Addictive Behaviors
Volume 31, Issue 12, December 2006, Pages 2328-2333
doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.03.002 | How to Cite or Link Using DOI
Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved. |
Permissions & Reprints |
Short communication
The problem of binge drinking among Italian university students: A preliminary investigation
Maria D’Alessioa, Roberto Baiocco, a, and Fiorenzo Laghia
aDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy
Available online 19 April 2006.
Abstract
Although binge drinking and excessive alcohol consumption are relevant public health problems in Italy, no research has been carried out on those topics for years. In the first months of the year 2005, 1000 undergraduates in a number of Italian universities were administered a survey regarding their attitudes in alcohol consumption. Participants were to complete a questionnaire including demographic and alcohol variables, the Sensation-Seeking Scale (SSSV) and the Positive Drinking Expectancy Scale (PDMS).
According to previous research, students were categorized in non-drinkers, social, binge, and heavy drinkers. Results showed that the estimated percentage of binge drinking among university students is 32.9%. The survey revealed–by means of univariate and multivariate analysis–that social, binge, and heavy drinkers differ in terms of some drinking variables, in their expectancies about alcohol and in sensation-seeking dimensions. Implications for the prevention of binge drinking in young adults are currently under discussion even if further investigation into the Italian context is urgently needed.
The Research paper on Binge Drink Alcohol Drinking Underage
Another Empty Bottle: Underage Another Empty Bottle: Underage Essay, Research Paper Another Empty Bottle: Underage Drinking Barely out of childhood, young people are today experiencing more freedom, autonomy, and choices than ever, at a time when they still need special nurturing, protection and guidance. Without parents or other adults safeguarding, the young adolescents are at risk of harming ...
Keywords: Alcohol; Alcohol abuse; Alcohol expectancies; Binge drinking; Sensation-seeking
Article Outline
1.
Introduction
2.
Methods
2.1. Participants and procedures
2.2. Measurement
2.2.1. Demographics
2.2.2. Alcohol use/severity
2.2.3. Personality variables
2.2.4. Drinking expectancy profile
3.
Results
3.1. Classification of drinking patterns
3.2. Individual correlates of social, binge, and heavy drinkers
3.3. Drinking variables
3.4. Sensation-seeking dimension and expectancy
3.5. Social drinkers, binge drinkers, and heavy drinkers: discriminant function analysis
4.
Discussion
References
1. Introduction
Alcoholism, and alcohol abuse and dependence are a major public health problem in Western society (Miller et al., 2004 and Morawska & Oei, 2005).
Recent investigations have shown that alcohol use among adolescents is a relevant health problem in Italy (DiGrande, Perrier, Lauro, & Contu, 2000).
Italian adolescents used to drink less alcohol beverages than their northern European counterparts but more than young people in southern and eastern European countries (Kuntsche, Rehm, & Gmel, 2004).
Binge drinking, often begins around age 13, tends to increase during adolescence–with a peak in young adulthood (ages 18 to 22)–and then gradually decreases. Researches found out that binge drinkers tend to be white, male students under the 24 years of age, that they are residents in a fraternity or sorority house, lead a party-centred life, and smoke cigarettes and marijuana (Bennett, Miller, & Woodall, 1999).
In adolescence, personality-related factors are strongly linked to binge drinking. Typically, literature has demonstrated that levels of sensation-seeking behaviour is positively related to binge drinking (Greene et al., 2000 K. Greene, M. Krcmar, L.H. Walters, D.L. Rubin and J.L. Hale, Targeting adolescent risk-taking behaviours: The contributions of egocentrism and sensation-seeking, Journal of Adolescence 23 (2000), pp. 439–461. Abstract | PDF (215 K) | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (92)Greene et al., 2000 and Ichiyama & Kruse, 1998).
The Essay on Why Do College Students Drink So Much
Why do College Students Drunk so Much? "Alcohol abuse on college campuses has reached a point where it is far more destructive than most people and today realize and today threatens too many of our youth." -Senator Joe Lieberman Why do college students drink so much? This timeless fad has effected this generation in high percentages since the beginning of college education. Today in America it is ...
An important line of research has indicated the relevance of expectancies and beliefs to alcohol consumption as well (McNally & Palfai, 2001).
Alcohol seems to be part of university lifestyle and drinking episodes are partly accounted for by positive expectancies as to the effects that alcohol will have—i.e. an increased sociability or tension reduction (Oei & Morawska, 2004).
Although research suggests binge drinking in adolescence to be a relevant problem, little research has been conducted into binge drinking in Italy so far. Specific hypotheses for the study were as follows: (1) students classified as binge drinkers would have higher positive expectancies and more sensation-seeking behaviours than social drinkers, but lower positive expectancies and less sensation-seeking behaviours than heavy drinkers; (2) the percentage of binge drinkers and heavy drinkers is higher among male students, among students living in fraternities or sororities, among students living in central Italy, and among students with an out of the family onset of drinking.
2. Methods
2.1. Participants and procedures
In the first months of the year 2005, 1000 undergraduates in 4 different Italian universities–69.3% of two universities located in central Italy and 30.7% in two universities located in southern Italy–were administered a survey regarding their attitudes in alcohol consumption. Mean age in the sample was 22.59 (S.D. = 3.53); the sample included female students–64.2%–and male students–35.8%. Most of the sampled students were attending the first or the second year of university–freshmen 46%, sophomore 54%–and lived at home with their parents–with parents 52.2%, alone 47.5%. All students responded to the same questionnaire packet at university in their classrooms. Participation required between 20 and 30 min.
2.2. Measurement
2.2.1. Demographics
An Identifying Information Form was used to collect demographic information. The questionnaire also included questions about the students’ friends, their spare time occupations, the places they frequent, and the number of nights out per week.
Binge Drinking Students Alcohol Icap
Binge Drinking We all know what it is like to wake up in the morning, your head is aching, and your body feels like it was hit by a big garbage truck. College students worldwide know this feeling. These are the results of binge drinking. Why do they do it? Binge drinking is defined for men as drinking five or more drinks in a row in the past two weeks, and for women as drinking four r more drinks ...
2.2.2. Alcohol use/severity
Drinking quantity and frequency were assessed using different questions: (a) frequency of alcohol consumption, (b) average number of drinks consumed per occasion in the last month, (c) age when alcohol was first tried outside the family, age when regular drinking began, and age when first intoxication occurred. Another item yielded information about drinking practices of friends and, finally, the amount of regularly drinking friends was calculated.
2.2.3. Personality variables
Zuckerman’s (1979) Sensation-Seeking Scale, Form V (SSSV), consisting of 40 forced choice items, was used to assess the sensation-seeking personality trait. Factor analysis has evidenced four subscales: disinhibition, experience, thrill- and adventure-seeking, and boredom susceptibility. Internal reliability of the SSSV ranges from 0.83 to 0.86.
2.2.4. Drinking expectancy profile
The Positive Drinking Expectancy Scale (PDMS; D’Alessio, Laghi, & Baiocco, 2006)–consisting of 12 items on a Likert scale (1 = disagree, 5 = agree)–was used to assess beliefs concerning the positive effects of alcohol. Factor analysis has evidenced three different positive functions of alcoholic beverages: (a) sexual and behavioural disinhibition, (b) relief from pain, anxiety, and stress, and (c) social confidence. Internal reliability of the PDSM ranges from 0.76 to 0.83.
3. Results
3.1. Classification of drinking patterns
According to previous research (Morawska & Oei, 2005 and Oei & Morawska, 2004), students were categorized as non-drinkers (not habitually consuming alcohol or drinking less than twice per year), social drinkers (drinking ranging from three/four times a year to three/four times per week), binge drinkers (one or two binge drinking episodes in a week: at least five, for men, or four, for women, drinks on one single drinking occasion), and heavy drinkers (three/four binge drinking episodes a week).
According to this classification of drinking patterns, the sample was composed of 21 non-drinkers (2.1%), 576 social drinkers (57.6%), 329 binge drinkers (32.9%), and 74 heavy drinkers (7.4%).
The Term Paper on Binge Stuff Alcohol Drinking People
. Hangover. Drinking and driving. Do something you might regret. Argument with friend or significant other. Unplanned / unprotected sex. Ride with someone who is also binge drinking. Missed school. Injuries. Arrested. Alcohol poisoning. Make a fool of yourself Short term. Hangover -- headache, intense thirst, nausea, vomiting, extreme sensitivity to light and noise, blurry vision, shakiness, and ...
The frequency of 2% of non-drinkers is similar to other studies (Morawska & Oei, 2005).
We did not use the non-drinker sample in further analyses.
3.2. Individual correlates of social, binge, and heavy drinkers
Frequencies for the three groups were compared on some individual variables. Drinking groups differed according to sex [χ2 = (2) = 85.06, P < 0.001]. Males were more likely to be classified as binge drinkers (47.4% of male vs. 25.9% of females) and heavy drinkers (12.9% of males vs. 4.6% of females), while females were more likely to be classified as social drinkers (39.7% of males vs. 69.5% of females).
Students who attended university in central Italy [χ2 = (2) = 8.47, P < 0.05] were more likely to be classified as “binge drinkers” (39.9% in central Italy vs. 30.8% in southern Italy).
Students not living in their parental home [χ2 = (2) = 22.13, P < 0.001] were more likely to be classified as heavy drinkers (11.4% of those living on their own vs. 3.4% of those living at home with family).
No significant differences were found according to the year attended (i.e. freshmen vs. sophomore) [χ2 = (2) = 5.24, P > 0.05].
3.3. Drinking variables
Social drinkers, binge drinkers, and heavy drinkers differed as to the age when they first tried alcohol [F(2,976) = 24.58, P < 0.001], the age when regular drinking began [F(2,976) = 23.09, P < 0.001], the age when they became intoxicated for the first time [F(2,976) = 19.45, P < 0.001], and the number of friends who regularly drink alcohol [F(2,976) = 103.17, P < 0.001]. Post hoc analyses revealed that heavy drinkers and binge drinkers were younger than social drinkers when they first tried outside their family context. No significant differences were found between heavy drinkers and binge drinkers. The three groups differed as to the age when regular drinking began, the age when they became intoxicated for the first time, and the number of friends who regularly drink alcohol. Heavy drinkers were younger than binge drinkers and social drinkers when they began to drink on a regular basis and when they got intoxicated for the first time, whereas social drinkers declared to be older than binge drinkers. Heavy drinkers appeared to have more friends who drink alcohol on a regular basis. Social drinkers reported the lowest number of friends who regularly drink alcohol (Table 1).
The Research paper on Cigarette Smoking And Alcohol Drinking And Their Social Relationship
Cigarette smoking has been prone to Filipinos due to the influences of the foreign culture. Alcoholic drinks are believed to ease the problems of the Filipino men and even women. As time goes by, younger and younger ages of Filipinos are engaging themselves to it. Filipinos are known for close family ties and our peer groups or “barkada”. “Among the high school students, majority of them are ...
Table 1. Group differences on drinking variables
| Social drinkers | Binge drinkers | Heavy drinkers |
Age when they first tried alcohol outside their family contexta | 13.6 (2.5) | 12.5 (2.3) | 12.3 (2.4) |
Age when regular drinking beganb | 15.0 (2.6) | 14.1 (2.3) | 13.4 (2.4) |
Age when they first became intoxicatedb | 16.0 (2.6) | 15.1 (2.4) | 14.4 (2.5) |
Number of friends drinking alcohol on a regular basisb | 3.6 (1.3) | 4.7 (1.5) | 5.4 (1.6) |
Full-size table
a Social drinkers > binge drinkers = heavy drinkers.
b Social drinkers < binge drinkers < heavy drinkers.
View Within Article
3.4. Sensation-seeking dimension and expectancy
Groups differed on the subscales of sensation-seeking dimensions and drinking expectancies: disinhibition [F(2,976) = 106.16, P < 0.001], thrill and adventures [F(2,976) = 51.68, P < 0.001], experiences [F(2,976) = 22.14, P < 0.001], boredom susceptibility [F(2,976) = 8.62, P < 0.001], sensation scale total score [F(2,976) = 78.36, P < 0.001], behavioural disinhibition expectancy [F(2,976) = 108.80, P < 0.001], relief from pain expectancy [F(2,976) = 45.65, P < 0.001], social confidence [F(2,976) = 151.29, P < 0.001], positive drinking expectancy total score [F(2,976) = 103.12, P < 0.001]. As to the boredom susceptibility subscale of the SSSV, higher levels were revealed by post hoc analyses in the heavy drinkers sample. No significant differences were found between social drinkers and binge drinkers. The three groups differed in all the others variables: heavy drinkers reported higher levels of sensation-seeking behaviours and higher positive expectancy about drinking than binge drinkers, while binge drinkers reported higher levels than social drinkers (Table 2).
The Research paper on Effects of Binge Drinking
... Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention by Michael P. Haines called A Social Norms Approach to Preventing Binge Drinking at ... college students who attempt suicide are heavy drinkers. The effects of binge drinking as a college student are effects that ... executive planning function and episodic memory. These long-lasting cognitive impairments are caused by excessive amounts of alcohol causing ...
Table 2. Means and standard deviations for SSSV and PMDS: subscales sten score for social, binge, and heavy drinkers
Scales | Social drinkers | Binge drinkers | Heavy drinkers | Total |
SSSV | Disinhibition | 4.83 (1.83) | 6.27 (1.79) | 7.40 (1.96) | 5.51 (2.01) |
| Thrill and adventure | 5.02 (1.92) | 5.99 (1.97) | 7.00 (1.68) | 5.50 (2.02) |
| Experiences | 5.20 (1.98) | 5.73 (2.00) | 6.69 (1.82) | 5.49 (2.02) |
| Boredom susceptibility | 5.27 (1.94) | 5.66 (2.02) | 6.14 (2.18) | 5.47 (2.01) |
| Total score | 5.09 (1.39) | 5.89 (1.46) | 7.46 (1.80) | 5.54 (1.60) |
PMDS | Behavioural disinhibition | 4.91 (1.71) | 6.13 (1.90) | 7.80 (2.03) | 5.54 (2.00) |
| Relief from pain | 5.10 (1.86) | 6.01 (1.95) | 6.95 (1.99) | 5.55 (1.99) |
| Social confidence | 4.89 (2.12) | 5.88 (2.14) | 8.49 (2.54) | 5.52 (2.01) |
| Total score | 5.08 (1.37) | 5.90 (1.46) | 6.81 (1.22) | 5.49 (1.44) |
Full-size table
View Within Article
3.5. Social drinkers, binge drinkers, and heavy drinkers: discriminant function analysis
A discriminant function analysis was conducted to determinate the dimensions along which the three groups differ. Two significant functions emerged [χ2 = (12) = 633.55, P < 0.001; χ2 = (15) = 103.6, P < 0.001] (Table 3).
The first function accounted for most of the variance (86.5%).
Structure matrix (Table 4) shows that function 1 was mostly explained by expectancy variables (social confidence and disinhibition subscales), only one dimension of the Sensation-Seeking Scale (Disinhibition), and some drinking variables. The first function was termed positive expectancy about alcohol.
Table 3. Multiple discriminant function analysis based on expectancy/sensation-seeking dimensions and drinking variables
| Eigenvalue | % Variance | Canonical correlation | Wilks’ λ | Chi-square | df | Significance |
Function 1 | 0.72 | 86.5 | 0.65 | 0.52 | 635.55 | 12 | 0.001 |
Function 2 | 0.11 | 13.5 | 0.32 | 0.90 | 103.46 | 5 | 0.001 |
Full-size table
View Within Article
Table 4. Multiple discriminant function: structure matrix
Scale/variable | Function 1 | Function 2 |
Drinking expectancy: social confidence | 0.63 | 0.42 |
Drinking expectancy: disinhibition | 0.56 | 0.05 |
Sensation-seeking dimension: disinhibition | 0.54 | − 0.19 |
No. of friends who regularly drink alcohol | 0.52 | − 0.28 |
Age when regular drinking began | − 0.26 | 0.11 |
Age when first tried alcohol outside family context | − 0.25 | 0.27 |
Full-size table
View Within Article
Variables concerning of the students’ alcohol use appears to be most important for function 2. The second function was defined as alcohol consumption behaviour. An evaluation of the group centroids showed that function 1 best separates social drinkers from heavy drinkers; however, function 2 adds to differentiate social and binge drinkers from heavy drinkers. Heavy drinkers have the highest positive expectancy about alcohol and experiment early alcohol consumption. On the other hand, social drinkers have the lowest level of positive expectancy about alcohol and the lowest level of early alcohol consumption. Binge drinkers fall in between on both variables (Table 2).
The results of discriminant classification show the 71.9% of subjects correctly classified (77.4% of social drinkers, 59.6% of binge drinkers, and 83.8% of heavy drinkers).
4. Discussion
The percentage of binge drinkers found in the sample, 32.9%, is similar to that found in the only research ever conducted in the Italian context (DiGrande et al., 2000), which described 35.6% of male students as binge drinkers. The data–also consistent with other national estimates (Knight et al., 2002, Kuntsche et al., 2004 and Wechsler et al., 2002)–confirmed that binge drinking and heavy drinking is indeed widespread among university students, especially among males. The frequency of heavy drinking for students who lived on their own (11.4%) was significantly higher than that for students who lived with their family (3.4%).
Students who attended university in central Italy were more likely to be classified as binge drinkers (39.9% in central Italy vs. 30.8% in southern Italy).
Social, binge, and heavy drinkers were revealed to differ in terms of drinking variables, expectancy about alcohol, and sensation-seeking dimensions by means of univariate and multivariate analysis. On a multivariate level, discriminant function analysis showed that positive expectancy about alcohol, sensation-seeking behaviours, and variables concerning alcohol use are significant in discriminating the three groups of drinkers. The model suggests that positive expectancy about alcohol best separates social drinkers from heavy drinkers, while early alcohol consumption adds to differentiate social and binge drinkers from heavy drinkers. While the current study is focused on binge drinking, data also seem to give important findings on different drinking patterns. Further investigation is also needed to better understand the contextual issues related to alcohol problems. Finally, future studies should focus on the relationship between specific types of alcohol or illicit drugs and distinctive problems.
References
Bennett et al., 1999 M.E. Bennett, J.H. Miller and W.G. Woodall, Drinking, binge drinking, and other drug use among southwestern undergraduates: Three-year trends, American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 25 (1999) (2), pp. 331–350. Full Text via CrossRef
D’Alessio et al., 2006 M. D’Alessio, F. Laghi and R. Baiocco, Young people’s consumption and attitudes, Firera Publishing Group, Roma (2006).
DiGrande et al., 2000 L. DiGrande, M.P. Perrier, M.G. Lauro and P. Contu, Alcohol use and correlates of binge drinking among university students on the Island of Sardinia, Italy, Substance Use and Misuse 35 (2000) (10), pp. 1471–1483. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (14)
Greene et al., 2000 K. Greene, M. Krcmar, L.H. Walters, D.L. Rubin and J.L. Hale, Targeting adolescent risk-taking behaviours: The contributions of egocentrism and sensation-seeking, Journal of Adolescence 23 (2000), pp. 439–461. Abstract | PDF (215 K) | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (92)
Ichiyama & Kruse, 1998 M.A. Ichiyama and M.I. Kruse, The social context of binge drinking among private university freshmen, Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education 44 (1998) (1), pp. 18–33.
Knight et al., 2002 J.R. Knight, H. Wechsler, M.C. Kuo, M. Seibring, E.R. Weitzman and M.A. Schuckit, Alcohol abuse and dependence among US college students, Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63 (2002) (3), pp. 263–270. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (170)
Kuntsche et al., 2004 E. Kuntsche, J. Rehm and G. Gmel, Characteristics of binge drinkers in Europe, Social Science & Medicine 59 (2004), pp. 113–127. Article | PDF (334 K) | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (99)
McNally & Palfai, 2001 A.M. McNally and T.P. Palfai, Negative emotional and readiness to change among college student binge drinkers, Addictive Behaviors 26 (2001), pp. 721–734. Article | PDF (113 K) | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (10)
Miller et al., 2004 J.W. Miller, J.C. Gfroerer, R.D. Brewer, T.S. Naimi, A. Mokdad and W.H. Giles, Prevalence of adult binge drinking, American Journal of Preventive Medicine 26 (2004) (4), pp. 294–298.
Morawska & Oei, 2005 A. Morawska and T.P.S. Oei, Binge drinking in university students: A test of the cognitive model, Addictive Behaviors 30 (2005), pp. 203–218. Article | PDF (189 K) | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (11)
Oei & Morawska, 2004 T.P.S. Oei and A. Morawska, A cognitive model of binge drinking: The influence of alcohol expectancies and drinking refusal self-efficacy, Addictive Behaviors 29 (2004), pp. 159–179. Article | PDF (251 K) | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (26)
Wechsler et al., 2002 H. Wechsler, J.E. Lee, M. Kuo, M. Seibring, T.F. Nelson and H. Lee, Trends in college binge drinking during a period of increased prevention efforts: Findings from 4 Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study Surveys, 1993–2001, Journal of American College Health 50 (2002), pp. 203–217. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (521)
Zuckerman, 1979 M. Zuckerman, Beyond the optimal level of arousal, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London (1979).
