When is it OK to be drunk? Situational and cultural variations in the acceptability of visible intoxication in the UK and Norway.

BACKGROUND: Research on norms regulating drunken behaviour has tended to focus on differences between different countries and cultures rather than variations within them. Here, we examine whether there are: (i) situation-specific differences in the acceptability of visible intoxication among students in the UK and Norway; (ii) whether there are situation-specific and overall differences in this regard between the two countries; and finally (iii) to what degree possible differences reflect individual characteristics such as use of alcohol, perceived harm of alcohol consumption, and broader value orientation. METHODS: Students at one British (n=473) and one Norwegian (n=472) university responded to a survey including a battery of questions assessing the acceptability of visible intoxication in different situations, such as with friends, with work colleagues, with family members, and situations where children are present. Data were also collected regarding alcohol consumption, perceived harms of alcohol consumption, and value orientation. Analyses of covariance were performed to assess patterns in the acceptability of visible intoxication across different situations, and the relative contributions of country, alcohol consumption, perceived harm of alcohol consumption and human values. RESULTS: In both countries, visible intoxication was rated as most acceptable in situations involving friends and colleagues. Students from both countries rated visible intoxication least acceptable in situations where children are present. However, both overall, and in situations where children or family members are present, acceptability of visible intoxication scores were higher in the UK than Norway. These differences persisted after control for other variables. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates large situational variation in acceptability of drunken behaviour, pointing to a fine-meshed set of norms regulating alcohol use and drunken behaviour within the two cultures, with the UK standing out as a more alcohol-liberal culture than Norway. Such differences underline how norms regulating drunken behaviour are culturally constituted

Does familial risk for alcohol use disorder predict alcohol hangover?

Positive family history of alcohol use disorder (FHP), a variable associated with propensity for alcohol use disorder (AUD), has been linked with elevated hangover frequency and severity, after controlling for alcohol use. This implies that hangover experiences may be related to AUD. However, inadequate control of alcohol consumption levels, low alcohol dose and testing for hangover during the intoxication phase detract from these findings. Here, we present further data pertinent to understanding the relationship between family history and alcohol hangover. Study 1 compared past year hangover frequency in a survey of 24 FHP and 118 family history negative (FHN) individuals. Study 2 applied a quasi-experimental naturalistic approach assessing concurrent hangover severity in 17 FHP and 32 FHN individuals the morning after drinking alcohol. Both studies applied statistical control for alcohol consumption levels. In Study 1, both FHP status and estimated blood alcohol concentration on the heaviest drinking evening of the past month predicted the frequency of hangover symptoms experienced over the previous 12 months. In Study 2, estimated blood alcohol concentration the previous evening predicted hangover severity but FHP status did not. FHP, indicating familial risk for AUD, was not associated with concurrent hangover severity but was associated with increased estimates of hangover frequency the previous year

“I have no clue what I drunk last night” Using Smartphone technology to compare in-vivo and retrospective self-reports of alcohol consumption.

This research compared real-time measurements of alcohol consumption with retrospective accounts of alcohol consumption to examine possible discrepancies between, and contextual influences on, the different accounts.Building on previous investigations, a specifically designed Smartphone technology was utilized to measure alcohol consumption and contextual influences in de facto real-time. Real-time data (a total of 10,560 data points relating to type and number of drinks and current social / environmental context) were compared with daily and weekly retrospective accounts of alcohol consumption.Participants reported consuming more alcoholic drinks during real-time assessment than retrospectively. For daily accounts a higher number of drinks consumed in real-time was related to a higher discrepancy between real-time and retrospective accounts. This effect was found across all drink types but was not shaped by social and environmental contexts. Higher in-vivo alcohol consumption appeared to be related to a higher discrepancy in retrospectively reported weekly consumption for alcohol beverage types other than wine. When including contextual factors into the statistical models, being with two or more friends (as opposed to being alone) decreased the discrepancy between real-time and retrospective reports, whilst being in the pub (relative to being at home) was associated with greater discrepancies.Overall, retrospective accounts may underestimate the amount of actual, real-time alcohol consumed. Increased consumption may also exacerbate differences between real-time and retrospective accounts. Nonetheless, this is not a global effect as environmental and social contexts interact with the type of alcohol consumed and the time frame given for reporting (weekly vs. daily retrospective). A degree of caution therefore appears warranted with regards to the use of retrospective self-report methods of recording alcohol consumption. Whilst real-time sampling is unlikely to be completely error free, it may be better able to account for social and environmental influences on self-reported consumption