<p>The manuscript (ms) shows that normative values mediate between attitude towards drug use and music preferences. The topic is somewhat relevant, given the effect of substance use (alcohol specifically) on public health in South America. A strong point of the manuscript is the use of a sample from Brazil, given than most research in the topic comes from English speaking countries. I believe the weakest aspects are the use of a convenience sample of mostly female undergraduate students, and of a measure of attitudes towards drugs as a proxy measure of consumption. Lastly, there are some aspects related to writing that debilitate the ms.</p><p> </p><p>General comments</p><p>I believe the conclusions in the Discussion and in the Abstract’s (“<span style="text-decoration: underline;">p</span>romoting normative values could buffer the negative effects of alternative music preference on attitudes toward drug use”) should be revised. On one side, the affirmations are not entirely supported by the results, on the other authors should be cautious not to conclude causal links from correlational results. As far as I know most evidence points to an association between music preference and substance use (most likely due to third factors), not to a casual effect of music on substance use.  </p><p>Although I am not a native speaker of English, and thus, not ideally suited to revise grammar and style, I noticed several grammar errors. I advise the authors to carefully review their writing.</p><p> </p><p>INTRODUCTION</p><p>The work focus on values from the theoretical framework of the Functional Theory of Values. I am not familiar with the model, but the dimension of normative values seems similar to the social norms construct of the Theory of Planned Behavior, a model widely used in the drug use and addiction field. I believe the ms would gain interest if the rationale for using the Functional Theory of Values is provided and differences with social norms are discussed (since large part of the evidence about attitudes and consumption comes from that framework).  </p><p> </p><p>METHOD</p><p> </p><p>I appreciate the report of Alpha coefficients for the measures used. However, if the <em>Music Preference Scale</em> measures preference for eight music styles (rap, heavy metal, punk, religious music [reversed], reggae, rock, electronic) I am not clear on the convenience of reporting the Alpha for the whole scale rather each subscale.</p><p>I was also surprised for the use of a proxy measure for drug consumption, when most of the research in the addiction field uses measures of consumption and there are several validated and psychometrically sound instruments. I would find it preferable if the focus of the ms is shifted to the measure of attitudes (instead of consumption through attitudes).</p><p>The reported Alpha coefficient for the Excitement subscale is somewhat low, is the subscale composed by very few items or there is another explanation for this low reliability?</p><p> </p><p>RESULTS</p><p>Authors state that descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations can be obtained upon request. I believe some basic measures should be included to assist the interpretation of results.  </p>