Parenthood, Alcohol Intake, and Drinking Contexts: <i>Occasio Furem Facit</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess whether the effect of parenthood on alcohol intake varies according to the context in which the drinking act occurs. METHOD: The data were drawn from the Canadian Addiction Survey, a national telephone survey conducted in 2004. The analytical sample included 1,079 drinking occasions nested in 498 female drinkers and 926 drinking occasions nested in 403 male drinkers between 18 and 55 years of age. A multilevel linear statistical model was used to estimate the variance related to the drinking occasion (Level 1) and to the parental role (Level 2). RESULTS: Parenthood was not associated with alcohol intake per occasion. Drinking context variables brought great explanatory power to the study of alcohol intake, but, overall, the effect of parenthood on alcohol intake did not vary according to the context in which drinking occurs. Only one interaction between the parental role and contextual characteristics was found. CONCLUSIONS: Men's and women's alcohol intake within drinking contexts is more likely to be influenced by the immediate context in which drinking occurs than by their parental role. The explanation for alcohol behaviors within the general Canadian population may lie as much in the situation as in the person.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".