2009
DOI: 10.15288/jsad.2009.70.178
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the Unique Influence of Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Drinking Perceptions on Alcohol Consumption Among College Students

Abstract: ABSTRACT. Objective: Interventions for college student drinking often incorporate interpersonal factors such as descriptive and/or injunctive norms to correct misperceptions about campus drinking (e.g., BASICS [Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students] and social-norms campaigns). Some interventions also focus on intrapersonal factors of alcohol consumption, which can be considered as one's own perception of drinking, one's attitude toward drinking, and one's intended outcome related to dr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
17
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
3
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Injunctive norms were assessed by a single item regarding what they believe best represents “the most common attitude” among college students at the host site about alcohol use using a 5-point response scale (1 =“drinking is never a good thing to do” to 5 =“getting drunk frequently is okay if that’s what the individual wants to do”) (22). Previous research has shown that injunctive norms in college student samples are comparable when using a single-item measure or multi-item measures (23,24). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Injunctive norms were assessed by a single item regarding what they believe best represents “the most common attitude” among college students at the host site about alcohol use using a 5-point response scale (1 =“drinking is never a good thing to do” to 5 =“getting drunk frequently is okay if that’s what the individual wants to do”) (22). Previous research has shown that injunctive norms in college student samples are comparable when using a single-item measure or multi-item measures (23,24). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Injunctive norms refer to the perceived approval of a behavior by referents close to the individual (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). Descriptive norms refer to the perceived frequency of the referent group engaging in behavior (Borsari and Carey, 2001; Lewis and Neighbors, 2006; Mallett et al, 2009). Both types of norms have been shown to consistently predict a wide range of drinking outcomes (e.g., weekly drinking, heavy episodic drinking; see Borsari and Carey, 2001).…”
Section: Distal Predictors Of Rwddmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research that has examined this issue suggests consuming AmEDs can reduce subjective perceptions of intoxication, even though these effects are not detected in objective measures or blood alcohol content (Ferreira, de Mello, Pompeia, & de Souza-Formigoni, 2006; Oteri, Francesco, Caputi, & Calapai, 2007). Further, studies have shown that students who tended to underestimate their blood alcohol levels were more likely to consume larger amounts of alcohol, which increased their likelihood of experiencing alcohol-related harm (Mallett, Bachrach, & Turrisi, 2009). Thus, there is a need to better understand college students’ AmED use due to the associated exacerbation of high-risk drinking behaviors and alcohol-related consequences.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These variables have been investigated in the general college drinking literature and found to be predictive of alcohol use within this population. For example, past research has shown that both college students’ beliefs about and attitudes towards drinking are associated with alcohol consumption (e.g., Darkes & Goldman, 1993; Mallett et al, 2009; Wechsler, Dowdall, Davenport, & Castillo, 1995; Weitzman, Nelson, & Wechsler, 2003). Prior college studies have also confirmed the importance of exploring perceived peer norms about drinking (Borsari & Carey, 2001; Neighbors, Lee, Lewis, Fossos, & Larimer, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%