Added: Shakina Reach - Date: 10.08.2021 19:31 - Views: 38206 - Clicks: 2222
Try out PMC Labs and tell us what you think. Learn More. The purpose of this study was to investigate the preferred drinking contexts of different gender and ethnic groups white, black, and Hispanic men and womenby examining where these groups do most of their drinking and to what extent drinking contexts preferences are associated with certain drinking-related consequences. The study used data from the, and U. 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.
We identified 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 venues2 home group did most drinking at home, and a fair amount elsewhereand 3 light group drank almost nothing quietly at home and also less in other settings than the other two clusters.
For a of ethnic-by-gender groups, context preference group asment 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, fighting, and drunk driving, after taking into the volume consumed, frequency of heavy drinking, age, and year of survey. Examining individuals' preferred drinking contexts may provide important information to augment overall drinking patterns in risk and prevention studies. 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 Greenfield and Rogers, ; Heeb and Gmel, ; Treno et al.
Drinking contexts also influence how much individuals White male looking for drinking white female. For example, most drinkers consume more alcohol in bars and at parties than at restaurants and in other settings Clark, ; Searles et al. Similarly, a recent multilevel analysis by Kairouz and Greenfield showed that a large part of the variability in drinking relates to the context, whereas much stems from individual differences such as gender. 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, ; Harford, ; Treno et al.
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, ; Caetano and Herd, Research by Herd and Grube is an exception, but they considered only black and white female drinkers. Using a national sample of 5, adults, they explored whether black and white women differed in how often they drank in particular types of social settings and whether drinking in different contexts independently predicted alcohol-related problems.
We asked the following: Is where one prefers to drink a useful indicator for predicting problem risk beyond overall pattern of intake? To understand why it is important to examine the pattern of drinking across a variety of contexts, it is useful to consider the role that drinking in one setting—the bar or tavern—is theorized to play in contributing to heavy drinking and problems. Pearson argued that heavy drinking in the tavern here defined as consuming a high volume in that setting is reinforced through rituals and ceremonies, including buying rounds, buying drinks for others, last call, and happy hour Clark, The more often individuals drink at bars, the more often they encounter these rituals and are exposed to the bar's heavy drinking norms Aarons et al.
Over time and with the intermittent reinforcement provided by bar or tavern patronage, heavy drinking may become the habitual mode of drinking Clark, ; Single, This might generalize to other settings but may also carry special risks because of features of the bar environment, where drinking may be heaviest.
Although bars may simply draw patrons who are already inclined to drink heavily a selection effectlongitudinal research has found that bar patronage is more likely to precede than to follow high volume consumed in bars and other drinking contexts Curran et al. This suggests that bars are environments in which patrons learn to drink heavily. This social learning theory of heavy drinking as related to bars, however, may apply more to whites than to other ethnic groups. Research has shown that blacks and Hispanics are less likely to drink in bars than whites, even when controlling for income, age, and employment status Treno et al.
Thus, minority men and women may drink heavily in environments other than bars, but it is unknown if such places act in a similar manner to encourage heavy drinking. Certain drinking contexts are associated with alcohol-related problems. Most research has focused on public drinking contexts, demonstrating that locations such as bars and, for young people, cars and dances are linked to alcohol-related aggression Graham et al.
Research suggests that this relationship is the result of the concentration of intoxicated people Graham et al. Less attention has been paid to exploring potential links between drinking contexts and other alcohol-related problems. For example, it is unknown if drinking in a private location, such as one's home, rather than a public location is more or less likely to be associated with arguments or fights with one's spouse. In this article, relying on cross-sectional, multiethnic, national surveys spanning 2 decades,we explore whether individuals may be classified according to preferences for drinking in particular drinking contexts.
We also examine group trends in preference-based types of drinkers between and Our third objective is to explore whether drinkers with particular preferences for certain drinking settings are at higher risk of specific negative consequences, over and above the risks from their overall month drinking pattern. We used, and U. These large cross-sectional surveys, each including black and Hispanic oversamples, were fielded approximately 10 years apart.
The and NAS surveys N7 and N9 were face-to-face interviews conducted by the Institute for Survey Research of Temple University, using stratified national household probability samples of and primary sampling units within a sampling frame representing the 48 contiguous states. The NAS was a computer-assisted telephone interview survey using list-assisted random digit dialing, sampling households in all 50 U.
All surveys relied on trained interviewers, were given in Spanish when preferred, and randomly selected adults ages 18 years and older within the household. For White male looking for drinking white female details on the sampling de, see Santos For the NAS, the list-assisted random digit dialing approach was used to collect a main probability sample plus additional samples of blacks and Hispanics.
As before, black oversamples were in geographic areas where there was a higher density of the black population, whereas Hispanic oversampling used Hispanic surname lists. Six published methodological studies on the NAS interview mode differences in-person vs telephone interviews, the latter yielding lower response rates similar to other computer-assisted telephone interview surveys have indicated good comparability of prevalence findings for alcohol consumption and associated problems, as summarized in Greenfield et al.
Data sets were weighted to represent the U. Because of clustered sampling and poststratification, standard errors in logistic regression analyses were adjusted using the survey command of the Stata statistical package Release 7. Respondents were asked how often in the past year they went out for an evening meal in a restaurant not including fast food places and luncheonettes ; went to bars, taverns, or cocktail lounges; went to a party in someone else's home; spent a quiet evening at home; had friends drop over and visit in their home; and hung around with friends in a public place such as a park, street, or parking lot.
Lastly, respondents who drank in each setting were asked how many drinks they typically had. The KS items first ask the frequencies of drinking wine, beer, and distilled spirits separately using a nine-level categorical scale, followed in each case by asking the proportion of time the respondent drinks each beverage in three quantity ranges: one to two, three to four, and five or more drinks response same as for the context of drinking variables.
White male looking for drinking white female volume is calculated by summing the responses with an appropriate algorithm Greenfield, ; Room, using a log transform to reduce the skew. For heavy drinking, from the KS we calculated days per year drinking three or more women or five or more men drinks. The choice of level for women was in recognition of gender-related problem-drinking norms, with three or more women versus five or more men used successfully in prior studies e. This variable did not require transformation.
Social consequences were measured by positive responses to 10 month acute-problem dichotomous items affirm, deny problem included in all surveys. Areas selected were those plausibly related to contexts, including the following: 1 legal trouble and accidents five items; e. In each case, any affirmed item was taken as the problem indicator. Initially, cluster analyses considered each individual's logged volumes in the venues to determine if there were clusters of individuals with similar profiles of drinking volume-by-drinking contexts i.
Analyses were disaggregated by gender, ethnic group white, black, and Hispanicand also survey year. However, the similarity of the gender-by-ethnic group for the survey years was great enough to support pooling data from all survey epochs, with the advantage that contextual cluster group membership was defined the same way across time, allowing meaningful pooled and trend comparisons of the cluster-analysis-defined groups. The clustering method used was k means, with cluster asment based on the Euclidian distance metric, suitable for large samples SPSS Inc.
In each gender-by-ethnic group case, three-cluster solutions were found to be more viable than solutions with four or more clusters. We labeled the resulting contextual drinking preference clusters according to the context s in which the highest volume of alcohol was consumed: a bar-plus cluster i.
Although each cluster solution was similar, the group asment was based on the specific gender-by-ethnic group analysis. We used multiple logistic regressions to examine the incremental predictive value of adding dummy variables indicating the context preference group bar-plus vs light, home vs light to models predicting the alcohol-related problems, controlling for age, and 50 years and older and year of survey Model 1.
We determined if contextual drinking preference improved the prediction of drinking problems above and beyond overall consumption patterns by adding to the basic model log overall volume KS volume and frequency of heavy drinking three or more drinks a day for women, five or more drinks a day for men Model 2. Figure 1for men, and Figure 2for women, present bar graphs for each ethnic group, showing each context preference group's mean consumption log volume in each of the six drinking contexts.
The graphs indicate where most of a particular context preference group's drinking takes place by showing the relative intake in each drinking context see captions to figures. Similarly, for each gender-by-ethnicity group, Table 1 shows the mean of volume in drinks per year consumed in each setting. We report the for white male drinkers first, because they may be taken as the reference group. White male looking for drinking white female with research Spradley and Mann,white men belonging to the bar-plus drinking group were found to do most of their drinking in bars, but the amount was almost as much everywhere else, except in outdoor public places see Figure 1white.
Bar-plus drinkers are relatively ubiquitous drinkers. This context-preference group drank in bars markedly less and also drank very little in public places. The light group drank almost nothing on a quiet evening at home and also very little in other social venues.
Overall, all the white male context-preference groups bar-plus, home, and light consumed more in restaurants, on average, than any of the other gender- and ethnic-specific cluster groups. Men's drinking context preferences for three ethnic groups white, Hispanic, black in, and U. National Alcohol Survey. Tables beneath figure provide percentages in context-preference groups for each year. Women's drinking context preferences for three ethnic groups white, Hispanic, black in, and U. Also in Table 1Hispanic men in the bar-plus group consumed more drinks annually relative to both black and white men drinkers.
By definition, they also did most of their drinking in bars, plus a large amount elsewhere see Figure 1Hispanic. White male looking for drinking white female men in the home cluster preferred drinking quietly at home and drinking somewhat when friends visited or when they were at others' parties. The profile of the Hispanic male light group looked very similar to that of white men.
Table 1 also suggests that black male bar-plus drinkers look very similar to their white male counterparts except they drink less at restaurants and quite a bit more in public places such as street corners and parks as is somewhat true for black men in the other context-preference groups. On average, black male bar-plus, home, and light drinkers consumed more drinks at home on a quiet evening, relative to any other gender- and ethnic-specific cluster groups see Figure 1black.
The light group black men are quite similar to white male counterparts. Regarding women's drinking context preferences, Table 1 suggests that white women's drinking patterns were very similar to their white male counterparts, although white women generally drank less in all instances than white men. Like white men, white women belonging to the bar-plus cluster drank mostly in bars, and nearly equivalent amounts elsewhere except outdoors see Figure 2white. White women home drinkers, on the other hand, drank mostly at home, usually on a quiet evening. They also drank a fair amount in all other settings, except in bars and public places.
Like their white male counterparts as well, white women in all groups bar-plus, home, and light consumed more alcohol in restaurants compared with other women. Table 1 shows that Hispanic women bar-plus drinkers did most of their drinking both in bars and at others' parties but also a fair amount elsewhere, except in public places. Also like their Hispanic male counterparts, Hispanic women home drinkers drank mostly at home on a quiet evening. They drank a fair amount in restaurants and with friends but not in bars and public places see Figure 2Hispanic. Hispanic women's light group resembles the white women's equivalent group.
Black women belonging to the bar-plus group did most of their drinking in bars, when friends were visiting at their home, and at home, usually on a quiet evening. They also drank a fair amount everywhere else. Overall, however, the black women bar-plus group drank less in bars compared with bar drinkers in all other ethnic and gender groups see Table 1 and Figure 2black.
The black women home cluster did most of their drinking during a quiet evening at home, a fair amount when friends dropped by, and very little elsewhere. Black women light drinkers, like other counterparts, drank almost nothing at home on a quiet evening and very little in other venues. Although trends were not tested, data tables in Figures 1 for men and 2 for women provide the relative percentage of all drinkers at each epoch ased to each context-preference group.
In the initial decade between andthere seems to have been a general decrease in the bar-plus context preference i. In the second decade between andthe prevalence of bar-plus context-preference drinkers among all ethnic-by-gender groups continued to decline, except among the white men and Hispanic women, for whom it remained stable. Regarding the home context-preference group, in the black and white ethnic groups, between and the percentages of women remained stable, whereas the representation of men increased.
During the same initial decadethe percentage of Hispanic men with the home drinking preference declined. However, in the second decadethere was a slight decrease in home drinking context preference for all ethnic-by-gender groups except white women. As for the light context-preference group, over the White male looking for drinking white female decades, with some minor variations, there seemed to be a general increase in prevalence across all ethnic-by-gender groups.
However, prevalence in the light cluster for white men increased in both decades, whereas the ethnic minority men prevalence increased more in the second decade, especially that of Hispanic men. For white women the increase in prevalence was greater in the first decade, whereas for the Hispanic women, the prevalence declined and then rose above the initial level.
Finally, for black women the prevalence increase was slow in the first decade and much greater in the second decade. For all ethnic groups in the most recent surveylarger percentages of women, compared with men, were classified in the light context preference, from about one half for white and black women to two thirds for Hispanic women.
The proportions of men ased to the light group ranged from about one third for whites to about one half for Hispanics, with black men intermediate. These gender contrasts in prevalence tend to be the inverse for those seen in the bar-plus groups. We assessed the relationship between preferred drinking contexts and each of the four alcohol-related problems i. Recognizing that the drinking context-preference groups have different overall drinking patterns, we wished to see whether an individual's contextual preference for drinking adds information controlling for overall drinking pattern.
Therefore, we specified two logistic regression models for each gender by ethnic group analyzed separately. Both models see Analytical procedure section control for age and survey year, with Model 2 adding overall volume and heavy drinking to the base model Model 1 to reveal the incremental contribution that drinking context preference might make beyond month drinking patterns. In Table 2summarizing the logistic regression model predicting arguments and fighting, Model 1 enters as predictors the context-preference indictors bar-plus and home, each referenced to lightplus age, and survey year.
After controlling for age and year of survey, the bar-plus drinkers compared with light drinkers regardless of gender or ethnicity were more likely to report arguments and fighting.White male looking for drinking white female
email: [email protected] - phone:(689) 225-3521 x 8781
The Relationship between Alcohol Drinking Patterns and Sleep Duration among Black and White Men and Women in the United States