Reciprocal relationships over time between descriptive norms and alcohol use in young adult sexual minority women.

Abstract

Objective Young adulthood, roughly ages 18–25, is a period of great risk for excessive consumption of alcohol, especially among sexual minority women. Despite the substantial literature examining the relationships between social norms and behavior in general, little attention has been given to the role of descriptive norms on the drinking behaviors of sexual minorities. The present study had three aims: to compare both typical woman descriptive norms and sexual minority-specific descriptive normative perceptions among a sample of sexual minority women, examine reciprocal associations between sexual minority-specific descriptive norms and alcohol consumption over time, and to examine whether these reciprocal associations were moderated by sexual orientation (i.e. whether one identifies as lesbian or bisexual). Method A national sample of 1,057 lesbian and bisexual women between the ages of 18–25 were enrolled in this study. Participants completed an online survey at four time-points that assessed the constructs of interest. Results Results indicated that sexual minority women consistently perceived that sexual minority women drank more than their non-sexual minority peers; sexual minority women-specific descriptive drinking norms and alcohol consumption influenced one another over time in a reciprocal, feed-forward fashion; and these associations were not moderated by sexual orientation. Conclusions These findings highlight the importance of considering sexual minority women-specific norms as an important factor predicting alcohol consumption in sexual minority women. Results further support the development and testing of normative interventions for high risk drinking among sexual minority women.

Daily-level associations between PTSD and cannabis use among young sexual minority women

“…Participants were directed to the baseline assessment upon provision of informed consent. The broader study included a baseline assessment and three annual web-based surveys (Kaysen et al, 2014; Litt, Lewis, Rhew, Hodge, & Kaysen, 2015). Daily diary monitoring data used in the current analyses were collected from a random subsample of 114 participants who reported consuming at least 2 drinks during a single drinking occasion at least 7 times in the past 30 days.…”

The relative strength of attitudes versus perceived drinking norms as predictors of alcohol use

“…In terms of injunctive norms, individuals tend to believe that others are more approving of drinking and related behaviors than they are themselves, and these perceptions predict personal drinking and related problems (LaBrie, Hummer, Neighbors, & Larimer, 2010; Lewis, Litt, & Neighbors, 2015; Prentice & Miller, 1993; Schroeder & Prentice, 1998). Similarly, in regard to descriptive norms, individuals tend to overestimate the amount of alcohol that others consume, and these perceptions correspond with heavier drinking behaviors (Litt, Lewis, Rhew, Hodge, & Kaysen, 2015; Martens et al, 2006; Neighbors, Larimer, & Lewis, 2004; Perkins, Haines, & Rice, 2005). Among young adults, injunctive and descriptive norms are distinct predictors of alcohol consumption (e.g., Lee, Geisner, Lewis, Neighbors, & Larimer, 2007).…”

A descriptive analysis of where and with whom lesbian versus bisexual women drink

“…Interventions that educate people about their own drinking in comparison to other people’s drinking have been found to be effective at reducing alcohol consumption (Cronce & Larimer, 2011), especially when tailored for specific groups (Lewis & Neighbors, 2007). Given that greater misperceptions of SMW-specific drinking norms are also associated with increased alcohol consumption (Litt et al, 2015), tailored interventions may be particularly effective for lesbians.…”

“…Participants were 1,057 women who identified as lesbian (40.5%) or bisexual (59.5%) and provided baseline data in a national longitudinal study (see Litt, Lewis, Rhew, Hodge, & Kaysen, 2015). Women were 18–25 years old ( M = 20.9, SD = 2.1, 49.0% were 21 and older) and identified as White (67.8%), multi-racial (15.6%), Black (10.0%), Asian (2.6%), “other” (3.0%), American Indian/Alaska Native (0.8%), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (0.1%).…”