The European Journal of Public Health Advance Access originally published online on February 19, 2008
The European Journal of Public Health 2008 18(4):386-391; doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckn007
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alcohol |
Alcohol-related adverse consequences: cross-cultural variations in attribution process among young adults
Hervé Kuendig1,2, Martin A. Plant3, Moira L. Plant3, Patrick Miller3, Sandra Kuntsche1 and Gerhard Gmel1,4
1 Swiss Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Problems, Lausanne, Switzerland
2 Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of International Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
3 Alcohol and Health Research Trust, Centre for Public Health Research, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
4 Alcohol Treatment Center, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
Correspondence: Hervé Kuendig, Swiss Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Problems (SIPA), PO Box 870, CH-1001 Lausanne, Switzerland, tel: +41 21 321 29 48, fax: +41 21 321 29 40, e-mail: hkuendig{at}gmail.com
Received October 4, 2007 , accepted January 25, 2008
Background: Social norms around what is culturally accepted in terms of alcohol consumption and drunken comportment appear important regarding the acceptance of alcohol-related adverse consequences; however, investigations often neglect to consider differences in terms of attribution. This study aims at assessing cross-cultural differences in the reporting of alcohol-related adverse consequences. It also considers differences across consequences that might explain which type of consequences (mainly acute or mainly chronic) are most affected by an attribution process. Methods: Conditional regression models were estimated based on data from eight European countries participating in the Gender, Alcohol and Culture—An International Study (GENACIS) project. Cases were matched to controls based on usual drinking patterns in order to control for average volume of alcohol and frequency of ‘risky single occasion drinking’ (RSOD). Results: Differences among the patterns of associations between countries and consequences were evident. The distinction between Nordic and other European countries was persistent. A higher variability of associations was observed for some consequences, namely the mainly acute instances. Finally, the Isle of Man and Switzerland showed specific trends with associations across consequences. Conclusion: Reporting of alcohol-related adverse consequences seemed strongly affected by cultural norms. The latter may be exemplified by viewing drinking as ‘time-out’ behaviour. Respondents in countries with a stereotypical history of being ‘dry’ or with a stereotyped ‘binge’ drinking culture were more likely to attribute consequences to their alcohol consumption than people in ‘wet’ countries. This was particularly true for consequences that related to episodic ‘time-out’ heavy drinking.
Keywords: alcohol-related adverse consequences, conditional matching, cross-cultural variations, drinking patterns, Europe, GENACIS