The relationship between alcohol problems, perceived risks and attitudes toward alcohol policy in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Approval of alcohol policies by the public in democratic countries is critical for instituting social change. With respect to alcohol policies, mounting research indicates that a higher price per unit of ethanol is an effective approach for reducing alcohol-related problems, yet surveys have found this approach is usually unpopular. The purpose of this paper is to assess the relationship between amount of drinking and support for various alcohol policies. DESIGN AND METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted on the Canadian Addictions Survey, a randomised telephone survey of over 10 000 Canadians. The relationship between the amounts of drinking reported by the respondents was examined in relation to the perceived seriousness of alcohol problems in their communities and the endorsement of several alcohol policies. RESULTS: Increased amount of drinking was significantly related to lower perceptions of drinking-related risks. Furthermore, heavier consumers had less favourable attitudes than lighter drinkers and abstainers toward alcohol policies, such as increased taxation. Aggregated data across the 10 Canadian provinces showed a strong effect size (r = -0.515, P = 0.128) between endorsement of alcohol taxation and rates of hospital separations for alcohol. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study show that the more that people drink, the more they oppose taxation. The implications of these findings are that as alcohol problems in communities become worse, the population may become more resistant to effective alcohol policies. Strategies are suggested for implementing effective policies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".