Community Norms, Enforcement of Minimum Legal Drinking Age Laws, Personal Beliefs and Underage Drinking: An Explanatory Model
Strategies to enforce underage drinking laws are aimed at reducing youth access to alcohol from commercial and social sources and deterring its possession and use. However, little is known about the processes through which enforcement strategies may affect underage drinking. The purpose of the current study is to present and test a conceptual model that specifies possible direct and indirect relationships among adolescents’ perception of community alcohol norms, enforcement of underage drinking laws, personal beliefs (perceived parental disapproval of alcohol use, perceived alcohol availability, perceived drinking by peers, perceived harm and personal disapproval of alcohol use), and their past-30-day alcohol use. This study used data from 17,830 middle and high school students who participated in the 2007 Oregon Health Teens Survey. Structural equations modeling indicated that perceived community disapproval of adolescents’ alcohol use was directly and positively related to perceived local police enforcement of underage drinking laws. In addition, adolescents’ personal beliefs appeared to mediate the relationship between perceived enforcement of underage drinking laws and past-30-day alcohol use. Enforcement of underage drinking laws appeared to partially mediate the relationship between perceived community disapproval and personal beliefs related to alcohol use. Results of this study suggests that environmental prevention efforts to reduce underage drinking should target adults’ attitudes and community norms about underage drinking as well as the beliefs of youth themselves.
KeywordsUnderage drinking Community norms Enforcement of minimum legal drinking age laws Personal beliefs Prevention
- 1.Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2008). Monitoring the Future national survey results on adolescents drug use: Overview of key findings, 2007. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. (NIH publication no. 08–6418).Google Scholar
- 3.National Research Council Institute of Medicine. (2004). Reducing underage drinking: A collective responsibility. Washington, DC: Committee on Developing a Strategy to Reduce and Prevent Underage Drinking. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- 9.Mosher, J. F., Toomey, T. L., Good, C., Harwood, E., & Wagenaar, A. C. (2002). State laws mandating or promoting training programs for alcohol servers and establishment managers: An assessment of statutory and administrative procedures. Journal of Public Health Policy, 23, 90–113.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Lipperman-Kreda, S., & Grube, J. W. (2009). Students’ perception of community disapproval, perceived enforcement of school anti-smoking policy, personal beliefs and their cigarette smoking behaviors: Results from a structural equations modeling analysis. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 11, 531–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive perspective. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Princeton-Hall.Google Scholar
- 19.Toomey, T. L., & Wagenaar, A. C. (2002). Environmental policies to reduce college drinking: Options and research findings. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 14(Suppl.), 193–205.Google Scholar
- 20.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2007). Youth Risk Behavior Survey [document on the internet]. [cited 2008 August 26]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/yrbss.
- 21.Washington State Department of Health. (2006). Washington State Healthy Youth Survey [document on the internet]. [cited 2008 August 26]. Available from: http://www.fortress.wa.gov/doh/hys/PastSurveys.htm.
- 22.Bentler, P. M. (1985–2004). EQS for windows, 6.1. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
- 24.Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological Methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar