Affect X Life Events Negative Affect X Social Support 2.66 (.04).01 (.00).00 (.00).04 (.01).00 (.00).00 (.00).10 ** *** Life Events Social Support Drinking to Cope Negative Affect.08 *.11 **.37 *** Drinking for Enhancement Life Events Social Support Negative Affect.15 ***.11 ** The primary aim of this study was to examine whether perceived social support and/or life events interacted with negative affect to predict drinking to cope. Both anxiety and depression were assessed. Since previous research has shown that drinking for enhancement is associated with heavy drinking and drinking problems, a secondary aim was to examine whether there were main and interactive effects of negative affect, life events, and social support on drinking for enhancement. BACKGROUND AIMS METHOD RESULTS Our findings were somewhat consistent with past theoretical and empirical research, in that experiencing more significant life events may put people with symptoms of depression and anxiety at greater risk for coping-related drinking. Contrary to past research, however, social support did not have a main or interactive effect on either of the drinking motives. Intervention efforts with first-year college students experiencing depression or anxiety symptoms might focus on developing coping skills to navigate stressful life events so as to decrease the risk of coping and enhancement motivated drinking and eventual alcohol-related problems. CONCLUSIONS