Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Perceived personal immunity to the consequences of drinking alcohol: The relationship between behavior and perception

  • 184 Accesses

  • 40 Citations

Abstract

Heavy drinkers, moderate drinkers, light drinkers, and nondrinkers were asked to rate a variety of negative health and social consequences of using alcohol. Subjects made probability ratings for fictional others who were heavy, moderate, or light drinkers or nondrinkers. Subjects also made probability ratings for themselves as hypothetical heavy, moderate, or light drinkers or nondrinkers and for themselves actually. A pattern of perceived personal immunity was found across groups. Subjects rated fictional others and themselves as hypothetical drinkers to be more likely to experience negative consequences than their actual selves. All groups of subjects (heavy, moderate, and light drinkers and abstainers) rated their actual chances of experiencing negative consequences to be approximately equal. In contrast, heavy drinkers saw the effects of drinking for other heavy drinkers as less likely than did subjects who had light or abstinent drinking patterns who rated fictional heavy drinkers. These findings suggest that individuals who drink more tend to deny the potential harm that may result from alcohol consumption. Short-term social consequences were viewed as most likely to occur. Long-term consequences were perceived as least likely to occur.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bradley, G. W. (1978). Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 36: 56–71.

  2. Brown, S. A. (1985). Expectancies versus background in the prediction of college drinking patterns.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 53: 123–129.

  3. Brown, S. A., Goldman, M. S., Inn, A., and Anderson, L. R. (1980). Expectations of reinforcement from alcohol: Their domain and relation to drinking patterns.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 48: 419–426.

  4. Christiansen, B. A., and Goldman, M. S. (1983). Alcohol-related expectancies versus demographic/background variables in the prediction of adolescent drinking.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 51: 249–257.

  5. Christiansen, B. A., Goldman, M. S., and Inn, A. (1982). Development of alcohol-related expectancies in adolescents: Separating pharmacological from social-learning influences.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 50: 336–344.

  6. Christiansen, B. A., Smith, G. T., Roehling, P. V., and Goldman, M. S. (1989). Using alcohol expectancies to predict adolescent drinking behavior after one year.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 57: 93–99.

  7. Critchlow, B. (1986). The powers of John Barleycorn: Beliefs about the effects of alcohol on social behavior.Am. Psychol. 41: 571–764.

  8. Critchlow Leigh, B. (1987). Beliefs about the effects of alcohol on self and others.J. Stud. Alcohol 48: 467–475.

  9. Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975).Belief Attitude, Intention, and Behavior, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.

  10. Hansen, W. B., and Malotte, K. (1986). Perceived personal immunity: The development of beliefs about susceptibility to the consequences of smoking.Prevent. Med. 15: 363–372.

  11. Hansen, W. B., Graham, J. W., Wolkenstein, B. H., Lundy, B. Z., Pearson, J. L., Flay, B. R., and Johnson, C. A. (1988). Differential impact of three alcohol prevention curricula on hypothesized mediating variables.J. Drug Educ. 18: 143–153.

  12. Heider, F. (1958).The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, Wiley, New York.

  13. Jellison, J. M., and Green, J. (1981). A self-presentation approach to the fundamental attribution error: The norm of internality.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 40: 643–649.

  14. Jones, E. E., and Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In Jones, E. E.,et al. (eds.),Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior, General Learning Press, New York, 1971.

  15. Lee, C. (1989). Perceptions of immunity to disease in adult smokers.J. Behav. Med. 12: 267–277.

  16. Miller, D. T., and Ross, M. (1975). Self serving biases in the attribution of causality: Factor or fiction?Psychol. Bull. 82: 213–225.

  17. Monson, T. C., and Snyder, M. (1977). Actors, observers, and the attribution process: Toward a reconceptualization.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 13: 114–119.

  18. Pandina, R. J. (1986). Methods, problems, and trends in studies of adolescent drinking practices.Ann. Behav. Med. 8: 20–26.

  19. Rohsenow, D. J. (1983). Drinking habits and expectancies about alcohol's effects for self versus others.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 51: 752–756.

  20. Roizen, R. (1983). Loosening up: General-population views of the effects of alcohol. In Room, R., and Collins, G. (eds.),Alcohol and Disinhibition: Nature and Meaning of the Link, NIAAA Research Monograph No. 12, DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 83-1246, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., pp. 236–257.

  21. Southwick, L., Steele, C., Marlatt, A., and Lindell, M. (1981). Alcohol-related expectancies: Defined by phase of intoxication and drinking experience.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 49: 713–721.

  22. Stacey, A. S., Widaman, K. F., and Marlatt, A. G. (1991). Expectancy models of alcohol use.J. Soc. Personal. Psychol. (in press).

  23. Steele, C. M., and Josephs, R. A. (1990). Alcohol myopia: Its prized and dangerous effects.Am. Psychol. 45: 921–933.

  24. Storms, M. D. (1973). Videotape and the attribution process: Reversing actor's and observer's point of view.J. Person. Soc. Psychol. 27: 165–175.

  25. Tobler, N. (1986). Meta-analysis of 143 adolescent drug prevention programs: Quantitative outcome results of program participants compared to a control or comparison group.J. Drug Issues, 16: 537–567.

  26. Uchalik, D. C. (1979). A comparison of questionnaire and self-monitored reports of alcohol intake in a nonalcoholic population.Addict. Behav. 4: 409–413.

  27. Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 39: 806–820.

  28. Weinstein, N. D. (1984). Why it won't happen to me: Perceptions of risk factors and susceptibility.Health Psychol. 3: 431–457.

  29. Weinstein, N. D. (1987). Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems: Conclusions from a community-wide sample.J. Behav. Med. 10: 481–499.

  30. Weinstein, N. D. (1988). The precaution adoption process.Health Psychol. 7: 355–386.

  31. Weinstein, N. D., Grubb, P. D., and Vautier, J. S. (1986). Increasing automobile seat belt use: An intervention emphasizing risk susceptibility.J. Appl. Psychol. 71: 285–290.

  32. Whaley, A. L. (1986). Cognitive processes in adolescent drug use: The role of positivity bias and implications for prevention policy.Int. J. Addict. 21: 393–398.

  33. White, H. R., and Labouvie, E. W. (1989). Towards the assessment of adolescent problem drinking.J. Stud. Alcohol 50: 30–37.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to William B. Hansen.

Additional information

This research was supported in part by grant 1-R01-AA06201 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hansen, W.B., Raynor, A.E. & Wolkenstein, B.H. Perceived personal immunity to the consequences of drinking alcohol: The relationship between behavior and perception. J Behav Med 14, 205–224 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00845452

Download citation

Key words

  • denial
  • alcohol consumption
  • beliefs
  • perceptions
  • negative consequences
  • personal immunity