Social Status and Binge Drinking 1
Running Head: SOCIAL STATUS, BINGE DRINKING
Social Status, Binge Drinking, and Social Satisfaction among College Students
Social Status and Binge Drinking 2
Abstract
The present research provides evidence that binge drinking is a symbolic proxy for higher social
status in college and is correspondingly related to greater social satisfaction at a Northeastern
liberal arts college (n = 1595). Binge drinking ameliorates some of the negative effects of lower
status on social satisfaction. Students of color, women, less wealthy, LGBTQ, and nonfraternity/sorority members who are not binge drinkers report lower levels of social satisfaction
than their binge drinking peers. Members of low status groups who are binge drinkers report
levels of social satisfaction comparable to the members of high status groups. Binge drinking
may also be a prerequisite for receiving the full benefits of high status group membership.
Members of high status groups that are not binge drinkers report lower levels of social
satisfaction than their binge drinking peers. The present study provides evidence regarding the
importance of socio-cultural factors like social status and social satisfaction in the phenomenon
of binge drinking.
KEYWORDS: Binge drinking, College Students, Social Status, Social Satisfaction, Race,
Gender, Socio-economic status, Sexual Orientation, Greek Letter Organizations
Social Status and Binge Drinking 3
Social Status, Binge Drinking, and Social Satisfaction on Campus
In the United States, binge1 drinking has become the center of social life on many college
and university campuses. National surveys reveal that about 40% of college students binge
drink(Knight et al. 2002), that about half of college students believe that the major purpose of
drinking is not to have fun, but to get drunk (Wechsler et al. 1995; Wechsler and Nelson 2008).
College students not only consume alcohol at a higher rate than their non-college-bound age
peers, but whereas the rate of binge drinking among the non-college-bound has declined since
the early 1990s, the rate of binge drinking has remained high among college students (Johnston
et al. 2009). College is where many students learn to binge drink. Although college-bound high
school seniors drink less heavily than their non-college-bound peers, their rate of alcohol
consumption substantially increases after entering college (Johnston et al. 2009).
Yet to understand college binge drinking, research reveals that drinking behavior campus
specific, tied to the social and cultural norms of a given college/university community (Lee et al.
2010). Despite the widespread belief in a "college drinking culture" prevalent in media stories
(Brady ) and in anti-binge drinking policy documents (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism ), there is significant variation between colleges in the prevalence of binge drinking
(Wechsler and Nelson 2008; Weitzman, Nelson, and Wechsler 2003). The level of binge
drinking varies enormously by college, ranging from 1% to 76% of the student population, but
the level of binge drinking tends to stay stable within colleges over time(Dowdall and Wechsler
2002; Wechsler et al. 2000; Wechsler et al. 2002; Weitzman, Nelson, and Wechsler 2003). The
stability of the binge drinking rates within campuses, and the variability of binge drinking rates
1
“Binge drinking” is typically defined in most studies as four drinks per episode for women and five drinks per
episode for men when individuals report one or more bingeing episodes over a two-week period (for an overview,
see (Wechsler and Nelson 2008; Weitzman, Nelson, and Wechsler 2003)).
Social Status and Binge Drinking 4
across campuses, point toward the consideration of socio-cultural factors in the practice of binge
drinking.
On college campuses were binge drinking is prevalent, the negative effects are serious:
poor academic performance (Singleton and Wolfson 2009; Wolaver 2002), student-on-student
violence (Hingson et al. 2002; Wechsler et al. 1995), risky sexual behavior (Goldstein et al.
2007; Hingson et al. 2005), sexual victimization (Benson, Gohm, and Gross 2007; Combs-Lane
and Smith 2002; Howard, Griffin, and Boekeloo 2008; Palmer et al. 2010; Ullman, Karabatsos,
and Koss 1999), drunk driving (Hingson et al. 2002; Turner, Keller, and Bauerle 2010; Wechsler
et al. 1995), and future alcohol dependency (Knight et al. 2002). The prevalence of alcohol
education programs at the middle school, high school, and college level mean that college
students are aware of these negative outcomes, but these programs seem to have a limited effect
on changing actual drinking behavior(Brown, Tucker, and Brandon 1991), especially campuses
with traditionally high levels of binge drinking. Despite the litany of aversive consequences of
binge drinking, students must have some less well-documented, yet remarkably powerful,
positive reasons for binge drinking (Logan, Henry, Vaughn, Luk, & King, 2011). The present
research argues that one of those positive reasons is that binge drinking is symbolically
associated with higher social status and therefore linked to more positive social experiences on
campus.
Integrating research from the substance abuse, institutional climate in higher education,
sociology, and social psychology literatures, the present study seeks to answer a number of
questions about a college with a high level of binge drinking. What is the social benefit of binge
drinking on this campus? Does binge drinking ameliorate some of the negative effects of low
Social Status and Binge Drinking 5
social status with respect to social satisfaction? Finally, is binge drinking necessary for high
social status students to gain the benefits of their high status in relation to social satisfaction?
Motivations for College Drinking
Although most of the scholarship on college binge drinking focuses on the negative
effects, there is the literature on the positive motivations for alcohol consumption (Cooper 1994;
Cooper et al. 1995; Cox and Klinger 1988). This scholarship has focused on motivations and
expectations. Positive motivations for drinking fall under four categories (Cooper 1994):

Social motives (drinking to obtain positive social rewards)

Conformity (drinking to avoid social censure or rejection)

Enhancement (drinking to enhance positive mood or well-being)

Coping (drinking to reduce or regulate negative emotions)
Motives are related to expectations; positive expectations about the results of alcohol
consumption lead to stronger motives to drink (Neighbors, Walker, and Larimer 2003) (Coleman
and Cater 2005; Lee et al. 2011; Neighbors, Walker, and Larimer 2003). For example, if students
expect that alcohol will facilitate a better social experience, they will have strong social motives
to binge drink
Given that drinking rates vary widely between college campuses, but tend to remain
persistent over time on each campus, campus culture must have an effect on motivations and
expectations at the individual level. This makes sense since two types of motivations (social
motives and conformity) focus on external, social reactions to alcohol consumption. Even
enhancement and coping motivations may have a social component: students must be socialized
Social Status and Binge Drinking 6
to believe that drinking heavily leads to positive emotional states or relieve the pain of negative
emotional states, and that socialization may happen on campus.
In this paper we will be examining how a specific campus culture may shape the
motivations for it students to drink. Why is binge drinking associated with positive social
rewards and enhanced positive moods on certain campuses? We argue than in the reason is
because binge drinking is associated with high status students, the students associated with
positive social rewards and enhanced well-being. Because of this connection, binge drinking
becomes associated with social satisfaction.
Social Status and Social Satisfaction
A student’s social status is one of the major determinants of her or his college experience.
Social status in college is strongly related to a student’s socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity,
sexual orientation, and gender. Higher social status is related to being wealthy, White,
heterosexual, and male while lower social status is related to being less wealthy, racial minority,
lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ), and female.
Research indicates that wealthier students occupy higher social status in college relative
to their less wealthy peers. Wealthy students are advantaged in the college admissions process,
particularly with respect to admission to elite schools (Greene 1998; Karabel 2005; Stevens
2007). Even after admissions, SES affects the college experience: Wealthier students are more
likely to join selective organizations, such as the sororities and fraternities (Stuber 2009).
Moreover, nine years after matriculation, students from lower class backgrounds have lower
incomes, lower levels of educational attainment, and lower aspirations than their peers from
wealthier families (Walpole 2003).
Social Status and Binge Drinking 7
Studies at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) generally find that White students
enjoy higher social status on campus than their racial minority peers. At predominantly White
schools, White students have higher graduation rates in comparison to racial minority students
(Small and Winship 2007). White students also report higher levels of satisfaction with their
college lives (D'Augelli and Hershberger 1993; Reid and Radhakrishnan 2003), and are more
likely to join fraternities and sororities which are socially powerful high status groups on campus
(Martin 2009). Research at PWIs finds that students perceive race hierarchically, with Whites at
the top (Bonilla-Silva 2003; Martin, Trego, and Nakayama 2010). Conversely, outside of the
classroom, racial minority students are more likely to report experiences of prejudice and
discrimination on campus (Swim, Hyers, Cohen, Fitzgerald, & Bylsma, 2003).
Heterosexual students have higher status relative to their LGBTQ peers. Similarly to
other low social status groups on campus, LGBTQ students find college campuses more
inhospitable than their straight peers (Jenkins, Lambert, & Baker, 2009). LGBTQ students report
more hostile experiences on campus, particularly outside of the classroom (Jenkins, Lambert,
and Baker 2009; Waldo 1998).
The relationship between gender and social status on college campuses is more complex.
In terms of academic achievement, female students are as, or more successful, than their male
counterparts (Carbonaro, Ellison, and Covay 2011; 2011). Yet, women are much more likely to
report experiences of prejudice, discrimination, and hostility than male college students
(Brinkman and Rickard 2009; 2009) and to be victims of sexual violence (Benson, Gohm, and
Gross 2007). The evidence indicates that whereas women may have achieved something close to
equal status in the classroom, men still hold disproportionate power in the social realms of
college -- the location of alcohol consumption.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 8
In all of these cases, the effects of lower social status on campus are particularly
pronounced in the social realm. A student spends far more time with her or his peers than with
her or his professors. Therefore, a college student’s overall experience with college may be
disproportionately related to social, rather than academic, factors.
Social Status and Binge Drinking
A synthesis of prior research reveals that collegiate binge drinking is also associated with
membership in high status groups on campus (Kahler, Read, Wood, & Palfai, 2003). Past studies
consistently find that Whites drink more heavily than racial minorities, men drink more than
women, and fraternity and sorority members drink more than non-members (Ernst et al. 2009;
McCabe 2002; Rice 2007; Rice 2007; Wechsler et al. 1995). This reality is also reflected in
students’ perceptions of who drinks heavily on campus. Students believe that binge drinking is
strongly associated with membership in high status groups (Ashmore, Del Boca, & Beebe,
2002).
The idea that lower status students on campus are less, not more likely, to binge drink
runs counter to the idea that lower status students might be binge drinking to cope with the
stigma of being low status. Lower status students do not binge drink to self-medicate the stigmas
associated with being lower in social status (Dennhardt, & Murphy, 2011; Higgins, Albrecht, &
Albrecht, 1977; Swami & Furnham, 2007). Similarly, despite experiencing more discrimination
than their high status peers (Reid and Radhakrishnan 2003), lower status students do not binge
drink to deal with the stresses of experiencing discrimination (Broman, 2007). Instead, those
lower status students on campus who do binge drink may be doing so to achieve some positive
social goal.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 9
Taken together, the results of previous studies suggest that students may symbolically
associate binge drinking with higher social status. Higher status students drink more. Higher
status students report more positive and fewer negative social outcomes on campus. Students are
aware of both of these things. Students, particularly lower status students, could then be
potentially motivated to binge drink to acquire the social advantages of high status students.
The Present Study
The purpose of the present study is to explore the socially embedded benefits of binge
drinking in terms of social status and social satisfaction. Social satisfaction was defined as a
global evaluation of a student’s satisfaction with her or his social life on campus. We find that
social satisfaction is strongly predictive of a student’s overall satisfaction with college and that
heavy alcohol consumption is associated with high social satisfaction. Further, we examined the
relationship between binge drinking and social status. Students in high status groups (wealthy,
males, Whites, heterosexuals, and fraternity/sorority members) consistently report higher levels
of social satisfaction than students in low status groups (less wealthy, females, racial minorities,
LGBTQ, and non-fraternity/sorority members). Students in high status groups are also much
more likely than their low status peers to be binge drinkers.
We find that binge drinking ameliorates the negative effects of low social status on social
satisfaction. Those students in low status groups that are binge drinkers report levels of social
satisfaction similar to students in high status groups. Conversely, students in high status groups
may also need to binge drink in order to access all of the benefits of their high social status.
Students in high status groups that are not binge drinkers report lower levels of social satisfaction
than their binge-drinking peers.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 10
Method
Participants
Participants in the present study were 1595 students (58% of the student population)
attending a selective, Northeastern residential liberal arts college.2 The survey was conducted in
February, 2009. Data was analyzed with respect to gender (948 women, 640 men), race (99
Black, 90 Latino/a, 104 Asian/Pacific Islander, 10 Native American, 1282 White),
fraternity/sorority membership (422 members, 1148 non-members), sexual orientation (79
LGBTQ, 1512 heterosexual), socio-economic status (High 1006, Low 571). Socio-economic
status was operationalized as students who reported receiving financial aid from the college
(Low) or those students who reported not receiving financial aid (High).
Measures
The data in the present study were drawn from a larger study examining the campus
climate for students that was administered online during the beginning of the second semester of
the academic year.
Binge Drinking. Binge drinking was defined as a student who consumed 4 drinks
(women) or 5 drinks (men) per session at least one time within a two-week period (Wechsler and
Nelson 2008). Other students who drank less or did not drink at all were included in the Nonbinge category. In addition, a measure of the total number of drinks students consume in an
average week was computed by multiplying the average number of drinks students consume in a
drinking session by the number of times that they drink each week.
Social Satisfaction. Social satisfaction was measured by a single item that assessing
students’ global perception of their social experience. The item used was, “I feel very positive
2
International students were removed from the analysis because research reveals cross-national differences in
drinking behavior and norms (Bloomfield et al. 2002; Kuendig et al. 2008; Lo and Globetti 2001).
Social Status and Binge Drinking 11
about my social experience on campus overall.” This item was evaluated on a seven-point scale
where 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree.”
Overall Satisfaction, Academic Satisfaction, GPA. The measure of Overall Satisfaction
was taken from Reid and Radhakrishnan (2003) and measured using eight items that assessed
students’ global evaluation of their college experience (Cronbach’s  = .88). Sample items
included, “If I had to do it all over again, I would still attend this school.” and “This school is a
good fit for me.” Academic satisfaction was measured by a single item that measured students’
global perception of their academic experience. The item used was, “Overall, I am satisfied with
my academic experience.” All items were evaluated on a seven-point scale where 1 = “Strongly
Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree.” Finally, students were asked to report their cumulative grade
point average.
Results
Preliminary Analyses: Social Satisfaction and Overall Satisfaction
Preliminary analyses reveal that social satisfaction relates strongly to overall student
satisfaction compared to other important indicators. An ordinary least squares regression analysis
was conducted using social satisfaction, academic satisfaction, and GPA as predictors of overall
satisfaction (R2 = .55). Results indicate that social satisfaction ( = .65, B = .48, SE B = .01, t =
37.11, p < .01) is a much better predictor of students’ overall satisfaction with their college
experience than satisfaction with the academic climate ( = .23, B = .23, SE B = .02, t = 12.16, p
< .01) or GPA ( = .03, B = .09, SE B = .05, t = 1.67, ns). This finding supports the idea that
social satisfaction is an important component of students' college experience.
In this sample, 64% of the students are binge drinkers and 36% are not. In addition, we
confirmed that binge drinkers not only drink more than their peers per session, but they also
Social Status and Binge Drinking 12
drink more overall. A univariate ANOVA indicates that, on average, binge drinkers (M = 18.55,
SD = 13.70) consumed more drinks per week than non-binge drinkers (M = 3.61, SD = 4.19), F
(1, 1533) = 624.84, p < .01.
Social Status, Social Satisfaction, and Drinking
To test the predictions that membership in high status groups is also associated with
greater social satisfaction and more drinking, univariate ANOVAs were performed on perceived
social satisfaction and the average number of drinks per week for each of the social status
variables. Table 1 shows that individuals belonging to high social status groups, most notably
fraternity and sorority members, report significantly greater social satisfaction than individuals
belonging to low social status groups. Further, Table 1 also shows that members of high status
groups, most notably fraternity and sorority members and male students, consume significantly
more alcohol than do members of low status groups, usually about twice the number of drinks.
Table 2 demonstrates that binge drinkers were significantly overrepresented in high social status
groups relative to low social status groups.
Low Social Status, Binge Drinking, and Social Satisfaction
To test the prediction that binge drinking ameliorates the adverse effects of membership
in a low social status group on social satisfaction, we ran a number of ANOVAs examining
social satisfaction across non-binge drinking and binge drinking individuals belonging to low
social status groups compared to individuals belonging to high status groups.
Figure 1 shows the mean level of social satisfaction for low status non-binge drinkers and
low status binge drinkers compared to high status individuals. For example, this figure compares
the level of social satisfaction reported by lower SES students who are not binge drinkers (in the
leftmost bars) to lower SES students who are binge drinkers (in the center bars). It also reveals
Social Status and Binge Drinking 13
the satisfaction level of the high status comparison group, in this case high SES students (in the
right bars).
Results indicate that binge drinking attenuated the previously observed relationship
between social status and social satisfaction for SES: F (2, 1543) = 21.14, p < .01; race: F (2,
1562) = 22.43, p < .01; gender: F (2, 1550) = 13.72, p < .01; fraternity/sorority membership: F
(2, 1522) = 64.24, p < .01; and sexual orientation: F (2, 1580) = 11.81, p < .01. Post-hoc tests
using Tukey’s HSD reveal that these effects are the result of differences between low status nonbinge drinking students versus low status binge drinking and high status students. The same
general pattern emerges such that low status students who do not binge drink are significantly
less socially satisfied than either low status binge drinkers or high status students. Conversely,
there is no difference in social satisfaction between low status binge drinkers and high status
students. This pattern was true with respect to socioeconomic status, race, and gender. In other
words, low SES, racial minority, and female students who are binge drinkers report social
satisfaction levels equivalent to high SES, White, and male students.
The patterns of results for fraternity/sorority membership and sexual orientation are
slightly different. Consistent with the general pattern described above, fraternity/sorority nonmembers who are not binge drinkers are less socially satisfied compared to non-members who
are binge drinkers. Yet, those fraternity/sorority non-members who are binge drinkers are still
less socially satisfied than fraternity/sorority members. With respect to sexual orientation,
although non-binge drinking LGBTQ students are significantly less socially satisfied than
heterosexual students, they were not significantly different than binge drinking LGBTQ students
who were, in turn, not significantly different from heterosexual students. Thus, even for LGBT
Social Status and Binge Drinking 14
students, binge drinking attenuated the negative effect of lower social status on social
satisfaction.
Analyses were also performed to rule out the possibility of interactions among the
various types of social status (e.g., race x socio-economic status) and binge drinking on social
satisfaction. Results indicated no interactions among the various types of social status and binge
drinking on social status.
High Social Status, Binge Drinking, and Social Satisfaction
To test the prediction that binge drinking is a necessary prerequisite for receiving the
social advantage of high social status, we compared non-binge drinkers and binge drinkers
within high status groups. Separate analyses were conducted for students in each of the following
categories: Whites, males, high SES, heterosexuals, and fraternity/sorority members. Table 3
shows that within each high status category, non-binge drinkers report less social satisfaction
than binge drinkers. To further test this idea, we conducted this analysis for the highest social
status students: White, wealthy, heterosexual men.3 As expected, non-binge drinkers (M = 4.61,
SD = 1.75) report being significantly less socially satisfied than were binge drinkers (M = 5.83,
SD = 1.34), F (1, 360) = 47.88, p < .01.
Discussion
The results of the present study provide evidence regarding the importance of sociocultural factors like social status and social satisfaction in the phenomenon of binge drinking. By
connecting the substance abuse literature to research in education, sociology, and social
psychology, we find consistent evidence supporting the idea that binge drinking is a symbolic
proxy for high social status in college. Binge drinking ameliorates some of the negative effects of
3
It was not possible to include fraternity membership because there were not enough White, male, high SES,
heterosexual, non-binge drinkers in fraternities to conduct the analysis.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 15
lower social status on social satisfaction, one of the most important predictors of a student’s
overall college experience. Students of color, women, less wealthy, LGBTQ, and nonfraternity/sorority members who are not binge drinkers report lower levels of social satisfaction
than their binge drinking peers. The members of low social status groups who are binge drinkers,
however, report levels of social satisfaction comparable to the members of high social status
groups. Further, we find evidence that binge drinking may be a prerequisite for receiving the full
benefits of membership in high social status groups. Members of high social status groups that
are not binge drinkers report lower levels of social satisfaction than their binge drinking peers.
The robustness of the effect of binge drinking across divergent types of social status (i.e.,
SES, race, gender, sexual orientation, fraternity/sorority membership) suggests that it is a general
phenomenon undergirding the perpetuation of binge drinking. This idea is supported by the fact
that we failed to see interactions between any of the social status factors and binge drinking
classification on perceived social satisfaction. For example, this meant that wealthy students of
color were not more likely to be binge drinkers (and therefore correspondingly more likely to
report higher social satisfaction) than poorer students of color. The effects of lower social status
are not limited to one particular kind of student.
Results from the present study indicate that, to the extent that students are invested in
getting the most out of their college experience, they will seek out those experiences that
maximize their social satisfaction. In this regard, the quantitative results of the present study are
consistent with the results of previous qualitative studies (Mattern 2006). Students might see
binge drinking as a logical consequence of seeking out the most favorable life possible while in
college. This would be particularly important for the members of low social status groups who
typically report less positive experiences on campus (Reid and Radhakrishnan 2003).
Social Status and Binge Drinking 16
Social Status, Social Power, and Social Satisfaction
Our results offer evidence that binge drinking is symbolically associated with high status:
wealth, masculinity, whiteness, fraternity/sorority membership, and heterosexuality (BonillaSilva 2003; Martin, Trego, and Nakayama 2010). High social status within a culture is related to
social power (Ridgeway & Bourg, 2004; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Moreover, high social status
can be the difference between a positive and negative college experience, between four years of
fun versus four years merely survived.
In an environment where binge drinking is the norm, engaging in binge drinking behavior
can be viewed as another form of social and cultural capital (Lee, Geisner, Patrick, & Neighbors,
2010). Social capital consists of the resources we gain through relationships such as information
not widely known, access to power, or influence over others (Bourdieu, 1985). Similarly, cultural
capital is the informal knowledge and tastes associated with higher status (Bourdieu, 1977;
Bourdieu & Passeron, 1979; Bourdieu, 1984). When low social status students binge drink, they
can appropriate this powerful symbol of high social status and directly access the benefits
associated with membership in high status groups on campus. From this perspective, binge
drinking low status students are pro-actively seeking ways to enhance their social experience and
not simply accepting their “place” in the campus hierarchy. Instead, these low status students
may be using binge drinking as a vehicle for social mobility.
To the extent that binge drinking is symbolic of higher social status, lower status students
could binge drink in order to pursue the social benefits of higher social status. Drinking behavior
on college campuses is tightly integrated with the social norms of those campuses (Larimer, et
al., 2009). The most powerful groups on campus create those norms, usually the groups that
comprise the campus majority. Low status students can “resist” the college norm to binge drink
Social Status and Binge Drinking 17
to the extent that they embrace other identities (e.g., racial minority, female) that have different,
less heavy drinking norms (Neighbors, et al., 2010). To the extent that students symbolically
associate binge drinking with higher social status, they could trade a marginalized social identity
for a more valuable one that is associated with better social outcomes.
Conversely, when high status students fail to engage in the symbolic high status behavior
of binge drinking, they cannot access the full benefits of their status. In that sense, some of the
social and cultural capital associated with high social status is contingent on enacting certain
normative behaviors. Although non-bingeing high status students already reported higher levels
of overall and social satisfaction compared to low status students, the upward social comparison
to their bingeing high status peers could serve as both a powerful motivator and social reinforcer
for binge drinking.
Binge Drinking as Maladaptive Adaptation
The ostensibly “positive” effects of binge drinking are the social equivalent of a pyrrhic
victory. The greater social satisfaction reported by binge drinkers does not exempt those students
from the negative individual (Knight et al. 2002) and interpersonal outcomes of binge drinking
(Benson, Gohm, and Gross 2007; Combs-Lane and Smith 2002; Howard, Griffin, and Boekeloo
2008; Palmer et al. 2010; Ullman, Karabatsos, and Koss 1999). We do not believe that binge
drinking is a solution to the complex social problems linking social status with negative
experiences occurring on campus and in society more broadly.
Instead, the present findings may be re-framed as a story of adaptation and survival. In
order for low status students to contend with an otherwise hostile campus climate, some students
choose to conform to the social norm of binge drinking upheld by high status groups on campus.
A major question for institutional policy and decision-makers is whether binge drinking is the
Social Status and Binge Drinking 18
preferred form of assimilating low status and marginalized students into the social mainstream of
campus life. Should lower status students on campus be forced to choose between positive social
outcomes versus a strong ingroup identity?
Limitations and Future Directions
One of the most dramatic implications of the present research is the idea that binge
drinking is related to social power. Although this idea is only tested indirectly in the present
study, future research should more directly evaluate the extent to which students are aware of the
link between social status, social power, and binge drinking. Similarly, we did not directly
examine ingroup identity. Future studies should directly test whether lower status students on
campus who binge drink also have less salient or central group identities compared to their nonbingeing peers. Finally, future studies should evaluate whether the effects of binge drinking on
social satisfaction apply to social status differentials occurring outside of the collegiate context.
Conclusion
The present study offers another insight into the nature of a seemingly intractable social
problem. It is our hope that by drawing attention to the important social motivations underlying
binge drinking institutional administrators and public health professionals will be able to design
and implement programs for students that take into account the full range of reasons that students
binge drink.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 19
References
Ashmore, R. D., Del Boca, F. K., & Beebe, M. (2002). 'Alkie,' 'frat brother,' and 'jock': Perceived
types of college students and stereotypes about drinking. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 32(5), 885-907. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00247.x
Benson, B. J., Gohm, C. L., & Gross, A. M. (2007). College women and sexual assault: The role
of sex-related alcohol expectancies. Journal of Family Violence, 22(6), 341-351.
doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9085-z
Bloomfield, K., Greenfield, T. K., Kraus, L., & Augustin, R. (2002). A comparison of drinking
patterns and alcohol-use-related problems in the united states and germany, 1995. Substance
Use & Misuse, 37(4), 399-428.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2003). ‘‘New racism,’’ color-blind racism, and the future of whiteness in
america. In Whiteout: The continuing significance of racism (pp. 271-284). New York:
Routledge.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In J. Karabel, & A. H.
Halsey (Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487-511). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-58). New York: Greenwood.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1979). The inheritors. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brady, J. (2005, September 7). Binge drinking entrenched in college culture. Retrieved from
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=1085909.
Brinkman, B. G., & Rickard, K. M. (2009; 2009). College students' descriptions of everyday
gender prejudice. Sex Roles, 61, 461-461-475.
Broman, C. L. (2007). Perceived discrimination and alcohol use among black and white college
students. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 51(1), 8-16.
Carbonaro, W., Ellison, B. J., & Covay, E. (2011). Gender inequalities in the college pipeline.
Social Science Research, 40(1), 120-135.
Coleman, L., & Cater, S. (2005). Underage "binge" drinking: A qualitative study into
motivations and outcomes. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 12(2), 125-136.
doi:10.1080/09687630512331323521
Combs-Lane, A. M., & Smith, D. W. (2002). Risk of sexual victimization in college women: The
role of behavioral intentions and risk-taking behavior. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
17(2), 165-183.
D'Augelli, A. R., & Hershberger, S. L. (1993). African american undergraduates on a
predominantly white campus: Academic factors, social networks, and campus climate.
Journal of Negro Education, 62(1), 67-81. doi:10.2307/2295400
Dennhardt, A. A., & Murphy, J. G. (2011). Associations between depression, distress tolerance,
delay discounting, and alcohol-related problems in european american and african american
college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, doi:10.1037/a0025807
Ernst, F. A., Hogan, B., Vallas, M. A., Cook, M., & Fuller, D. (2009). Superior self-regulatory
skills in african american college students: Evidence from alcohol and tobacco use. Journal
of Black Studies, 40(2), 337-346. doi:10.1177/0021934708315152
Social Status and Binge Drinking 20
Goldstein, A. L., Barnett, N. P., Pedlow, C. T., & Murphy, J. G. (2007). Drinking in conjunction
with sexual experiences among at-risk college student drinkers. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol and Drugs, 68(5), 697-705.
Greene, H. (1998). The select :Realities of life and learning in america's elite colleges : Based
on a groundbreaking survey of more than 4,000 undergraduates (1st ed.). New York: Cliff
Street Books.
Higgins, P. C., Albrecht, G. L., & Albrecht, M. H. (1977). Black–White adolescent drinking: The
myth and the reality. Social Problems, 25(2), 215-224. doi:10.1525/sp.1977.25.2.03a00090
Hingson, R. W., Heeren, T., Winter, M., & Wechsler, H. (2005). Magnitude of alcohol-related
mortality in morbidity among US college students ages 18-24: Changes 1998-2001. Annual
Review of Public Health, 26, 259-279.
Hingson, R. W., Heeren, T., Zakocs, R. C., Kopstein, A., & Wechsler, H. (2002). Magnitude of
alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among U.S. college students ages 18-24. Journal of
Studies on Alcohol, 63(2), 136-144.
Howard, D. E., Griffin, M. A., & Boekeloo, B. O. (2008). Prevalence and psychosocial correlates
of alcohol-related sexual assault among university students. Adolescence, 43(172), 733-750.
Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. The Journal of Higher
Education, 63(5, Racial Harassment on Campus), pp. 539-569.
Jenkins, M., Lambert, E. G., & Baker, D. N. (2009). The attitudes of black and white college
students toward gays and lesbians. Journal of Black Studies, 39(4), 589-589-613.
doi:10.1177/0021934707299638
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the
future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2009. volume II: College students and
adults ages 19-50 ((NIH Publication No. 10-7585) ed.). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on
Drug Abuse.
Kahler, C. W., Read, J. P., Wood, M. D., & Palfai, T. P. (2003). Social environmental selection
as a mediator of gender, ethnic, and personality effects on college student drinking.
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17, 226–234.
Karabel, J. (2005). The chosen :The hidden history of admission and exclusion at harvard, yale,
and princeton. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Knight, J. R., Wechsler, H., Kuo, M., Seibring, M., Weitzman, E. R., & Schuckit, M. A. (2002).
Alcohol abuse and dependence among U.S. college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
63(3), 263-270.
Kuendig, H., Plant, M. A., Plant, M. L., Miller, P., Kuntsche, S., & Gmel, G. (2008). Alcoholrelated adverse consequences: Cross-cultural variations in attribution process among young
adults. European Journal of Public Health, 18(4), 386-391. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckn007
Larimer, M. E., Kaysen, D., Lee, C. M., Lewis, M. A., Dillworth, T., Montoya, H. D., &
Neighbors, C. (2009). Evaluating level of specificity of normative referents in relation to
personal drinking behavior. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, Suppl. 16, 115–121.
Lee, C. M., Geisner, I. M., Patrick, M. E., & Neighbors, C. (2010). The social norms of alcoholrelated negative consequences. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24(2), 342-348.
doi:10.1037/a0018020
Lee, C. M., Maggs, J. L., Neighbors, C., & Patrick, M. E. (2011). Positive and negative alcoholrelated consequences: Associations with past drinking. Journal of Adolescence, 34(1), 8794. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.01.009
Social Status and Binge Drinking 21
Lewis, M. A., Logan, D. E., & Neighbors, C. (2009). Examining the role of gender in the
relationship between use of condom-related protective behavioral strategies when drinking
and alcohol-related sexual behavior. Sex Roles, 61(9-10), 727-735.
Lo, C., & Globetti, G. (2001). Chinese in the united states: An extension of moderation in
drinking. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 42(3), 261-274.
Logan, D. E., Henry, T., Vaughn, M., Luk, J. W., & King, K. M. (2011). Rose-colored beer
goggles: The relation between experiencing alcohol consequences and perceived likelihood
and valence. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, doi:10.1037/a0024126
Martin, J. N., Trego, A. B., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). College students' racial attitudes and
friendship diversity. Howard Journal of Communications, 21(2), 97-118.
doi:10.1080/10646171003727367
Martin, N. D. N. (2009). Social capital, academic achievement, and postgraduation plans at an
elite, private university. Sociological Perspectives, 52(2), 185-210.
doi:10.1525/sop.2009.52.2.185
Mattern, J. L. (2006). Drinking stories: The form and function of fantasy in the college drinking
culture. Dissertation Abstracts International, A: The Humanities and Social Sciences,
67(04), 1154-1154.
McCabe, S. E. (2002). Gender differences in collegiate risk factors for heavy episodic drinking.
Journal of Studies of Alcohol, 63, 49-56.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2007). What colleges need to know now:
An update on college drinking research. No. NIH Publication No. 07-5010). Bethesda, MD:
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Neighbors, C., LaBrie, J. W., Hummer, J. F., Lewis, M. A., Lee, C. M., Desai, S., . . . Larimer,
M. E. (2010). Group identification as a moderator of the relationship between perceived
social norms and alcohol consumption. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24(3), 522-528.
doi:10.1037/a0019944
Neighbors, C., Walker, D. D., & Larimer, M. E. (2003). Expectancies and evaluations of alcohol
effects among college students: Self-determination as a moderator. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 64(2), 292-300.
Palmer, R. S., McMahon, T. J., Rounsaville, B. J., & Ball, S. A. (2010). Coercive sexual
experiences, protective behavioral strategies, alcohol expectancies and consumption among
male and female college students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(9), 1563-1578.
doi:10.1177/0886260509354581
Rankin, S. (1998). Campus climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered students, faculty,
and staff: Assessment and strategies for change. In R. Sanlo (Ed.), Working with lesbian,
gay and bisexual college students: A guide for administrators and faculty (pp. 227–284).
Westport, CT: Green- wood Publishing Company.
Reid, L. D., & Radhakrishnan, P. (2003). Race matters: The relation between race and general
campus climate. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9(3), 263-275.
doi:10.1037/1099-9809.9.3.263
Rice, C. (2007). Misperception of college drinking norms: Ethnic/Race differences. Journal of
Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 14(4), 17-30. doi:10.1300/J137v14n04_02
Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., & Hunter, J. (2009). Disclosure of sexual orientation and
subsequent substance use and abuse among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Critical role
of disclosure reactions. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 23(1), 175-184.
doi:10.1037/a0014284
Social Status and Binge Drinking 22
Sher, K. J., Bartholow, B. D., & Nanda, S. (2001). Short- and long-term effects of fraternity and
sorority membership on heavy drinking: A social norms perspective. Psychology of
Addictive Behaviors, 15, 42–51.
Singleton, R. A., & Wolfson, A. R. (2009). Alcohol consumption, sleep, and academic
performance among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 70(3), 355363.
Small, M. L., & Winship, C. (2007). Black students’ graduation from elite colleges: Institutional
characteristics and between-institution differences. Social Science Research, 36(3), 12571275. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2006.06.006
Stevens, M. L. (2007). Creating a class: College admissions and the education of elites.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Stuber, J. M. (2009). Class, culture, and participation in the collegiate extra-curriculum.
Sociological Forum, 24(4), 877-900. doi:10.1111/j.1573-7861.2009.01140.x
Swami, V., & Furnham, A. (2007). Unattractive, promiscuous and heavy drinkers: Perceptions of
women with tattoos. Body Image, 4(4), 343-352. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2007.06.005
Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L., Fitzgerald, D. C., & Bylsma, W. H. (2003). African
american college students' experiences with everyday racism: Characteristics of and
responses to these incidents. Journal of Black Psychology, 29(1), 38-67.
doi:10.1177/0095798402239228
Turner, J., Keller, A., & Bauerle, J. (2010). The longitudinal pattern of alcohol-related injury in a
college population: Emergency department data compared to self-reported data. The
American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 36(4), 194-198.
doi:10.3109/00952990.2010.491881
Ullman, S. E., Karabatsos, G., & Koss, M. P. (1999). Alcohol and sexual assault in a national
sample of college women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(6), 603-625.
Waldo, C. R. (1998). Out on campus: Sexual orientation and academic climate in a university
context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26(5), 745-774.
doi:10.1023/A:1022110031745
Walpole, M. (2003). Socioeconomic status in college: How SES affects college experiences and
outcomes. The Review of Higher Education, 27(1), 45-73.
Wechsler, H., Moeykens, B., Davenport, A., Castillo, S., & Hansen, J. (1995). The adverse
impact of heavy episodic drinkers on other college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
56(6), 628-634.
Wechsler, H., & Nelson, T. F. (2008). What we have learned from the harvard school of public
health college alcohol study: Focusing attention on college student alcohol consumption and
the environmental conditions that promote it. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs,
69(4), 481-490.
Weitzman, E. R., Nelson, T. F., & Wechsler, H. (2003). Taking up binge drinking in college:
The influences of person, social group, and environment. Journal of Adolescent Health,
32(1), 26-35.
Wolaver, A. M. (2002). Effects of heavy drinking in college on study effort, grade point average,
and major choice. Contemporary Economic Policy, 20(4), 415-428.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 23
Table 1
Mean Values of Perceived Social Satisfaction and Average Number of Drinks Consumed Per
Week by Social Status
Social Satisfaction
Mean (SD)
F
High SES
5.36 (1.56)
30.65**
Low SES
4.90 (1.70)
Racial Majority
5.32 (1.57)
Racial Minorities
4.64 (1.77)
Men
5.32 (1.61)
Women
5.11 (1.64)
Heterosexual
5.24 (1.61)
LGBTQ
4.38 (1.82)
Frat./Sorority
5.82 (1.27)
Non-Frat./Sorority
4.96 (1.69)
Note. SDs in parentheses.
** p < .01, * p < .05.
Drinks Per Week
Mean (SD)
15.30 (14.36)
F
83.67**
8.95 (10.48)
44.08**
14.11 (13.50)
38.08**
8.78 (12.45)
6.30**
18.17 (16.30)
99.30**
9.49 (9.38)
21.04**
13.22 (13.44)
3.96*
10.14 (13.57)
89.89**
19.72 (16.91)
10.69 (11.11)
147.57**
Social Status and Binge Drinking 24
Table 2
Percentage of Binge Drinkers by Social Status
% Binge
% Non-binge
2
High SES
71.10
28.90
63.96**
Low SES
49.50
50.50
Racial Majority
68.50
31.50
Racial Minorities
54.90
54.90
Men
69.00
31.00
Women
60.60
39.40
Heterosexual
64.90
35.10
LGBTQ
45.80
54.20
Frat./Sorority
78.80
21.20
Non-Frat./Sorority
41.60
58.40
Note. SDs in parentheses.
** p < .01, * p < .05.
54.98**
11.22**
10.81**
53.52**
Social Status and Binge Drinking 25
Table 3
Mean Values of Perceived Social Satisfaction for Heavy Bing Drinking and Non-binge Drinking
High Status Individuals
Binge
Non-binge
F
Race - White
5.54 (1.45)
4.91 (1.69)
45.42**
Gender – Men
5.62 (1.46)
4.69 (1.76)
47.46**
SES - Wealthy
5.58 (1.45)
4.89 (1.68)
41.07**
Sex. Orient. - Heterosexual
5.49 (1.48)
4.83 (1.72)
59.91**
Frat./Sorority - Member
5.91 (1.19)
5.53 (1.45)
6.14**
Note. SDs in parentheses.
** p < .01, * p < .05.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 26
Figure 1
Mean Levels of Social Satisfaction for Non-binge Drinking and Binge Drinking Low Social
Status Groups Compared to High Social Status Groups
Note. Low status group for sexual orientation = LGBTQ students, High status group for sexual
orientation = Heterosexual students. Low status group for race = racial minority students, High
status group for race = White students. Low status group for SES = less wealthy students, High
status group for SES = wealthy students. Low status group for gender = women, High status
group for gender = men. Low status group for Frat./Sorority membership = non-members, High
status group for Frat./Sorority membership = members.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 27
References
Benson, Brenda J., Carol L. Gohm and Alan M. Gross. 2007. "College Women and Sexual Assault:
The Role of Sex-related Alcohol Expectancies." Journal of Family Violence 22(6):341-351.
Bloomfield, Kim, Thomas K. Greenfield, Ludwig Kraus and Rita Augustin. 2002. "A Comparison of
Drinking Patterns and Alcohol-Use-Related Problems in the United States and Germany,
1995." Substance use & Misuse 37(4):399-428.
Bonilla-Silva, E. 2003. "‘‘New racism,’’ color-blind racism, and the future of Whiteness in America."
Pp. 271-284 in Whiteout: The continuing significance of racism"‘‘New racism,’’ color-blind racism, and
the future of Whiteness in America." New York: Routledge.
Brady, Jonann. "Binge Drinking Entrenched in College Culture." ABC, Retrieved 09/07.
Brinkman, Britney G. and Kathryn M. Rickard. 2009; 2009. "College Students' Descriptions of
Everyday Gender Prejudice." Sex Roles 61(7-8):461-461-475.
Brown, Charles, Earnestine Tucker and Coress Brandon. 1991. "Freshman Residence Perception of
an Alcohol Education Class." College Student Journal 25(4):451-456.
Carbonaro, William, Brandy J. Ellison and Elizabeth Covay. 2011; 2011. "Gender inequalities in the
college pipeline." Social Science Research 40(1):120-120-135.
Coleman, Lester and Suzanne Cater. 2005. "Underage "Binge" Drinking: A Qualitative Study into
Motivations and Outcomes." Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 12(2):125-136.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 28
Combs-Lane, Amy M. and Daniel W. Smith. 2002. "Risk of Sexual Victimization in College Women:
The Role of Behavioral Intentions and Risk-Taking Behavior." Journal of Interpersonal Violence
17(2):165-183.
Cooper, M. L. 1994. "Motivations for Alcohol Use among Adolescents: Development and
Validation of a Four-Factor Model." Psychological Assessment 6(2):117-128.
Cooper, M. L., Michael Frone, Marcia Russell and Pamela Muda. 1995. "Drinking to regulate
Positive and Negative Emotions: A Motivational Model of Alcohol Use." Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 69(5):990-1005.
Cox, W. M. and Eric Klinger. 1988. "A motivational model of alcohol use." Journal of Abnormal
Psychology 97(2):168-180.
D'Augelli, Anthony R. and Scott L. Hershberger. 1993. "African American undergraduates on a
predominantly White campus: Academic factors, social networks, and campus climate." Journal
of Negro Education 62(1):67-81.
Dowdall, George W. and Henry Wechsler. 2002. "Studying College Alcohol Use: Widening the Lens,
Sharpening the Focus." Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63(supplement 14):14-22.
Ernst, Frederick A., Beth Hogan, Melissa A. Vallas, Mekeila Cook and Dana Fuller. 2009. "Superior
Self-Regulatory Skills in African American College Students: Evidence From Alcohol and
Tobacco Use." Journal of Black Studies 40(2):337-346.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 29
Goldstein, Abby L., Nancy P. Barnett, C. T. Pedlow and James G. Murphy. 2007. "Drinking in
Conjunction With Sexual Experiences Among At-Risk College Student Drinkers." Journal of
Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 68(5):697-705.
Greene, Howard. 1998. The select :realities of life and learning in America's elite colleges : based on a
groundbreaking survey of more than 4,000 undergraduates. 1st ed. New York: Cliff Street Books.
Hingson, Ralph W., Timothy Heeren, Michael Winter and Henry Wechsler. 2005. "Magnitude of
Alcohol-Related Mortality in Morbidity among US College Students Ages 18-24: Changes 19982001
." Annual Review of Public Health 26:259-279.
Hingson, Ralph W., Timothy Heeren, Ronda C. Zakocs, Andrea Kopstein and Henry Wechsler.
2002. "Magnitude of Alcohol-Related Mortality and Morbidity among U.S. College Students
Ages 18-24." Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63(2):136-144.
Howard, Donna E., Melinda A. Griffin and Bradley O. Boekeloo. 2008. "Prevalence And
Psychosocial Correlates Of Alcohol-Related Sexual Assault Among University Students."
Adolescence 43(172):733-750.
Jenkins, Morris, Eric G. Lambert and David N. Baker. 2009. "The Attitudes of Black and White
College Students Toward Gays and Lesbians." Journal of Black Studies 39(4):589-589-613.
Johnston, L. D., P. M. O'Malley, J. G. Bachman and J. E. Schulenberg. 2009. "Monitoring the Future
national survey results on drug use, 1975-2009. Volume II: College students and adults ages 19-50.":305.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 30
Karabel, Jerome. 2005. The chosen :the hidden history of admission and exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and
Princeton. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Knight, John R., Henry Wechsler, Meichun Kuo, Mark Seibring, Elissa R. Weitzman and Marc A.
Schuckit. 2002. "Alcohol Abuse and Dependence among U.S. College Students." Journal of
Studies on Alcohol 63(3):263-270.
Kuendig, Herve, Martin A. Plant, Moira L. Plant, Patrick Miller, Sandra Kuntsche and Gerhard
Gmel. 2008. "Alcohol-related adverse consequences: Cross-cultural variations in attribution
process among young adults." European Journal of Public Health 18(4):386-391.
Lee, Christine M., Irene M. Geisner, Megan E. Patrick and Clayton Neighbors. 2010. "The social
norms of alcohol-related negative consequences." Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 24(2):342-348.
Lee, Christine M., Jennifer L. Maggs, Clayton Neighbors and Megan E. Patrick. 2011. "Positive and
negative alcohol-related consequences: Associations with past drinking." Journal of Adolescence
34(1):87-94.
Lo, Celia and Gerald Globetti. 2001. "Chinese in the United States: An Extension of Moderation in
Drinking." International Journal of Comparative Sociology 42(3):261-274.
Martin, Judith N., Alison B. Trego and Thomas K. Nakayama. 2010. "College Students' Racial
Attitudes and Friendship Diversity." Howard Journal of Communications 21(2):97-118.
Martin, Nathan D. N. 2009. "Social Capital, Academic Achievement, and Postgraduation Plans at an
Elite, Private University." Sociological Perspectives 52(2):185-210.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 31
Mattern, Jody L. 2006. "Drinking stories: The form and function of fantasy in the college drinking
culture." Dissertation Abstracts International, A: The Humanities and Social Sciences 67(04):1154-1154.
McCabe, Sean E. 2002. "Gender differences in collegiate risk factors for heavy episodic drinking *."
Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63(1):49(8).
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. College Drinking. Washington, D.C.: Niaaa.
Neighbors, Clayton, Denise D. Walker and Mary E. Larimer. 2003. "Expectancies and Evaluations
of Alcohol Effects among College Students: Self-Determination as a Moderator." Journal of
Studies on Alcohol 64(2):292-300.
Palmer, Rebekka S., Thomas J. McMahon, Bruce J. Rounsaville and Samuel A. Ball. 2010. "Coercive
Sexual Experiences, Protective Behavioral Strategies, Alcohol Expectancies and Consumption
Among Male and Female College Students." Journal of Interpersonal Violence 25(9):1563-1578.
Reid, Landon D. and Phanikiran Radhakrishnan. 2003. "Race matters: The relation between race and
general campus climate." Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 9(3):263-275.
Rice, Christopher. 2007. "Misperception of College Drinking Norms: Ethnic/Race Differences."
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 14(4):17-30.
Singleton, Royce A. and Amy R. Wolfson. 2009. "Alcohol Consumption, Sleep, and Academic
Performance Among College Students." Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 70(3):355-363.
Small, Mario L. and Christopher Winship. 2007. "Black students’ graduation from elite colleges:
Institutional characteristics and between-institution differences." Social Science Research
36(3):1257-1275.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 32
Stevens, Mitchell L. 2007. Creating a class: college admissions and the education of elites. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press.
Stuber, Jenny M. 2009. "Class, Culture, and Participation in the Collegiate Extra-Curriculum."
Sociological Forum 24(4):877-900.
Turner, James, Adrienne Keller and Jennifer Bauerle. 2010. "The Longitudinal Pattern of AlcoholRelated Injury in a College Population: Emergency Department Data Compared to SelfReported Data." The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 36(4):194-198.
Ullman, Sarah E., George Karabatsos and Mary P. Koss. 1999. "Alcohol and Sexual Assault in a
National Sample of College Women." Journal of Interpersonal Violence 14(6):603-625.
Waldo, Craig R. 1998. "Out on campus: Sexual orientation and academic climate in a university
context." American Journal of Community Psychology 26(5):745-774.
Walpole, MaryBeth. 2003. "Socioeconomic status in college: How SES affects college experiences
and outcomes." The Review of Higher Education 27(1):45-73.
Wechsler, Henry, Meichun Kuo, Han Lee and George Dowdall. 2000. "Environmental correlates of
underage alcohol use and related problems of college students." American Journal of Preventive
Medicine 19(1):24-29.
Wechsler, Henry, Jae E. Lee, Meichun Kuo, Mark Seibring, Toben F. Nelson and Hang Lee. 2002.
"Trends in College Binge Drinking During a Period of Increased Prevention Efforts." Journal of
American College Health 50(5):203.
Social Status and Binge Drinking 33
Wechsler, Henry, Barbara Moeykens, Andrea Davenport, Sonia Castillo and Jeffrey Hansen. 1995.
"The Adverse Impact of Heavy Episodic Drinkers on Other College Students." Journal of Studies
on Alcohol 56(6):628-634.
Wechsler, Henry and Toben F. Nelson. 2008. "What We Have Learned From the Harvard School of
Public Health College Alcohol Study: Focusing Attention on College Student Alcohol
Consumption and the Environmental Conditions That Promote It." Journal of Studies on Alcohol
and Drugs 69(4):481-490.
Weitzman, Elissa R., Toben F. Nelson and Henry Wechsler. 2003. "Taking Up Binge Drinking in
College: The Influences of Person, Social Group, and Environment." Journal of Adolescent Health
32(1):26-35.
Wolaver, Amy M. 2002. "Effects of Heavy Drinking in College on Study Effort, Grade Point
Average, and Major Choice." Contemporary Economic Policy 20(4):415-428.