Drinking Context and Drinking Problems Among Black, White, and Hispanic Men and Women in the 1984, 1995, and 2005 U.S. National Alcohol Surveys

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the preferred drinking contexts of different gender and ethnic groups (white, black, and Hispanic men and women), by examining where these groups do most of their drinking and to what extent drinking contexts preferences are associated with certain drinking-related consequences. Method: The study used data from the 1984, 1995, and 2005 U.S. National Alcohol Surveys. Among current drinkers, cluster analyses of volume drunk in six contexts (restaurants, bars, others' parties, or when spending a quiet evening at home, having friends drop over at home, and hanging out in public places) were used to classify individuals by their drinking context preferences in each gender by ethnicity subgroup. Results: We identifi ed three highly similar drinking context-preference clusters within each of the six subgroups: (1) bar-plus group (did most drinking in bars, plus much in other venues), (2) home group (did most drinking at home, and a fair amount elsewhere), and (3) light group (drank almost nothing quietly at home and also less in other settings than the other two clusters). For a number of ethnic-by-gender groups, context preference group assignment predicted drinking-related problems, over and above general drinking patterns. For example, for all groups, the bar-plus preference group relative to the light group showed higher risk of arguments, fi ghting, and drunk driving, after taking into account the volume consumed, frequency of heavy drinking, age, and year of survey. Conclusions: Examining individuals' preferred drinking contexts may provide important information to augment overall drinking patterns in risk and prevention studies. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs 70: [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] 2009) T HE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN drinking patterns and alcohol-related problems is well established; that is, drinking more and in heavy quantities increases the likelihood of experiencing alcohol-related problems (Greenfi eld and Rogers, 1999;Heeb and Gmel, 2005;Treno et al., 2000;Wells et al., 2005). Drinking contexts also infl uence how much individuals drink. For example, most drinkers consume more alcohol in bars and at parties than at restaurants and in other settings (Clark, 1985;Searles et al., 1995). Similarly, a recent multilevel analysis by Kairouz and Greenfi eld (2007) showed that a large part of the variability in drinking relates to the context, whereas much stems from individual differences such as gender. Previous research on drinking contexts has focused on exploring frequency and amount of drinking in various settings rather than classifying people by where they do the most drinking (Clark, 1985;Harford, 1978;Treno et al., 2000). Researchers have explored what kinds of individuals go to given drinking contexts; for example, how often black, white, or Hispanic individuals visited particular settings, such as bars or street corners, and how often they drank in those settings (Clark, 1988;Caetano and Herd, 1988). Research by Herd ...

They Drink How Much and Where? Normative Perceptions by Drinking Contexts and Their Association to College Students'Alcohol Consumption

“…Prior research has shown that college student drinking events are almost evenly distributed between public (i.e., bars, restaurants) and private (i.e., homes) contexts (Clapp et al, 2000). Moreover, prior investigations of drinking locations have found that the context in which drinking occurs often contributes to the amount of alcohol consumed (Clapp et al, 2006) and is related to a variety of negative consequences (Nyaronga et al, 2009;Wells et al, 2005). Several variables have been examined as to why context infl uences alcohol consumption.…”

“…Several variables have been examined as to why context infl uences alcohol consumption. Factors such as ethnicity (Nyaronga et al, 2009), gender (Herd and Grube, 1993), lack of supervision (Wells et al, 2005), and living arrangement (Gfroerer et al, 1997;Valliant and Scanlan, 1996;Ward and Gryczynski, 2009) are associated with different contexts of heavier drinking in college. A number of contexts have been examined in relation to alcohol consumption and negative consequences, including home, non-fraternity/sorority parties, fraternity/sorority parties, bars, and sporting events.…”

“…In a national survey on alcohol consumption and related consequences, it was found that 60% of students who live on campus reported drinking in their residence in the last 30 days (Liang and Huang, 2008). Further research by Nyaronga et al (2009) found three basic clusters within their study on ethnicity and drinking context, with home being one of the three most popular locations. However, home was encapsulated into "mostly drink at home but do a fair amount of drinking elsewhere," making it diffi cult to zero in on the consequences associated with this drinking context.…”

“…Prior research has shown bars to be a drinking context associated with risk. A recent analysis of three U.S. National Alcohol Surveys found that bars are consistently a preferred drinking context, and people who drink at bars are more likely to engage in arguments, fi ghting, and drunk driving than those who drink the equivalent amount of alcohol at home (Nyaronga et al, 2009). Research has also shown that college students who have taken advantage of drink specials in bars reached higher BACs than students who did not take advantage of drink specials (Thombs et al, 2008).…”

Risks of Alcohol Use Disorders Related to Drinking Patterns in the U.S. General Population

“…The number of 5+ drinking days is strongly associated with nonfatal injury (Cherpitel et al, 1995), drinking and driving (Greenfi eld and Rogers, 1999a), arguments and fi ghts (Nyaronga et al, 2009), and criminal behavior (Greenfi eld, 1998), as well as morbidity (Greenfi eld, 2001) and mortality (Rehm et al, 2006). Even chronic harms, such as alcohol dependence , show a dose-response relationship with 5+ drinking days.…”