Frequency of Binge Drinking and the Perception of Peer Alcohol Use Among Post-Secondary Students: A Survey of University Students in a Western Canadian Province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problematic alcohol use, including binge drinking, is a highly prevalent but widely unaddressed public health issue in North America. Binge drinking is especially problematic for young adults in college and university because their rates of binge drinking are considerably higher in comparison to their non-college and non-university young adult peers. High alcohol consumption and binge drinking is normalized throughout college and university and there are gross misperceptions of perceived alcohol use among peers. Few studies have examined the extent of the problem within Canadian colleges and universities. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the differences among students self-reported frequency of binge drinking over the past two weeks and compare their perceptions of peer alcohol use and examine the predictive qualities of these variables. Using data collected with the American College Health Association's National College Health Assessment II survey instrument at the University of Alberta, I found there were differences in perceived alcohol use among students based on frequency of binge drinking and that students who binge drink have higher perceptions of perceived peer alcohol use. Variables that predicted alcohol consumption included being of white race/ethnicity, concurrent substance use, and being involved in intramural sports, while variables that predicted perception of peer alcohol use included being a binge drinker and being involved in varsity sports. The findings from this study suggest that students who binge drink have higher perceptions of peer alcohol use, and greater misperceptions of peer alcohol use that, in turn, could play a role in increasing alcohol consumption within this group. For nurses, public health professionals, and university/college administrators, my findings bring attention towards problem drinking within Canadian colleges and universities, opens the possibility of using the perception of peer alcohol use as a screening tool to identify at-risk students, and supports changes in college and university policy to promote the moderation of alcohol use.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".