1. No category

J. DRUG EDUCATION, Vol. 26(3) 243-255, 1996
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES, GOAL ATTAINMENT
EXPECTANCIES AND FAMILY MODELS IN
RELATION TO ALCOHOL USE AMONG
COLLEGE STUDENTS
STEPHANIE B. KARWACKI, PH.D.
Richland County Community Programs, Wisconsin
JOHN R. BRADLEY, PH.D.
University of Montana
ABSTRACT
Associations between coping responses, drinking motivations, expectations
of meeting social and academic goals, and family of origin problem drinking
and measures of college students’ quantity/frequency of alcohol use and
social complications of alcohol use were investigated in a sample of 218
college students. Positive associations were found between “emotionfocused” forms of coping such as detachment and the criterion measures,
whereas “problem-focused coping” was not significantly associated with
quantity/frequency of alcohol use or drinking complications. Positive correlations were also found between drinking motives, goal attainment expectancies
and family models measures and the criterion measures. Regression models
constructed for alcohol quantity/frequency and drinking complications implicated the total number of drinking motives, family models of problem drinking and the coping strategy of self-blame as strongly related to criterion
measures. Positive social drinking motives and coping by seeking social
support were implicated as possible protective factors.
INTRODUCTION
Contemporary models of alcohol use and addiction have focused greater attention
on the role of psychological components in the initiation, maintenance, and
modifications of problem drinking. Recognizing that substance use and addictive
243
0 1996, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc.
doi: 10.2190/A1P0-J36H-TLMJ-0L32
http://baywood.com
244 I KARWACKI AND BRADLEY
behaviors can be influenced by psychological, social and environmental factors
as well as biological factors, clinicians and researchers are also focusing on
non-biological possibilities for prevention and intervention methods. Such
methods include modifying the motivational base for alcohol use and identification of realistic non-chemical life goals [ I ] and the development of adaptive
coping mechanisms as alternatives to reliance on drinking alcohol as a coping
method [2, 31.
The current study is based on a social learning approach to alcohol use
and follows recent research of Bradley, Carman, and Petree in which relations
between drinking motivations, discrepancies between values and expectations
for life goals, family learning history and complications of alcohol use were
examined in a college population [4, 51. Drinking motives [5-81, values/
expectancies discrepancies [9-111 and family models of drinking [ S , 121 have
been found to be associated with drinking patterns and to play a role in mediating
drinking practices. The present study includes measures of 1) four types of drinking motives, 2) values/expectancies discrepancies for academic and social goals,
3) family models of drinking behavior, and 4) measures of specific coping
strategies used in recent stressful social and academic situations to illuminate their
role in relation to alcohol quantity/frequency and social complications of alcohol
use. Additionally, we constructed regression models and attempted to crossvalidate those models in a second student sample to explore the unique and
additive predictive utility of the research variables. By examining these associative and predictive patterns, important risk factors in the initiation of alcohol use
or important mediators in the transition from intermittent use to alcohol abuse and
dependency may be identified for use in prevention and intervention efforts with
college students.
COPING AND ALCOHOL USE
Abrams and Niaura suggest that when the use of alcohol is a primary coping
mechanism or when deficiencies in more adaptive coping exist then heavy drinking and alcohol abuse are promoted [3]. Supposedly, drinking becomes maladaptive when choices to achieve desired goals are limited to alcohol use and when the
individual engages in frequent use while denying negative consequences. Marlatt
suggests that whether an individual engages in drinking or taking drugs to cope
will vary according to the perceived stressfulness of the situation, the degree of
perceived personal control, the availability of adequate coping alternatives, and
the person’s expectations regarding substance use [13]. Pentz suggests that when
individuals use substances as a coping mechanism, they are inhibited from learning or practicing more adaptive, alternate coping behaviors [14]. This may be
particularly true of generalized coping skills, such as problem solving, which are
used across a variety of situations [14, 151.
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS I 245
What psycho-social factors differentiate problem drinkers from non-problem
drinkers? What factors contribute to the progression from mild or intermittent use
to heavy or regular use? Empirical findings suggest that adequate coping skills
and resources may lessen the chance that intermittent or mild substance use or
abuse will develop into regular or heavy use. For example, Cooper, Russell, and
George report that drinking to cope, defined as a tendency to use alcohol to
escape, avoid, or otherwise regulate unpleasant emotions, was the most potent
predictor of abuse status in a sample of problem and nonproblem drinkers drawn
from the general population [2]. Coping styles indicative of avoidance of emotion
also emerged as more important predictors of abuse status than problem-focused
coping. Alcohol expectancies moderated the relationship between avoidant styles
of emotion-focused coping and drinking to cope in that abuse status was best
predicted among those expressing greater belief in alcohol’s positive reinforcing
properties.
DRINKING MOTIVATIONS
Previous studies have found that the more motives or reasons a person had for
drinking, the more he or she was likely to drink and to have drinking related
complications, such as legal, family, or employment difficulties [6-81. “Positive
social drinkers,” defined as those motivated to drink largely for the convivial
pleasure that surrounds it, were found in these early studies to be less likely
to report drinking problems than those drinking for “personaVpsychological”
motives such as to escape from personal difficulties. However, Bradley, Carman,
and Petree found that positive social motives were associated with problem
drinking outcomes, suggesting that “social drinking” in college populations can be
an area of risk [ 5 ] .
We examined four general motive categories: Positive social motives and
personaUpsychologica1motives [6-8, 161 as described above; and power motives
[17],and warmtWafSection motives [18, 191 each in relation to degree of alcohol
use and social complications of that use. Power motives and warmth/affection
motives are defined as drinking to enhance feelings of personal power or confidence and drinking to enhance intimate social interactions.
GOAL ATTAINMENT EXPECTANCIES
Drawing on Rotter’s social learning theory [20], Carman [S, 121 has investigated alcohol use as an “irreal” means of achieving goals perceived as otherwise
unattainable or as a means of coping with anticipated failure or frustration in
regard to valued goal areas. Jessor, Carman, and Grossman found that self-reports
of low expectations in the areas of achievement and affiliation were positively
related to self-reports of greater alcohol intake and drinking-related complications
246 / KARWACKI AND BRADLEY
in a sample of college students 1211. Other studies found low expectancies of
attaining valued recognitiodachievement among high school students to be positively correlated with drug use [lo], and low expectancies of job success to be
positively correlated to problem drinking in a study of military personnel [9]. In a
follow up study of adolescents classified as problem drinkers, Donovan, Jessor,
and Jessor reported that those who were problem drinkers as young adults had
reported lower values on academic achievement, higher values on independence
relative to achievement and lower expectancies for academic recognition than
adolescents who were not problem drinkers as young adults [ 111.
FAMILY MODELS
Our college student participants also responded to the fifteen items describing
drinking behaviors in their family. We assumed that the nature of the behavior
chosen as a response to frustration and stress depends in part on what parents or
other significant models have demonstrated as appropriate [12] and that greater
reported exposure to problem family drinking would be associated with more
drinking and more problems due to drinking by students. Research in this area has
provided support for the influence of problem-related family models on problem
drinking behavior in offspring [5, 12,221.
HYPOTHESES
For the coping scales it was expected that the coping strategies involving
problem solving, seeking social support, and focusing on the positive would be
negatively correlated with measures of alcohol quantity-frequency and social
complications. These coping strategies are intercorrelated and may reflect a
type of direct and assertive response. The coping strategies of self-blame, selfisolation, detachment, and wishful thinking were hypothesized to be positively
related to quantity/frequencyof alcohol consumption and use social complications
as they may reflect more of an avoidant, or passive way of dealing with problems.
The tension-reduction strategy was also hypothesized to correlate positively with
these criterion variables as it includes an item about substance use and serves as a
direct report of alcohol use.
The total number of drinking motivations endorsed was expected to positively
correlate with measures of quantity-frequencyand social complications. The four
motive subscales of personallpsychological,positive social, personal power and
warmtMaffection motives were all expected to correlate positively with criterion
measures with prior research suggesting that the personallpsychological scale
would have the greatest positive correlations with the two criterion measures.
Positive correlations were expected between each of the two general areas
of value-access disjunctions (differences between goal value ratings and goal
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS / 247
attainment expectancy ratings in areas of achievement and affiliation) and
measures of alcohol quantitylfrequency and use complications.
The family model measure was hypothesized to be positively correlated with
alcohol quantity/frequency and use complications.
Finally, variations in degree of alcohol quantity-frequency and use complications was expected to be additively related to the linear combination of
motive scores, value-access disjunctions, coping strategy measures and family
model scores.
METHOD
Undergraduate students, enrolled at the University of Montana, voluntarily
participated in the study in exchange for experimental credit in their introductory
psychology class. Participants were told this was a study of habits, values, and
coping styles. The questions relating to alcohol use were part of a larger survey of
a number of appetitive behaviors. A questionnaire packet was administered to
several large groups over a period of two months to 218 participants with 91 males
and 127 females. Of that sample, 204 reported current alcohol use, of which 116
were female and 87 male. Only those subjects currently using alcohol were used
in the correlation analyses. The number of subjects for each individual analysis
did vary slightly due to a different number of subjects responding to the different
criterion measures and or having missing data. A second sample was also collected in the manner as described above to be used for cross-validation purposes.
The cross-validation sample consisted of thirty-nine females and thirty-three
males for a total of seventy-two participants. Results of point biserial correlation
procedures indicated that the samples were comparable for purposes of this study.
Motivations for alcohol use were measured using forty items that assessed the
categories of positive social, personallpsychological,power and warmtldaffection
motives. Positive social and personaVpsychologica1motive items were developed
in previous work by Carman [8], Jessor, Carman, and Grossman [21] and Mulford
and Miller [6]. The power and warmtldaffection motive items were developed by
Condon [23] and Priebe [24] based on the theoretical work of McClelland, Davis,
Kalin, and Wanner [17] and Wilsnak [18, 191. Five scores were derived from the
scale including a total number of items endorsed and a percentage score for each
of the four motive categories that was derived by dividing the total number of
items endorsed in a specific category by the total number of forty possible items
endorsed. Alpha coefficients were computed for each of the four motive scales
ranging from .81 to .88.
Goal values and expectancies for goal attainment were measured using a thirty
item scale developed by Jessor, Carman, and Grossman [21] that presents fifteen
academic and fifteen affiliation goals. Participants rank on a 100-point scale from
0 to 100, how much they would like to attain the goal and then how strongly they
248 I KARWACKI AND BRADLEY
expect the event to occur. Two value access disjunction scores were then calculated as the mean of the difference score for the sum of the items in the academic
category and in the affiliation category. Past studies have found excellent internal
consistency [4] and test-retest reliability [21] for this scale.
The Ways of Coping-Revised Scale by Folkman and Lazarus served as the
measure of coping responses [25]. The scale contains sixty-six items that describe
a broad range of coping strategies. Participants are asked to describe a specific
recent stressful event and then complete the Ways of Coping questionnaire by
rating on a 4-point Likert scale the extent to which they used each of the listed
coping strategies. The set of eight coping scales used in the present study were
derived by factor analyses on the sixty-six items in a previous study of college
students by Folkman and Lazarus [25]. The factors include six emotion-focused
scales defined as detachment (alpha = .74), keep to self or self-isolation (alpha =
.65), self-blame (alpha = .76), wishful thinking (alpha = .70), focus on the positive
(alpha = .70), and tension-reduction (alpha = S9). The other two factors are a
problem-focused scale (alpha = .88), and seeking social support (alpha = .82), a
scale that is considered to contain a mix of problem-focused and emotion focused
strategies. In this study, participants filled out the questionnaire twice, one for a
recent stressful academic situation and a second time for a recent stressful interpersonal situation.
Family models of alcohol use were measured using a fifteen-item scale
developed by Carman that describes the purpose, amount and outcome of drinking
in the participant’s family [ 121. A summary score is derived by tabulating each
item that is answered in the direction of problem-related drinking. An alpha
coefficient of .91 has been reported for this scale [5].
Quantity and frequency of alcohol use was assessed using a self-report technique originally developed by Straus and Bacon [26] and used by a number of
researchers in later studies [7, 8, 271. Subjects are asked how often they drink a
particular beverage and how many servings they consume during a specified time
period. Subjects are given a range of both quantity and frequency items from
which to choose the one that best applies. In this study participants were asked
about consumption of wine, wine coolers, beer, and liquor. Frequency scores (F)
for alcohol are derived by taking the midpoint of the frequency level endorsed and
converting it to servings per day. Quantity scores (Q) for alcohol were calculated
as ounces of alcohol and derived by multiplying alcohol content by average
serving size using predetermined alcohol content and serving size standards. The
summary statistic is a quantity/frequency index score (QF) that reflects ounces
per day and is calculated as the product of (Q) and (F).
Social complications (SC) related to drinking were measured using a thirteenitem scale that assesses frequency of familial, driving, friendship, legal, health,
and school/work problems associated with drinking. Items were taken from previous work of Carman [8], Condon [23] and Strauss and Bacon [26].
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS I 249
RESULTS
CorrelationAnalyses
Table 1 presents the Pearson r values between the coping factors, drinking
motivations, value-access disjunctions, and family models measures and the
criterion variables of alcohol quantity/frequency (Q/F)and alcohol social complications (SC). Results are presented for the combined sample of men and women
and by gender.
Good support was found for the hypothesis that the coping strategies of detachment, self-blame, keep to self, wishful thinking, and tension reduction would be
positively related to the criterion measures. The pattern and frequency of correlations did vary between the academic and interpersonal situation and within each
situation by gender.
The hypothesis that the coping strategies of focus on the positive, problem
focused coping, and seek social support would correlate negatively with criterion
measures was not supported, however, no significant positive correlations were
found in the interpersonal situation between these strategies and the criterion
measures. In the academic situation, no significant positive correlations were
obtained between problem-focused coping and the criterion measures. A
significant positive correlation was obtained between seeking social support
and SC for males only in the academic situation. The strategy of focus on the
positive had several positive correlations with criterion measures in the academic
situation.
The hypothesis that the total number of drinking motivations would positively
correlate with criterion measures was supported for the combined sample, and by
gender, with SC for males and with Q/F for females. The hypothesis that the four
individual motive categories would positively correlate with criterion measures
was generally supported for the personal power and warmtWaffection motive
categories. The personaVpsychologica1motives was significantly related with SC
only for females. Positive social motives correlated negatively with criterion
measures with some variation by gender.
The hypothesis for the goal attainment expectancies was generally supported in
that the value-access disjunction scores for both achievement and affiliation were
positively correlated with criterion measures for the combined sample, with some
variation by gender. For males only, achievement disjunction scores correlated
positively with criterion measures but the affiliation disjunction scores did not.
For females only, the achievement and affiliation disjunction scores correlated
positively only with SC.
For the family models measure, significant positive correlations were obtained
with SC as hypothesized, however not with Q/F. This result was consistent
across gender.
250 / KARWACKI AND BRADLEY
Table 1. Correlational Analyses on Alcohol Use Variables
Total Sample
Males Only
Females Only
Q/F
SC
Q/F
SC
Q/F
SC
.22**
.24*'
.14*
.11
.15*
.13
.1 7*
.06
.23*
.28*
.12
.23*
.17
.23*
.26*
.11
.26**
.21
.21*
.10
.15
.11
.04
.13
.04
.09
-.06
.14
.02
.09
.08
.11
.01
.14*
.1 7
'
.18
.35"
.21*
.11
.1 7'
.21+
.15
.10
.17*
.12
.07
.03
.18
.24*
.I5
.13
.06
.09
.17
.05
.10
.08
.10
.04
.09
Focus on Positive
Problem focused
Seek support
.15*
.06
.07
.19"
.07
.13
.09
-.01
.14
.26*
.06
.23'
.23*
.12
.06
.07
.05
.12
Tension-reduction
.15*
.12
.13
.22*
.17
.10
Coping Factors
InterpersonalSituation
Detachment
Keep to self
Self-blame
Wishful thinking
Focus on Positive
Problem focused
Seek support
Tension-reduction
Academic Situation
Detachment
Keep to self
Self-blame
Wishful thinking
Motivations
Positive social
Psychological
Warmth/aff ection
Personal power
Total number
.13
.03
-.04
.15'
.04
.04
-.18** -.35** -.09
-.06
-.03
.07
.13
.24** -.03
.21** .35** .19
.22** .1 8*
.18
.13
.02
-.14
.01
.06
-.03
-.41** -.27** -.34**
.19*
.02
.01
.32** .23** .20*
.43** .31** .27**
.29** .13
.22"
V/A Disjunctions
Achievement
Affiliation
Family Models
.14
-.04
.21**
.15*
.22*
.22*
.01
.16
.15
.06
.28**
.19*
.09
.20**
.13
.26*
.07
.19*
Note: Q/F = Quantity/Frequency Index. SC = Social Complications Scale
' p < .05
" p < .01
+p = .05
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS / 251
Regressions and Cross-Validation
Results of the stepwise multiple regression and cross-validation computations
are listed in Table 2. Variables that entered the regression equations are listed in
their order of entrance. Beta weights listed reflect final step values.
For the regression analyses on Q/F, two variables, the total number of alcohol
use motives and the coping factor of self-blame in the interpersonal situation,
entered the regression equation and together accounted for 16 percent of the
variance (F(2,199) = 19.05, p < .001). The three variables of positive social
motives for alcohol use, negative family models of alcohol use, and the total
number of alcohol motives entered the regression equation for the SC measure and
together these variables accounted for 21 percent of the variance (F(3,212) = 18.7,
p c .001). The positive social motives variable had a negative Beta weight.
Regression analyses were also computed on each criterion measure by gender and
models were obtained that accounted for a significant amount of variance. Models
by gender did vary from the combined sample model.
Cross-validation procedures were conducted only for the combined sample of
men and women. Results of the cross-validation for QE indicated that when the
regression model was applied to the second sample, it did not account for a
significant amount of variance (less than 1%). The cross-validation for the regression model on SC did generalize and accounted for 38 percent of the variance in
the second sample (p < .01).
DISCUSSION
The findings of this study lend support for the social learning theories that view
psychological and learning factors as important components in the acquisition and
maintenance of substance use. Particularly interesting was the strong association
between patterns of coping and Q/F and SC. Results suggest that when the coping
strategies of self-blame, detachment, wishful thinking, and keeping to one’s
self are applied in stressful situations, there is a higher likelihood of an associated
increase of alcohol use and associated social complications. Other coping
strategies, particularly problem-solving strategies, were less likely to be associated with alcohol use and use complications.
In this study, using social supports emerged as a strategy that was less likely to
be associated with alcohol use or complications of use and was implicated as a
possible protective factor for females in the regression model. It is important to
keep in mind that the nature of one’s support system may promote unhealthy or
healthy behaviors and be a moderating factor in an individual’s choices regarding
alcohol use. In this sample, it may be that the chosen support systems for females
promoted healthy behaviors. Also, in this study, the coping strategy of “focus on
the positive” unexpectedly was positively associated with alcohol use and complications in the academic situation. This coping strategy involves a positive
252 / KARWACKI AND BRADLEY
Table 2. Regression Analyses on Quantity/Frequency and
Social Complications
DV
IV
Sample A
TM
Q/F
SB(I)
R
$
A$
.34
.40
.12
.16
.12
.04
Beta
F
df
.31
.22
26.12
19.05
11200
a199
pc.001
p c .001
*Cross-validationresults indicate this model did not account for a significant
amount of variance when applied to the second sample.
sc
PSM
FMD
TM
.33
.40
.46
.ll
.16
.21
.ll
.05
.06
-.20
.25
.25
26.29
20.15
18.70
11214
21213
31212
p < .001
p c .001
p c .001
"Cross-validation results indicated that this model accounted for 38 percent of
the variance, p < .01, in the second sample.
Male
Q/F
sc
Female
Q/F
sc
.28
.37
.08
.13
.08
.05
.25
.24
7.1 0
6.40
1/84
2/83
p < .01
p < .01
.47
.54
.59
.63
.22
.29
.35
.40
.22
.07
.06
.05
.28
.22
.26
.27
24.87
18.15
15.48
14.31
1188
2187
3186
4185
p c ,001
p < .001
p c .001
p c .001
.44
.49
.53
.57
.20
.24
.28
.33
.20
.04
.04
.05
.41
.20
-.29
.22
28.1 1
17.78
14.85
13.36
1/114
21113
31112
4/111
pc.001
p c .001
p < .001
p < .001
.29
.38
.43
.08
.15
.19
.08
.07
.04
.27
-.23
.21
11.47
10.43
9.42
1/124
2/123
31122
p < ,001
p < ,001
p < ,001
Notes: ACHVA = Achievement value-access disjunction, FMD = negative family models,
FP =focus on the positive coping strategy, PWM = personal power motives, PSM = positive
social motives, SB = self-blame coping strategy, SS = seek social support coping strategy,
TM = total number of alcohol motives, TR = tension reduction coping strategy,
(A) = response to stressful academic situation, (I) = responses to stressful interpersonal
situation.
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS / 253
reappraisal of the situation and in this sample, in the academic situation, the
reappraisals may have served to diminish or distract from the problem versus
facilitating a move to “problem-solving.” Interesting variations in results between
gender and between academic versus interpersonal situation also point out that
points of prevention and intervention may be most effective when taking into
account gender differences and different skills in different situations.
Drinking motives’ positive correlation with Q/F and SC support previous
research that the more motives a person has for drinking, the more likely he or she
uses alcohol more frequently and has more complications of use. This finding also
lends support for the theory that when drinking is relied on as a generalized
response then it is more likely to develop into excessive use or abuse.
Significant positive correlations were scattered among the criterion measures
and the individual motive categories of personal power, warmthlaffection, and
personallpsychological motives. Positive social motives emerged as a type of
protective factor: positive social motives negatively correlated with criterion
measures and entering with a negative Beta weight in the regression model,
accounted for 11 percent of the variance in the SC measure. This does support
early research findings that individuals who drank for positive social motives were
less likely to use alcohol excessively as compared to individuals who drank for
more personal or psychological motives. The present findings are at variance with
a recent study of college students’ drinking [8] in which positive social drinking
motives were associated with an increase in alcohol use social complications.
Possible explanations for this discrepancy might be found in future work by
examining the nature of support systems or social networks and examining how
prevailing attitudes promote or discourage alcohol use.
Results regarding the goal attainment expectancy variable support previous
research and the theory that a low expectation or perceived inability to achieve
important goals is related to greater alcohol intake and related social complications. Again, interesting variation occurred by gender and by situation, however,
it appears that in some cases, alcohol use’may serve the function of compensating
for a lack of hope or ability or opportunity to achieve desired goals.
The family models measure was consistently related to SC and entered into
the regression models as a predictive variable of SC. These results support
the social learning theory that family models are an influential factor that contributes to the likelihood of excessive alcohol use and social problems because
of that use.
Finally, results suggest that the variables investigated in this study are relevant
for educators and health care providers to consider in prevention and intervention
efforts with a college population. In many cases these variables may be predictive
of level of alcohol use and negative outcome of that use. Approaches to identifying those at risk and addressing the social learning processes that predispose and
support alcohol use behavior are important factors in effectively reducing college
aged alcohol abuse.
254 I KARWACKI AND BRADLEY
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to extend my sincere thanks to Allen Petree, Ph.D. for his assistance
with the data analysis and to Michael Murtagh, Ph.D. for assistance with the
data collection.
REFERENCES
1. W. M. Cox and E. Klinger, A Motivational Model of Alcohol Use, Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 97, pp. 168-180, 1988.
2. M. L. Cooper, M. Russell, and W. H. George, Coping, Expectancies, and Alcohol
Abuse: A Test of Social Learning Formulations, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97,
pp. 218-230, 1988.
3. D. B. Abrams and R. S. Niaura, Social Learning Theory, in Psychological Theories of
Drinking and Alcoholism, H. T. Blane and K. E. Leonard (eds.), Guilford Press, New
York, pp. 131-178, 1987.
4. J. R. Bradley, R. S. Carman, and A. Petree, Expectations, Alienation, and Drinking
Motives among College Men and Women, Journal of Drug Education, 21, pp. 27-33,
1991.
5. J. R. Bradley, R. S. Carman, and A. Petree, Personal and Social Drinking Motives,
Family Drinking History, and Problems Associated with Drinking in Two University
Samples, Journal of Drug Education, 22, pp. 195-202, 1992.
6. H. A. Mulford and D. E. Miller, Drinking Behavior Related to Definitions of Alcohol:
A Report of Research in Progress, American Sociological Review, 24, pp. 385-389,
1959.
7. H. A. Mulford and D. E. Miller, Drinking in Iowa, 111: A Scale of Definitions of
Alcohol Related to Drinking Behavior, Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 21,
pp. 267-278, 1960.
8. R. S. Carman, Personality and Drinking Behavior among College Students, masters’
thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1965.
9. R. S. Carman, Expectations and Socialization Experiences Related to Drinking among
U.S. Servicemen, Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcoholism, 32, pp. 1040-1047,
1971.
10. R. S. Carman, Internal-External Locus of Control, Alcohol Use and Adjustment among
High School Students in Rural Communities, Journal of Community Psychology, 2,
pp. 129-133, 1974.
11. J. Donovan, R. Jessor, and L. Jessor, Problem Drinking in Adolescence and Young
Adulthood: A Follow-Up Study, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 44, pp. 109-137, 1983.
12. R. S. Carman, Drinking Behavior as Related to Personality and Sociocultural Factors,
doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1968.
13. G. A. Marlatt, Relapse Prevention: Theoretical Rationale and Overview of the Model,
in Relapse Prevention: Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment of Addictive
Behaviors, G . A. Marlatt and J. R. Gordon (eds.), Guilford Press, New York, 1985.
14. M. A. Pentz, Social Competencies and Self Efficacy as Determinants of Substance
Use in Adolescents, in Coping and Substance Use, S. Shiffman and T. A. Wills (eds.),
pp. 117-142, Academic Press, Orlando, 1985.
COPING, DRINKING MOTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS / 255
15. C. C. DiClemente and J. 0.Prochaska, Process and Stages of Self-change: Coping and
Competence in Smoking Behavior Change, in Coping and Substance Use, S . Shiffman
and T. A. Wills (4s.). Academic Press, Orlando, pp. 319-343, 1985.
16. R. S. Carman. B. J. Fitzgerald, and C. Holmgen, Alienation and Drinking Motivations among Adolescent Females, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44,
pp. 1021-1024, 1983.
17. D. McClelland, W. Davis, R. Kalin, and E. Wanner, The Drinking Man, Free Press,
New York, 1972.
18. S. C. Wilsnak, The Effects of Social Drinking on Women’s Fantasy, Journal of
Personulity, 42, pp. 43-61, 1974.
19. S. C. Wilsnak, The Impact of Sex Roles and Women’s Alcohol Use and Abuse,
Alcoholism Problems in Women and Children, M. Greenblat and M. A. Schucket
(eds.), Grune and Stratton, New York, 1976.
20. J. B. Rotter, Social Learning and Clinical Psychology, Prentice-Hall, New York, 1954.
21. R. Jessor, R. S. Carman, and P. Grossman, Expectations of Need Satisfaction and
Drinking Patterns of College Students, Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 29,
pp. 101-116, 1968.
22. S. A. Brown, V. A. Creamer, and B. A. Stetson, Adolescent Alcohol Expectancies in
Relation to Personal and Parental Drinking Patterns, Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
96, pp. 117-121, 1987.
23. R. Condon, Drinking Patterns and Motivations of College Students, masters’ thesis,
University of Wyoming, Caramie, 1982.
24. P. R. Priebe, Gender Differences in Expectations and Behavior Associated with
Alcohol, masters’ thesis, University of Wyoming, Laramie, 1985.
25. S. Folkman and R. S. Lazarus, If It Changes It Must Be a Process: Study of Emotion
and Coping during Three Stages of a College Examination,Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 48, pp. 150-170, 1985.
26. R. Straus and S. D. Bacon, Drinking in College, Yale University Press, New Haven,
1953.
27. R. Jessor, T. D. Graves, R. C. Hanson, and S. L. Jessor, Society, Personality and
Deviant Behavior: A Study of a Tri-Ethnic Community, Holt, Rinehart 8c Winston,
New York, 1%8.
Direct reprint requests to:
Stephanie Karwacki, Ph.D.
Richland County Community Programs
lo00 Hwy 14W
Richland Center, WI 53581