Research Design Final Paper

Running head: SOCIAL NORMS AND SUBSTANCE CONSUMPTION 1

Social Norms Affecting Consumption Patterns of Illicit/Licit Substances Among 302W

Psychology Students

Victoria L. Warnock

Northern Arizona University


Abstract

Previous research indicates that undergraduate students decide to engage in substance

consumption despite the minimum legal drinking age laws and state or federal level policy. We

compared the influence of age on alcohol consumption and attitudes towards legality with

cannabis consumption patterns. Participants (N=86) at Northern Arizona University completed

anonymous surveys lifted from the Core Alcohol and Drug Survey. Participants answered

questions pertaining to alcohol volume or frequency and involvement with cannabis, in

conjunction with perceived normative values based on self-attitudes, friends and students in

general. We employed a Multiple Regression design to statistically control for confounds such

as gender, class standing and perceived norms. Where the mean age was (M=20.45) we found

no statistical significance for the proposed hypotheses. However, self-attitudes towards

consumption patterns yielded statistical significance across both self-reported raw scores of

alcohol consumption (β=1.27, p<.0001) and cannabis engagement (β=.700, p<.0001). In

addition, it was revealed that participants perceived normative consumption of their friends

alcohol use moderately affects their personal consumption patterns (β=.384, p<.018). Thus, in

conclusion, self-reported attitudes about appropriate consumption were the single best predictor

for actual intake of undergraduate students, followed by the perceived normative consumption of

their peers.

Keywords: Alcohol, Cannabis, Undergraduates, Perception, Norms


Social Norms Affecting Consumption Patterns of Illicit/Licit Substances Among 302W

Psychology Students

Social institutions provide an overarching code of culturally standardized values and

expectations that attempt to influence individuals on a micro scale in their conscious decision-

making processes. These established normative beliefs define what is socially acceptable and

appropriate within our everyday events and function, serving to found conventional rules and

laws for conducting ourselves amidst society. In the United States federal law mandates that the

tolerable age to consume alcoholic beverages is 21, the extent to which this regulation is upheld

and exercised is a facet of our inquiry. In contrast, indulgence in the easily accessible illicit drug

cannabis is federally unrecognized or condoned yet still occurring.

Among university settings, students are generally known to engage recreationally in

either substance and at times ingest both for intensified effects of intoxication. The purpose of

our study is to isolate whether age as a social norm contributes as a significant factor in the

consumption patterns of alcohol in students. In addition, we aim to assess the degree to which

students participate in the conscious intake of cannabis considering the implications of its

illegality. This area of analysis is imperative to understanding what social mechanisms such as

policy and tolerability affect the individual in decision-making processes and the extent to which

imposed parameters will hold authority and conformity.

Furthermore, the results of this study will contribute to more comprehensive data trends

concerning psychology students in academic environments, exposing patterns in submission to

inappropriate engagement of both licit and illicit substances. Undergraduate psychology students

present a unique approach to deciphering what factors may influence indulgence actions with

substances, as a considerable portion of their education covers the diverse range of drugs


available and how they affect the individual physiologically and mentally. For example,

Introduction to Psychology devotes half a chapter if not more to the general and commonly

known illicit substances webbed within our society and includes a look at licit substances such as

alcohol and tobacco. Developmental psychology coupled with introduction to cognitive and

behavioral neuroscience provide a more in depth chapter respectively on how each substance

differs from each other based on physiological effects, mental effects and the repercussions of

short-term vs. long-term usage. Considering this notion, this study should also aid in

ascertaining the extent to which learned information about the implications and harm of

substances interferes with conscious decisions that result in engaging regardless of prior

knowledge.

Previous Research Results

Several studies have examined the role of social norms in college student substance

consumption patterns, including age, perceived normative values and setting variations.

University settings provide diverse mechanisms for substance indulgence, although the minimum

legal drinking age enforcement has aided in reducing under-age consumption, a study conducted

from 2005-2006 found that 51.6% of people aged 18-20 reported using alcohol within the past 30

days (National Survey on Drug Use and Health). Thus, although this fraction of the population

is incapable of purchasing or enjoying alcohol in public settings they are managing to secure

alcohol regardless, a second party of those that are of legal age are involved and providing

alcohol to minors. Brown, Matousek & Radue (2009) directed a study in which 130 students

between 21-25 years old at the University of Wisconsin-Madison were interviewed in 16

different focus groups inquiring about perceptions and motivations for providing minors with

alcohol. The aim of this study was to identify potential ways in which those of legal drinking


age such as friends and relatives could reduce access of alcohol to minors on campus, therefore

establishing more productive methods of intervening. The discussion and focus groups averaged

about eight people and were held from 2007-2008. Key themes were isolated in the results and

utilized to better understand what mechanisms drive those of legal age to provide alcohol to

minors. The results established that the main reasons for providing alcohol were that most social

engagements involve drinking and that some individuals turn 21 and still continue to have

underage friends that they want to participate in events. In addition, reoccurring themes found

that the participants believed their behavior to be no different than adults that engage in drinking,

the prestige of acceptance into specific universities enables the individual to drink if he/she

pleases because that accomplishment is noteworthy and a considerable portion found the current

legal age to be inappropriate or unfair. The participants also identified one other reason that

most provide alcohol for minors, an overwhelming feeling of social expectation and cultural

norm in university settings. Participants described how they felt they must ‘pay it forward’ or

‘give back’ in the reciprocal relationship of those that are legal that provided alcohol for them as

minors and now as they reach legal age they should perpetuate the cycle (Brown, Matousek &

Radue, 2009).

A study conducted at the University of New York in Buffalo demonstrates to what extent

Bandura’s concept of Social Learning Theory contributes to developing consumption patterns of

students. Social Learning Theory states that individuals learn behaviors through observation of

models such as family and friends (McLeod, 2011). This relates to how an individual may

perceive the respected norms within a context and thus establish their own distinction of

appropriate and inappropriate. This study claimed that most university students are inclined to

overestimate what is a socially acceptable rate of drinking and this could result in distorted


expectations of frequency and volume (Wardell & Read, 2013). Positive Alcohol Expectancies

or PEAs help form unrealistic rewards of drinking and in turn affect the consumption rates of

students. Wardell and Read (2013) asserted that this idea of Reciprocal Determinism simply

implies that consumption patterns are shaped by these social norms and skewed confident reward

systems and perpetuate a cyclical motion, in essence they mold and are molded by each other. In

order to establish that this relationship exists, researchers assessed the rate of past alcohol use

and three measures of PEA’s on a sample of 557 college students. The study found that the

perceived quantity norms directly influenced the actual quantity uptake, yet frequency norms

showed no correlation to actual frequency consumption rates suggesting that some factors

involving social norms have a significant impact while others have modest or little to none

(Wardell & Read, 2013).

A similar study conducted at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston identified the

initial age of substance abuse by individuals claiming this indicates future potential cannabis,

alcohol and other drug use trends in overall life-time dependence patterns. Mohler-Kuo (2003)

utilized a sample of 215 randomly assigned undergraduate students from 120 colleges across 40

states from 1993-2001. This particular study focused on cannabis and other illicit substances and

the prevalence among four-year university students, whom were surveyed and asked when, if

ever, the following substances had been used. Students were asked about their alcohol rates

concerning volume and frequency within the last two weeks and the initial age at which they

selectively indulged in each substance. Results demonstrated that there was a significant

increase in cannabis consumption from 1993-2001 in university students, notably engagement

within the last 30 days (Mohler-Kuo, 2003). The data also implied an average age at which

substance abuse before or after affected the general trends in later abuse, if an individual reported


engaging in cannabis, tobacco and alcohol consumption before 16 years of age he/she was more

likely to record a higher level of usage for the past 30 days, more likely to have experimented

with other illicit drugs and have transformed into a lifetime users (Mohler-Kuo, 2003). In

addition, Mohler-Kuo (2003) found another important aspect of consumption patterns involving

the pattern of polysubstance abuse, or abuse of more than one mind-altering drug at one time in

order to achieve heightened intoxication. The study analyzed the role of polysubstance abuse in

the context of the previous 30 days; they found that almost all the cannabis users reported using

multiple substances during this time period. The most popular combination appeared to be

cannabis, tobacco and binge drinking.

Polysubstance Consumption and Substance Substitution

Simultaneous polysubstance abuse is a relatively new phenomena actively being

observed within the psychology field, of studies conducted thus far most have examined what

substances are combined but little have inspected the doses relative to one another and the order

in which a person ingests them for a desired effect. Barrett, Darredeau and Pihl (2006) looked at

what context might affect the order in which drugs were administered, the desired result from the

combination and to what degree doses were consciously consumed by users. Between April

2003-2004, 149 students were sampled who admitted to using two or more substances in their

lifetime and data was recorded via a structured interview where participants answered questions

such as the age of first use of a drug, provided information about the drug from their own

knowledge base, rate of use within past 30 days, described what substances had been co-

administered and the order in which each participant did so. Researchers discovered a few trends

that may aid in understanding student consumption patterns, tobacco was the leading substance

most frequently co-administered with other drugs. Cannabis, tobacco and alcohol repeatedly


appeared to be the most reoccurring and popular combination of mind-altering consumption

patterns (Barrett, Darredeau & Pihl, 2006). Thus a new factor has been given relevance in

studies looking at addiction and formation of consumption patterns.

In addition, users often justify their substance abuse by claiming that they are interacting

with the lesser of two evils, aside polysubstance abuse a user may opt to simply substitute one

substance for another. A study conducted by Reiman (2009) analyzed the role of substitution

among 350 anonymous cannabis users from Berkeley Patient’s Group, a medical cannabis

dispensary in Berkeley, CA. Utilizing survey data, substitution was operationalized as: a

conscious choice to use one drug either legal or illicit, instead of, or in conjunction with another

due to issues such as perceived safety, the potential level of addiction, effectiveness in relieving

individuals symptoms and the access to or level of acceptance of the substance in question. The

results yielded that 40% of users substituted cannabis for alcoholic beverages, 26% preferred

cannabis as a substitute for other illicit substances and 65.8% substitute cannabis for prescription

medications. The implications of this study reveal that cannabis has the potential to be perceived

positively as a valid substitute for other drugs and this could play into an individual’s decision to

engage in recreational use of substances despite social expectations of upholding the law.

Information gathered by Wechsler & Nelson (2010) suggest recent trends in drinking

among college students aged 18-24 years-old are increasing and the overall effectiveness of and

enforcement of the minimum legal drinking age of 21 is debatable. Recent studies have found

that although there has been an observable decline in heavy drinking habits of 18-20 year-olds

since the early 1980s, an increase in binge drinking among those of 21-24 years of age has been

recorded in the past decade. Studies also confirmed that despite acknowledgement of the

minimum legal drinking age of 21 among university settings, 75% of 18-20 year-olds reported


drinking within the last year. An additional study conducted in April through June of 2010 using

the Core Alcohol and Drug Survey assessed the effectiveness of alcohol policies on four-year

universities by examining two campuses that prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol on

campus in contrast to two campuses that allow the sale and consumption of alcohol. The study

analyzed 186 randomly selected individuals from all four universities and utilized a multiple

logistic regression analysis that statistically controlled for confounds such as gender, age,

ethnicity, participation in sports and Greek activities (Walter & Kowalczyk, 2012). The results

supported the ideation that minimum legal drinking age policy is ineffective or carries no effect

in micro-level processes. Walter & Kowalczyk (2012) found that females demonstrated

significantly lower odds of heavy drinking, those that participated in sports exhibited

significantly higher odds of heavy drinking habits, students that were equal to or older than 21

demonstrated higher odds of heavy drinking and most noteworthy, that no significant difference

was observed between both the wet and dry policies of the four universities. Thus, the

researchers could not reject the null hypothesis and concluded that to some degree the policy

associated with the minimum legal drinking age is ineffective.

The Amethyst Initiative Argument protests that the minimum legal drinking age of 21

years old is simply not working and producing more negative consequences as a result. This

organization argues for open and public debate over the minimum legal drinking age, advancing

to possibly lower it and reduce negative consequences associated with underage drinking. They

believe that the recent increase in college students aged 18-20 years-old that binge drink or drink

heavily is a direct reaction of being denied access to alcohol that is more carefully monitored at

21 and are thus pushed into the underground realm of acquiring and consuming alcohol. As of


November 2009, 135 Presidents and Chancellors of universities in the United States have signed

this petition (Wechsler & Nelson, 2010).

A study conducted by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism observed

that within university settings students undergo a common two-step process of consuming

alcoholic drinks as a consequence of social norms. The first involves Attribution Theory, which

states that the individual within a social context will derive situational information to come to a

causal explanation of the present events, the perceiver attempts to create cause and effect

relationships (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). Rasual et al. (2011) proposed that based off Attribution

Theory, a student witnessing a specific acceptable level of drinking at an event will infer that this

is normative and base their frequency and volume patterns of this established standard, and a

discrepancy will most likely exist that in turn motivates the student to compensate to reach

equilibrium. Lowering the minimum legal drinking age may be one way to reduce normative

perspectives stemming from observing heavy drinking patterns at private parties and other

events. This study employed a systems approach to measure the hypothetical impact of lowering

the minimum legal drinking age on a college campus. Data was pooled from Social Norms

Marketing Research Project to fill in parameters, from 32 universities across the United States

students were surveyed. Students were asked to indicate how many drinks were consumed at an

event, how many drinking-related events were attended weekly and their personal style of

drinking on a scale (Rasul et al. 2011). Although the results proved to be incapable of utilization

based on hypothetical parameters and conditions and the researchers were unable to provide a

conclusion to the question, the design of this study provides much insight into what role the age

of a consumer may play in conscious decision-making when it comes to substance consumption.


Based on the collective effort of past research we have been able to identify key factors

that might influence indulgence of students in drug abuse. We believe that our specific study will

further isolate and scrutinize the general function of social institutions and contexts on

development of social norms both perceived and existing realistically, and thus help to infer

whether age acts as a true imposition on decision-making processes of students when consuming

alcohol and whether consumption rates of cannabis will fluctuate relative to its disapproval

amidst society.

We predict that despite psychology 302W students having prior knowledge of the

harmful effects and influence of recreational drug use there will be a significant number of

individuals who engage regardless of meeting the minimum legal drinking age and a significant

number of students will admit to consuming cannabis despite this substance’s illegality. We plan

on anonymously surveying the 302W student population of Fall 2013 as our sample size and

pooling this data together to establish a correlation. If students significantly indulge in alcohol

under the age of 21, and exhibit substantial and consistent consumption patterns with cannabis

then we can infer to some degree that social norms do not necessarily have a direct effect on the

decision-making processes of the individual.

Method

Participants

Eighty-six currently enrolled Psychology 302W students were recruited through Northern

Arizona University Faculty and surveyed in the classroom. There were 59 females and 27 males

and class standing found 3 sophomores, 68 juniors and 15 seniors within our sample size. Zero

participants identified as 18 years-old, 11 identified as 19 years-old, 44 identified as 20 years-old

and 31 participants who identified as 21 years or older. The average age of our sample size was


20.45 years. Participants were chosen from the current Fall 2013 Psychology 302w enrollment

to serve as a basic sample size that could later be applied to undergraduate students in general.

All participants in this study were instructed to omit their name or any other identifiers for the

purpose of our research, anonymity was a crucial aspect stressed in this process. There was no

compensation offered for this study. All participants signed an informed consent form

instructing that participation was entirely voluntary and if at any point the individual became

uncomfortable, refusal to continue the survey was their prerogative.

Materials and Measures

Our questionnaire was lifted from the Southern Illinois University Core Institute Alcohol

and Drug survey, questions received little to no modifications. Questions that were modified

only experienced the systematic removal of a number of substances that proved to be irrelevant

to our data collection. Our questionnaire included 19 self-report questions pertaining to

substance consumption volume and frequency as well as normative perceived peer engagement.

In addition, the Core Institute Alcohol and Drug Survey was revised and utilized in various past

studies to examine alcohol and other substance consumption among undergraduate university

settings. The Core Institute measure has been administered to over half a million undergraduate

students on 800 diverse campuses across the United States (Presley & Meilman, 1994).

Alcohol and Age. Alcohol and age comprise our first predictor variable; we evaluated

the role of age on alcohol consumption frequency and volume. Age was determined merely

from self-report on the given questionnaire, as a categorical variable the participant is either

under the minimum legal drinking age or of age and older. We examined frequency and volume

by selecting specific questions pertaining to each pattern from the Core Institute Alcohol and

Drug Survey. For example, a frequency question appeared as the following: “During the past 30


days, how many days did you consume alcoholic beverages?” and participants could respond

within a range of “zero” to “all days”. In addition, a volume question appeared as the following:

“Think back over the last two weeks. How many times have you had five or more drinks in one

sitting?”, participants would then indicate frequency by selecting between a range of “none” to

“10 or more drinks”. Thus, with all three pieces of information available, we measured the

quantitative individual frequency and volume rates in comparison to the indicated age to

determine whether the minimum legal drinking age of 21 truly influences students as a social

expectation and norm.

Cannabis and Legality. Our second predictor variable cannabis and legality, examined

the role of institutional law and social taboo in relation to the conscious decision to engage in

recreational use of marijuana. We measured the notion of consciously being aware that cannabis

is federally outlawed and illegal on a state-level in Arizona within our questionnaire with a

categorical “yes/no” format. We measured cannabis consumption by quantitatively evaluating

frequency rates of individual in order to assess if engagement was occurring. For example, a

frequency question appeared as: “Within the past 30 days, how many days did you consume

Marijuana?” and participants were given a range of “zero” to “all days” as options for response.

Therefore, when we pooled out data trend together we evaluated if a participant had answered

“yes” to consciously being aware of federally outlawed cannabis consumption and compared that

to their self-report frequency rates, examining if and how often they engaged in recreational use.

Considering that our questions were formatted to isolate a single construct at a time,

when scoring we indicated which group the participants responses belonged in for correlational

comparison. If a participant indicated their age was below the minimum legal drinking age of

21, they were sectioned off in order to further analyze their specific frequency and volume rates


in contrast to those that indicated they were of legal age or older. When we assessed our second

predictor variable, we isolated those that admitted to engaging in cannabis consumption into one

group and those that did not engage into the comparison group. Thus we could illuminate the

affect of legality and social taboo in the conscious decision to consume cannabis, particularly,

whether this social norm carried any influence within the student population at all.

Planned Statistical Analysis. Utilizing a Sequential Multiple Regression Analysis, we

aim to understand the relationship between variables rather than construct a prediction about the

relationship between variables. By employing a Sequential Multiple Regression Analysis, we

intend to explain a correlation between our two sets of predictor variables in relation to our

dependent variable. In addition, multi-variable analyses statistically control for the effects of

other confounds within the study that may influence the dependent variable such as gender, class

standing and normative peer perception of substance engagement. We employed a two-tailed

study with separate Pearson Correlation Coefficients for predictor variables, alcohol and age and

the legality and social taboo of cannabis consumption. This allowed us two distinct relationship

strengths between our predictor variables in which we compared to our dependent variable of

substance consumption. We chose an alpha level of 0.05, if a smaller alpha level were chosen

we would decrease the probability of inferring a Type I Error yet increase the probability of

making a Type II Error.

A demographics form was created by our faculty sponsor Matthew Anderson, and

administered to the Psychology 302w student sample prior to the initiation of any studies. The

data from each demographics form is linked through a Participant ID however there is no link of

data established between our questionnaire and the sampled participants.

Procedure


Participants entered the classroom and were instructed to clear everything from their

desks and to take out a writing utensil. Surveys were administered to those present the day of

data collection in a survey packet. Participants were given informed consent and a participant ID

prior to initiation of the questionnaires and instructed to complete the demographics forms on the

first page and all the surveys located in the packet to the best of their ability. Students then

answered each survey and upon finishing gave the faculty sponsor the responses.

The Dependent variable being measured was the general substance consumption patterns

of undergraduate students; the correlation compiled from individual data set responses to our

questionnaire. This measure was reflected by the two predictor variables analyzed from our

survey materials assessing two widely consumed substances, alcohol and cannabis. Predictor

variable one had two levels, age was examined by categorically grouping participants into either

under the age of 21 or 21 and older while frequency and volume was quantitatively assessed via

Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient in accordance with the given age. If participants under the

minimum legal drinking age show significant consumption rates in comparison to those of the

legal age or older we can infer that to some extent the social expectation of abstinence until 21

does not affect the individual in their decision-making processes. Similarly, our second predictor

variable has two levels, categorizing participants based on conscious admittance to present

legality status of cannabis and then quantitatively identifying whether consumption occurred

from frequency report data. Thus, if a participant indicates that they are aware that cannabis is

federally outlawed and on Arizona state-level is only permitted medically, by choosing to still

engage in recreational use we can infer to some extent that the presence of a macro-level law has

less affect on the micro-level decision to consume a substance recreationally.


Results

The tested hypothesis predicted that age would affect consumption levels of alcohol in

undergraduate students and both Pearson’s r correlation coefficient and multiple regression

analysis were employed to statistically control for confounds threatening internal validity. Two

variables were measured for alcohol consumption, alcohol consumption (AC) measured all

questions on the survey related to frequency or volume while alcohol raw scores (AC_R_S)

indicated self-report of number of drinks consumed within the past week. The findings do not

support our hypothesis as both the Pearson r and multiple regression statistical analyses

confirmed. Mean age of participants was (M= 20.45, SD= 1.45) years and the mean academic

year of participants was junior status as (M=3.13, SD= .44), Pearson’s r analyzed (N= 86)

participants in total. The correlation coefficient for AC found r(81)=.22, p= .022 while the

correlation coefficient for AC_R_S found r(81)= .235, p= .016. While the results are significant

and reveal a positive correlation between age and alcohol consumption, the obtained Pearson r

for both analyses of alcohol consumption are small in effect size when compared to an effect size

range of -1.0 to 1.0, thus indicating a weak relationship between our two predictor variables of

age in relation to alcohol consumption. The results of the regression analysis for AC indicated

that R2=.697, F(8,75)= 21.52, p< .0001. It was discovered that age did not significantly predict

alcohol consumption as (β =.067, p< .487). The results of the AC_RAW_SCORE regression

analysis found that R2=.369, F(8,74)= 5.4, p< .0001. Beta indicated that age did not influence

the self-reported raw score of alcohol consumption as (β = .118, p< .402)(See Table 1). Thus in

conclusion, we cannot reject the null hypothesis, as age was not significantly associated with

alcohol consumption in our sample.


The second tested hypothesis predicted that legality would have affect on

undergraduates’ conscious decision to consume cannabis and both a Pearson’s r correlation

coefficient and multiple regression analysis were performed to evaluate this relationship.

Legality question one (LGL_1) focused on the notion that the individual was aware that cannabis

is federally outlawed and Pearson’s r found that r(81)= -.17, p= .061. These results suggest that

although the relationship yields a negative correlation it is not significant. In addition, the effect

size is small compared to a range of -1.0 to 1.0 and thus we cannot conclude that legality is

associated with consumption patterns. Legality question two (LGL_2) assessed whether the

individual’s decision to engage with cannabis was swayed by the notion that it is federally

outlawed and only permissible in the state of Arizona for medical purposes. Pearson’s r found

that r(81)= -.028, p= .402 and also supports our claims that legality is not associated with

conscious decision-making processes of the individual to consume cannabis. The regression

analysis further indicates this relationship as R2= .917, F(7,75)= 118.55, p< .001 with a

determined beta value of (β = -.006, p< .876) for predictor variable measure of LGL_1 and a beta

value of (β = -.028, p< .430) for predictor variable measure LGL_2(See Table 2). Therefore, the

null hypothesis cannot be rejected; we cannot conclude that legality and cannabis consumption

are associated.

Significance Revealed in Predictor Variables

Multiple regression analysis allowed for the statistical control of confounds such as

examining the role of sex of the participant, academic year of the participants and perceived

norms of alcohol and cannabis engagement both subjectively and objectively. It appears that the

highest predictor of alcohol consumption for undergraduate students is the perceived normative

view of their self-expressive attitudes toward appropriate engagement with alcohol


(PN_AC_SELF). PN_AC_SELF is a self-reported measure of participant’s opinions of

appropriate frequency of actual alcohol consumption per year, (See Figure 1) contrasts

participant’s attitudes with their self-reported measures of drinks consumed within the last week,

AC_R_S. AC_R_S found (β= .527, p< .001) for the confound of self-attitude of consumption,

suggesting that the subjective view of the individual significantly affects consumption rates of

both frequency and volume. Contributing to this theme, AC found (β= .633, p< .0001) for the

same predictor variable of PN_AC_SELF (See Figure 2).

When we statistically controlled for confounds involving cannabis consumption, the

previous theme of self-expressive attitudes toward consumption exposed itself as the highest

predictor variable for recreational cannabis engagement. PN_CC_SELF is a self-reported

measure of participant’s opinions of appropriate frequency of actual cannabis consumption per

year. Regression analysis for self-reported attitudes toward appropriate cannabis consumption

(PN_CC_SELF) revealed that (β= .981, p< .001), supporting the association that self-expressive

attitudes about appropriate consumption patterns reflects upon actual consumption rates (See

Figure 3).

Thus, as regression analysis of alcohol and cannabis consumption of undergraduate

students disclosed, the perceived normative substance consumption of the individual proved to

be the single best predictor of actual intake rates. Subsequently, a moderate relationship between

alcohol consumption and perceived normative consumption of friends was exposed and

concluded to impact the decision-making processes of undergraduate students. Age was not

found to significantly impact the participant in alcohol consumption and the notion of legality of

a substance was not found to significantly impact the decision to engage in cannabis use.


Discussion

The tested hypotheses did not yield significant results consistent with our proposed

theory in which minimum legal drinking age affected alcohol consumption patterns and legality

affected recreational cannabis engagement admits undergraduates students. Thus, we cannot

conclude that policy such as the minimum legal drinking age of 21 affects the decision-making

processes of the individual with regards to alcohol consumption. In addition, no significant

relationship was isolated between acknowledgement of legality and intentional recreational use

of cannabis. Despite statistically controlling for many confounds within our study, the

possibility of another variable affecting the analyzed relationships between age and alcohol or

policy and cannabis is too high. Although gender and class standing had little to no effect on

substance consumption, the self-perceived appropriate consumption patterns of the individual

and close friends were the best predictor variables for actual intake of substances.

Relation to Previous Research

Our findings support Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory, the idea that behaviors

about substance consumption are learned through models such as family or friends (McLeod,

2011). We found a moderate significance behind a participant’s belief of consumption relative

to their friends and how that was reflective in their own intake. As Wardell and Read (2013)

speculated, the concept of Reciprocal Determinism evidently influences the individual to some

extent as the perpetual cycle of social normative views shapes substance consumption and the

consumption itself molds the perspective on social norms. Self-expressive attitudes toward

appropriate substance consumption proved to be the single best predictor of real consumption by

students, both Bandura’s Social Learning Theory and Reciprocal Determinism sway our self-

perceptions as we define individually where our boundaries are constructed. Rasual et al. (2011)


proposed an additional explanation that may contribute to the individual fashioning of our

defined appropriate levels of consumption, Attribution Theory claims that immersed within a

social context the individual derives and decodes situational meaning in order to create a cause

and effect relationship. Therefore in conjunction with our findings, an individual may compile

information from previous encounters socially that contribute to their understanding of

appropriate levels of consumption given particular social contexts and aid in defining individual

stances on engagement.

Strengths and Limitations

The construct validity and reliability of our variables was considerably strong in our

research design as consistency was both maintained and the variables effectively measured what

our hypotheses required. Age was defined by the minimum legal drinking age law of 21, our

consumption variable was defined by quantitative frequency and volume scores and legality was

measured by self-reported acknowledgment of state and federal policy by the participants. Face

and construct validity we also generally strong within this study, as overall the proposed study

addressed our hypotheses and the specific content was exact in assessing what was necessary for

analysis. Concurrent validity was established by isolating the two predictor variables in question

that theoretically affected substance consumption and examined as separate correlations

contributing to the dependent variable through Multiple Regression Analysis. There were

several limitations to our research design; we were unable to establish external validity, as the

sample size of our study was smaller than anticipated and too small to necessarily apply to our

findings for more massive populations of undergraduate students. There was not enough given

time for this study to establish convergent or predictive validity and a test-retest application of

this design would allow for parameters that potentially could establish discriminant validity.


Implications. This research indicates that mechanisms such as perceived normative

values and expectations influence individuals in their micro-processes. Despite failing to find a

correlation between age and alcohol, the self-expressed attitudes of the participant revealed

significant effects on the actual intake levels. When a participant implied that they did not

partake in excessive amount of drinking this was reflective in the quantitative data analyzed. In

addition, participants demonstrated that close social circles such as their peers influenced the

boundaries and conceptions of their perceived appropriate levels of consumption and this

significantly affected their real quantities of drinking. The participants expressed attitudes

toward appropriate cannabis engagement also reflected this significant relationship in actual

consumption. Therefore it is imperative to understanding undergraduate’s decision to engage in

substance consumption as reflective of their own contrived margins and mechanisms on macro

levels such as policy and law do not necessarily hold any weight in this process. This is

invaluable to future work with undergraduate and other populations as we strive to create more

effective substance abuse prevention and treatment programs and reform policy that is effective

and applicable to the individual in varying contexts.

Future Research. New questions have exposed themselves following this study that

future research should aim to elaborate on and contribute to the scientific community.

Considering that the highest significance levels were only found for individual self-expressed

attitudes toward appropriate substance consumption we wonder how we can identify those

factors that construct these boundaries and focus on the impact each factor has on the decision to

engage in substance abuse. Confounds such as the extent of social contexts modifying perceived

norms of consumption patterns, the order and degree that factors such as developmental

upbringing and exposure to enabling environments alter self-employed boundaries and how


individuals classify their notion of appropriate versus inappropriate should be explored in regards

to consumption of substances both licit and illicit.


References

Barrett, S. P., Darredeau, C., & Pihl, R. O. (2006). Patterns of simultaneous polysubstance use in

drug using university students. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical & Experimental,

21(4), 255-263. doi:10.1002/hup.766

Brown, R., Matousek, T., & Radue, M. (2009). Legal-age students' provision of alcohol to

underage college students: an exploratory study. Journal Of American College Health,

57(6), 611-618. doi:10.3200/JACH.57.6.611-618

Fiske, S.T., & Taylor, S.E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill

Martens, M. P., Brown, N. T., Donovan, B. M., & Dude, K. (2005). Measuring negative

consequences of college student substance use: A psychometric evaluation of the core

alcohol and drug survey. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development

(American Counseling Association), 38(3), 164-175. Retrieved from:

http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=66a8978c-9b01-40d7-bd8f-53db73acf0de

%40sessionmgr10&vid=1&hid=6&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1za

XRl#db=f5h&AN=18593183

McLeod, S. A. (2011). Albert Bandura | Social Learning Theory - Simply Psychology. Retrieved

from http://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html

Mohler-Kuo, M. (2003). Trends in Marijuana and Other Illicit Drug Use Among College

Students: Results From 4 Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study

Surveys: 1993-2001. Journal Of American College Health, 52(1), 17.Retrieved from:

http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=8525942c-1c69-4efe-a3dc-847f529241db

%40sessionmgr4&vid=1&hid=6&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaX

Rl#db=f5h&AN=12065640


Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2005 and 2006.

http://www.drugabusestatistics.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k6NSDUH/tabs/Sect2peTabs1to42

.htm#Tab2.5.Accessed October 29th, 2013.

Presley, C. A., & Meilman, P. W. (1994). Development of the core alcohol and drug survey:

Initial findings and future decisions. Journal of American College Health, 42(6), 248.

Rasul, J. W., Rommel, R. G., Jacquez, G. M., Fitzpatrick, B. G., Ackleh, A. S., Simonsen, N., &

Scribner, R. A. (2011). Heavy episodic drinking on college campuses: Does changing the

legal drinking age make a difference? Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 72(1), 15-

23. Retrieved from: http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?

sgHitCountType=None&sort=RELEVANCE&inPS=true&prodId=AONE&userGroupNam

e=nauniv&tabID=T002&searchId=R5&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&contentSegment=

&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&contentSet=GALE|

A249876954&&docId=GALE|A249876954&docType=GALE&role=

Reiman, A. (2009). Cannabis as a substitute for alcohol and other drugs. Harm Reduction

Journal, 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7517-6-35

Walter, G., & Kowalczyk, J. (2012). The effectiveness of alcohol policies in 4-year public

universities. Journal of Community Health, 37(2), 520-528. doi:10.1007/s10900-011-

9474-3

Wardell, J. D., & Read, J. P. (2013). Alcohol expectancies, perceived norms, and drinking

behavior among college students: Examining the reciprocal determinism hypothesis.

Psychology Of Addictive Behaviors, 27(1), 191-196. doi:10.1037/a0030653


Wechsler, H., & Nelson, T. F. (2010). Will increasing alcohol availability by lowering the

minimum legal drinking age decrease drinking and related consequences among youths?

American Journal of Public Health, 100(6), 986-992. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.178004

Table 1.

Regression Analysis of Age and Alcohol Consumption.


Model Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. Collinearity Statistics

B Std. Error

Beta Tolerance

VIF

1

(Constant) -4.723 4.059 -1.164 .248

Sex of Participant .385 .416 .065 .925 .358 .822 1.217

Age of Participant .129 .184 .067 .699 .487 .434 2.303

Academic Year .350 .533 .055 .657 .513 .576 1.736

Percieved Norms Alcohol Consumption 1

.298 .229 .092 1.301 .197 .803 1.246

Percieved Norms Alcohol Consumption 2

.611 .345 .131 1.771 .081 .740 1.351

Percieved Norms Alcohol Consumption 3-Self

.887 .108 .633 8.250 .000 .688 1.453

Percieved Norms Alcohol Consumption 3-Friends

.599 .203 .232 2.955 .004 .655 1.526

Percieved Norms Alcohol Consumption 3-General

.135 .176 .058 .768 .445 .703 1.423

a. Dependent Variable: AC

Table 2.

Regression Analysis of Legality and Cannabis Consumption.


Model Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. Collinearity Statistics

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance

VIF

1

(Constant) -.512 .615 -.833 .408

Legality 1 -.042 .270 -.006 -.157 .876 .876 1.142

Legality 2 -.148 .187 -.028 -.794 .430 .908 1.101

Percieved Norms Cannabis Consumption 1

-.221 .084 -.130 -2.618 .011 .451 2.219

Percieved Norms Cannabis Consumption 2

.384 .159 .125 2.418 .018 .415 2.412

Percieved Norms Cannabis Consumption 3-Self

.700 .034 .981 20.336 .000 .475 2.105

Percieved Norms Cannabis Consumption 4-Friends

.041 .041 .050 .978 .331 .429 2.333

Percieved Norms Cannabis Consumption 5-General

-.079 .064 -.065 -1.220 .226 .392 2.549

a. Dependent Variable: Cannabis Consumption 1

Figure 1.


Self-Reported Number of Alcoholic Drinks Consumed in Past Week and Perceived Self-

Expressive Norms of Alcohol Consumption.

Figure 2.


Total Alcohol Consumption (AC) and Perceived Self-Expressive Norms of Alcohol

Consumption.

Figure 3.


Cannabis Consumption and Perceived Self-Expressive Norms of Cannabis Consumption.

Appendix A


Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative

Appendix B


Exempt IRB Aprroval

Appendix C


Informed Consent

College of Social and Behavioral SciencesDepartment of Psychology

NAU Box 15106Flagstaff, Arizona 86011

(928) 523-3063

Project Title: Fall 2013 Psychology 302W (3949) Student Research Projects

Dear Participant,

You are being asked to participate in a research project conducted through the Psychology Department at Northern Arizona University sponsored by Gregory Busath. Additional faculty sponsor is Matthew Anderson. The researchers are required to receive your informed consent before you participate in this project.

The administrator of this research will explain to you: (1) the purpose of the project; (2) what you will be asked to do and how long your participation will last; (3) how your personal information, if collected, will be kept confidential; (4) if you will receive any compensation; (5) the possible risks; and (6) potential benefits of participation.

Your participation in this research is voluntary. If you refuse to participate, there are no penalties or loss of benefits or services that you are otherwise entitled. If you decide to participate and then withdraw or skip a question there are also no penalties or loss of benefits or services. Whether or not you choose to participate in this project will have no effect on your relationship with NAU now or in the future.

A basic explanation of the project is written below. Please read this explanation and discuss any questions you have with the research administrator.

After any questions you may have are answered and you decide to participate in the research, please sign on the last page of this form in the presence of the person who explained the project to you. If you like, you can retain a copy of this form for your records.

1. PROJECT PURPOSE:

These questionnaires have been created by student researchers in a Psychology 302W (Research Methods) class at Northern Arizona University. Each questionnaire represents a serious effort to further scientific knowledge on a variety of topics such as drug and alcohol usage. The research is supervised by a faculty member in psychology and is exempt from review by the Institutional Review Board at NAU because data is intended strictly for classroom purposes.

The following questionnaires/surveys are included in this packet:

1. Anonymous Demographic Information2. Alcohol Consumption Among Undergraduate Students3. Cannabis Recreational Engagement Survey

2. EXPLANATION OF PROCEDURES:


If, upon reading this informed consent form, you decide that you would like to participate, you will be asked to complete several questionnaires. Each questionnaire will take about 15 to 20 minutes to complete. You will be given physical paper and pencil to complete this survey. Although the subject matter and content will vary widely, a typical questionnaire will consist of a series of statements and/or questions asking you to rate your feelings, thoughts, and/or behavior.

For example, some questionnaires may ask you to agree or disagree with a statement such as:I see myself as open to new experiences…

1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree moderately, 3 = disagree a little, 4 = neither agree nor disagree, 5 = agree a little, 6 = agree moderately, 7 = agree strongly.

After completing the questionnaires you will be “debriefed,” in writing, about the general purpose of the questionnaires you completed. You will also be able to learn the outcome of each study at the Undergraduate Research Symposium in December.

Your responses will be kept stored away and no identifying information will be collected. Once the survey data are transformed in electronic data format, your responses will be shredded.

Remember that your participation in this study is completely voluntary. You may discontinue participation in this study at any time without penalty.

3. CONFIDENTIALITY:

All information obtained from the inventories is strictly confidential. To protect the confidentiality of your responses, the only individuals who will have access to your information are the faculty sponsor, graduate assistants assigned to the course, and student researchers in Psychology 302W. No other individuals will be able to view the information you provide.

4. COMPENSATION:

You will not be compensated for your participation in this research.

5. BENEFITS:

By participating in this study, you will help Psychology 302W students complete their course requirements and learn about research methods. As a participant, you will have the opportunity to learn about real psychological research firsthand.

6. RISKS:

There is a minimal risk of harm from completing these surveys. In other words, the risks associated with participation are anticipated to be no greater than the risks encountered in daily life. If a question or questions causes you emotional discomfort, please know that you do not have the prerogative to decline participation in this study. You also have the right to discontinue or refuse participation at any time during the survey. Further, you are encouraged to contact the faculty sponsor and lab instructor, Gregory Busath and Matt Anderson, with any questions or concerns.

7. CONSENT:

I have read the above information about the project titled, Fall 2013 Psychology 302W(3949)


Student Research Projects, and have been given an opportunity to ask questions. I agree to participate in this project, and if desired, have been given a copy of this consent document.

Name of Faculty Sponsor: Gregory Busath Sponsoring Department: Psychology, FacultyBusiness Phone/E-mail: (928) 523-1855 [email protected]

Name of Additional Faculty Sponsor: Matthew Anderson Sponsoring Department: Psychology, Lab InstructorBusiness Phone/E-mail: (602) 908-3104 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Appendix D

Survey

** A drink is a bottle of beer, a glass of wine, a wine cooler, a shot of liquor or a mixed drink

Think back over the last two weeks. How many times have you had five or more drinks in one sitting?None ____Once ____Twice ____3 to 5 times ____6 to 9 times ____10 or more times ____

Please indicate to the best of your ability how many drinks per week you consume: ______

To what extent has your alcohol use changed within the last 12 months?

Increased _____About the same ____Decreased ____I have not used alcohol ____

Which statement below about drinking alcoholic beverages do you think best describes your own attitude?____ Drinking is never a good thing to do.____ Drinking is alright, but a person should not get drunk.____ Occasionally getting drunk is okay.____ Occasionally getting drunk it okay if that’s what a person wants to do.

Which statement below about drinking alcoholic beverages do you feel best represents the most common attitude among students in general here at Northern Arizona University? ____ Drinking is never a good thing to do.____ Drinking is alright, but a person should not get drunk.____ Occasionally getting drunk is okay.____ Occasionally getting drunk it okay if that’s what a person wants to do. How often do you think that you or your peers in each of the following categories consume alcohol?


a. YourselfNever ____Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

b. Your friendsNever ____Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

c. Students in generalNever ____Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

During the past 30 days, how many days did you consume alcoholic beverages?

0 days ____1-2 days ____3-5 days ____6-9 days ____10-19 days ____20-29 days ____All days ____How often do you think the average student consumes alcohol?

Never ____


Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

Are you aware that although an ongoing debate for legality of Marijuana exists on a state-level, federal consumption of Marijuana is outlawed? Yes ____ No ____

Considering that Marijuana is federally outlawed and only legal in Arizona for medicinal use, do you believe this sways your decision to engage? Yes ____ No ____

Which statement below about using Marijuana do you think best describes your own attitude?____ It is never a good thing to use.____ Trying it out one or two times is okay.____ Occasional use is okay. ____ Frequent use is okay if that’s what the individual wants to do.

Which statement below about using Marijuana do you feel best represents the most common attitude among students in general here at Northern Arizona University?____ It is never a good thing to use.____ Trying it out one or two times is okay.____ Occasional use is okay. ____ Frequent use is okay if that’s what the individual wants to do.

How often do you think that you or your peers in each of the following categories engage in Marijuana use?


a. YourselfNever ____Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

b. Your friendsNever ____Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

c. Students in generalNever ____Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

During the past 30 days, how many days did you consume Marijuana?

0 days ____1-2 days ____3-5 days ____6-9 days ____10-19 days ____20-29 days ____All days ____How often do you think the average student uses Marijuana?

Never ____


Once per year ____6 times a year ____Once a month ____Twice a month ____Once a week ____3 times per week ____5 times a week ____Every day ____

* The following questions have been taken verbatim or modified slightly for use in this questionnaire from Southern Illinois University’s Core Institute Drug and Alcohol Survey and the Core Institute Survey of Alcohol and Other Drugs Norms

** This measurement of an alcoholic beverage is taken from the Core Institute Drug and Alcohol Survey

SOCIAL NORMS AFFECTING SUBSTANCE CONSUMPTION 41

Appendix E

Resources

1. Core Alcohol and Drug Survey

2. Cline Library EBSCOhost search

3. Cline Library RefWorks

4. Microsoft Word

5. IBM SPSS

6. Microsoft Powerpoint


Appendix F

Protocol

Survey questions were lifted from the Core Alcohol and Drug Survey and additional

questions were chosen from the Core Campus Survey of Alcohol and Other Drug Norms.

Survey was compiled, questions were unaltered or slightly modified to exclude substances

deemed irrelevant to study purpose, and surveys were then sent to instructor to print copies for

data collection week. Instructor initially distributed informed consent forms followed by the

survey, after completion the surveys were collected face down and immediately enclosed in a

folder. Instructor then moved folder with surveys to confidential filing cabinet in lab for future

data input and analysis.


Appendix G

Debriefing Form

Thank you for providing data for the Research Methods in Psychology (PSY302W (3949)) student projects conducted at Northern Arizona University during the fall 2013 semester which explored the question, “Affect of Social Norms on Substance Consumption Patterns of Psychology 302W Students?”

Your participation was essential to the completion of this study.

As you recall, while demographic information was collected, the surveys were completed anonymously. This preserves the confidentiality of your responses. There was no deception used in the collection of data.

The results of these studies will be presented during the Undergraduate Research Symposium held in December of 2013 at the Northern Arizona University Skydome.

If any of the questions you were asked today have upset you and you would like to talk about them, please contact your instructor or one of these sources:

Campus Health Center (928) 523-2131

NAU Counseling Services (928) 523-2261

Again, thank you for your time and support of this process. If you have any questions or concerns regarding any of these projects, you may contact adjunct faculty member Gregory Busath (928 523-1855, [email protected]).

Additional thanks by,

Victoria WarnockUndergraduate [email protected]

Crystal LittlebenUndergraduate [email protected]

Documents

Research Design Final Paper