University Students Drinking Habits

University Students Drinking: The Role of Motivational, Social and Environmental Factors Shwetank Powar Christ University
Despite the increased efforts in raising awareness about alcohol abuse and its negative consequences, there seems to be very little improvement in the situation among university students. University students seem to have earned a reputation as heavy drinkers. Studies suggest that university students report higher levels of alcohol drinking in contrast with the non-students of the same age (Johnston et al., 1991). Inappropriate amounts of consumption and higher reports of binge drinking have become a major source of concern for the society. Binge drinking is drinking 5 or more drinks in a row for men and 4 drinks for women, at least once in the past 2 weeks. The present review of five studies made across developed countries, aims at understanding the motives, attitudes, demographic co-relatives and the influencing factors involved in drinking behaviour among university students and its effects on their lives. Five articles from various reputed journals were researched to study this phenomenon and understand it more profoundly. The studies used for the review were as follows I. Attitudes, Knowledge and Use of Alcohol in University Students. The method employed in this research was 106 British university students completed a questionnaire obtained from various sources (Coleman, Butcher & Carson 1980; Abacus R, 1987) and several of the questions were formulated specially for the purpose of this study. Subjects were asked about their Television viewing habits and the duration. Other sub- sections asked about demographic details, General knowledge about alcohol and its units, general attitude statements about alcohol. II. University Student Drinking: The role of Social and Motivational factor. This study employed 99 undergraduate students and further sub- classified as 50 heavy drinkers and 49 light drinkers. Drinking habits were initially verified using the Time Line Follow Back Procedure (TLFB, Sobbel & Sobbel 1996) to ensure that participants met the following criteria. And then based on these categorisations they were further divided and 3 different questionnaires were employed
1. The drinking expectancy Questionnaire (DEQ, Young And Knight, 1989)
2. Benefits and drawback questionnaire (BBQ, Oxford et.al, 2002)
3. Important People and Activities Questionnaire (IPA, Clifford & Longabaugh, 1991)
Further semi-structured interviews lasting from 20-40 minutes, enquiring about their social, general and personal influences on alcohol consumption- both positive and negative were recorded. III. International Study of Heavy Drinking: Attitudes and Socio-demographic Factors in University Students.
The data for this project was collected as part of the International Health and Behaviour Survey (IHBS), A cross sectional study of health behaviours and associated beliefs in university students in several countries. IV. Drunk in Public, Drunk in Private: The relationship Between College Students, Drinking Environments and alcohol consumption.
The data was obtained from a random telephone survey from 400 randomly chosen university students attending two different universities. V. Self Esteem and Alcohol Consumption: A Study of College Drinking Behaviour in Naturalistic Setting.
This study had 44 participants (29 men and 15 women). They had voluntarily participated in the study. They were told that, in one of their upcoming college parties they will have a breath analyser test at the end of the party and a quick exit questionnaire about the no. of drinks they have had. But they had no idea on which day the party is going to occur. And 2 weeks prior to the party a 12 point Self-Esteem questionnaire (Roberts 1995) was administered. Drinking wasn’t encouraged but participants were asked to be at their normal behaviours.

Results
Most importantly to understand results in the first experiment the drinks were converted to units. A Glass of wine, one pint of lager and one standard pub measure of hard spirits were classified as being one unit. However this disregards the varying alcohol contents in each drink, additional data was obtained about the last drink the subjects have had and their usual consumption frequency. And based on their consumption levels the participants were categorised. There were found to be 9 non-drinkers, 23 light drinkers(less than 4 on a night out), 40 moderate drinkers(less than 10 units on an average night out) and 33 heavy drinkers (more than 10 units on an average night out) A highly significant relationship was found between parents drinking habits and the drinking category of the students. Even if the student knew someone with a severe alcohol problem that did not make a difference in their drinking habits. And also no significant relationship was found between television viewing and alcohol consumption. The most common cited reasons for alcohol consumption were social (People I know drink, to celebrate, to be polite), Psychological (to feel happy, confident, enjoyment) and intrinsic (enjoy the feeling). Heavy drinkers reflected greater acceptance of all the above reasons. Alcohol has been found to contribute to sexual risk taking among adolescents (Dermen et al. 1998). The hypothesis that heavy drinkers would interact with a heavier drinking social circle in comparison with light drinkers was confirmed. Evidence also suggests that social influences, while often subtle are very strong. (Wood et. Al 2001). Many participants during the interviews confessed about the whole process being a huge game of work avoidance, and how they would encourage and force their friends to not work and indulge in drinking. The strength of beliefs in the importance of not drinking too much was greatest in non-drinkers, intermediate in those who consumed alcohol moderately and lowest in heavy drinkers (Dantzer et. al. 2004)Heavier drinking was reported with no host parties (BYOB - bring your own beverage parties) as students might have more access to alcohol than at host parties (Clap et. al. 2006). The hypothesis that students with lower levels of self-esteem would become significantly more intoxicated than students scoring higher on a self-esteem measure was supported. In fact a very strong relationship was established between self-esteem and actual drinking behaviour (Glindenman et. al 1998)
Discussion
In the above studies under review the most difficult task was about quantifying the drink unit and assessing the type of drink consumed and also measuring the drinking atmosphere was complex. The university students in all the studies were not representative and the results may vary with other university students. The biggest obstacle being, inferences cannot be drawn for designing preventive or rehabilitation strategies based on these results of a smaller population and generalising it for a larger group. It would be unwise to devise a plan based on a relatively small group to devise a plan for a larger population of youths. There is also a great scope for error in in self-report measures, and self-report inventories were a major source of acquiring information in all of the above studies. And they cannot be accurate or very reliable at times. Most importantly it should also be noted the type of values certain cultures maintain about alcohol consumption, because in certain countries of the Mediterranean have achieved a responsible wine-drinking culture among the youth in contrast with countries like United states of America, some countries of the North-western , Central and Eastern part of Europe. The most worrying part about these researches is that, not much efforts were required at all to recruit heavy drinkers into the study. Nevertheless these studies have provided us with a great deal of insight into this area of concern. By linking quantitative and qualitative measures, then categorisation of drinkers and inclusion of both the sexes it helped a great deal to obtain this valuable and advantageous data. Once we have identified the effects of the entire social, environmental, biological factors it will help us understand the potential risk and preventive factors and create a protective and preventive environment for the students. And it is equally important to encourage and offer alternative sources of refreshments and entertainment on various social occasions.
References
Calahan, D. et.al. (1965) Behaviour and attitudes related to drinking in a medium sized urban community in New England, Social Research Group, Report 2, Washington, DC, George Washington University.
Clapp JD, & Shillington A.M. (2001) Environmental predictors of heavy episodic drinking events. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse; 27(2):310–313.
Clapp, J.D., Reed, M.B., Holmes M.R., Lange, J.E., & Voas, R.B., (2006) Drunk in Public, Drunk in private: the relationship between college students, drinking environments and alcohol consumption; The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 32, 275-285
Clifford, P.R. & Longbaugh, R. (1991). Manual for the Important People and Activities Instrument. Providence, RI: Centre for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University.
Coleman, J.C., Butcher, J.N. & Carson R.C. (1980) Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, New York, Kogan Page.
Dantzer,C., Wardle, J., & Fuller. R., (2006) International Study of heavy drinking: Attitudes and sociodemographic factors in university students; Journal of American college health, 55(2).
Dermen, K.H., Cooper, M.L. & Agocha, V.B. (1998). Sex related alcohol expectancies as moderators of the relationship between alcohol use and risky sex in adolescents. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 59, 71-77.
Glindenman, K., E., Geller, S., & Fortney, J.,(1996); Self-Esteem and alcohol consumption: A study of college drinking behaviour in natural setting. Virginia, State University.
Ingle, H., Fumham, A., (1996), Attitude, knowledge and use of alcohol in university students; Counselling Psychology Quarterly 9, p 309
Johnston,L.D., O’Malley, P.M. & Bachman J.G.(1991), Drug use among American high school seniors, college students and young adults, 1975-1990:Washington DC, US Government Printing Office.
Orford, J., Krishnan, M., Balaam, m., Everitt, M., & Graaf, K.V.D. (2004); University student drinking: the role of motivational and social factors; Drugs: education, prevention and policy. 11, 407-421.
Sobbel, L.C., & Sobbel, M.B.(1996). Timeline Follow back User’s Manual for alcohol Use. Toronto: Canadian Addiction Research Foundation.

References: Calahan, D. et.al. (1965) Behaviour and attitudes related to drinking in a medium sized urban community in New England, Social Research Group, Report 2, Washington, DC, George Washington University. Clapp JD, & Shillington A.M. (2001) Environmental predictors of heavy episodic drinking events. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse; 27(2):310–313. Coleman, J.C., Butcher, J.N. & Carson R.C. (1980) Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, New York, Kogan Page. Dantzer,C., Wardle, J., & Fuller. R., (2006) International Study of heavy drinking: Attitudes and sociodemographic factors in university students; Journal of American college health, 55(2). Dermen, K.H., Cooper, M.L. & Agocha, V.B. (1998). Sex related alcohol expectancies as moderators of the relationship between alcohol use and risky sex in adolescents. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 59, 71-77. Glindenman, K., E., Geller, S., & Fortney, J.,(1996); Self-Esteem and alcohol consumption: A study of college drinking behaviour in natural setting. Virginia, State University. Ingle, H., Fumham, A., (1996), Attitude, knowledge and use of alcohol in university students; Counselling Psychology Quarterly 9, p 309 Johnston,L.D., O’Malley, P.M Orford, J., Krishnan, M., Balaam, m., Everitt, M., & Graaf, K.V.D. (2004); University student drinking: the role of motivational and social factors; Drugs: education, prevention and policy. 11, 407-421. Sobbel, L.C., & Sobbel, M.B.(1996). Timeline Follow back User’s Manual for alcohol Use. Toronto: Canadian Addiction Research Foundation.