for remission (i.e., remission of 2, rather than 3, symptoms). Also, related to the sample’s high-risk status, each individual in the current study had at least one family member with lifetime AD who had accessed professional treatment, which may have influenced them to consider reducing their own alcohol use. This possibility is consistent with evidence that the shared familial environment accounts for a significant proportion of variance in treatment seeking (True et al., 1996). In the current study, individuals with no current AUD symptoms who were drinking at risk levels were differentiated from individuals with persistent AUD. In the study by Dawson et al. (2012), these individuals were included in the no recovery group, comprising about 8% of that group (D.A. Dawson, personal communication, July 24, 2013). Designating them as a separate category in the current study revealed that although they were drinking at high-risk levels, they differed in substantive ways from individuals with current AUD, having a shorter duration of AUD, higher rates of remitted drug use and lower rates of current nicotine dependence.
