Addictive Behaviors, Vol. 15, pp. 95-103, 1990 0306-4603/90 $3.00 + .

OO
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Copyright D 1990 Pergamon Press plc

BRIEF REPORT

HEAVY DRINKING AND ITS CORRELATES IN YOUNG MEN

ARTHUR I. ALTERMAN
VA Medical Center and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia

JULIA G. HALL
Drexel University, Philadelphia

JAMES J. PURTILL, JOHN S. SEARLES, JOHN M. HOLAHAN,

A. THOMAS McLELLAN
VA Medical Center and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia

Abstract - This study examined the drinking behavior of a sample of 98 college men and the
relationship to drinking of a variety of subject variables. The subjects reported drinking an average
of nearly eight days a month, about five drinks each time, and were intoxicated more than three times
monthly. Nearly half reported having experienced two or more drinking-related adverse conse-
quences within the past year and over a third were intoxicated four or more times monthly. Forty
percent of the subjects could be described as problem drinkers. Illicit drug use and the disinhibition
factor of the sensation seeking scale were the most consistent correlates of drinking behavior and its
adverse consequences, although belonging to a fraternity, consuming alcohol/drugs before age 15,
the Macandrew Alcoholism Scale score, and a family member having received alcoholism treatment
were also found to be consistently associated with drinking in the subjects. Sociodemographic
characteristics, physical health, mental health treatment, childhood behavior problems, adolescent
antisocial behavior, and familial alcoholism were by and large not found to be related to drinking
behavior. A stepwise multiple regression analysis revealed that five variables accounted for 5 1% of
the total variance in drinking behavior. The significant predictors included a heavy drug use factor,
a smoking factor, fraternity membership, drug/alcohol use before age 15, and having a family
member who had received alcoholism treatment. Thus, four of the five significant predictor variables
were reflective of drug use in the subject or his family. The findings underline the need for further
prospective longitudinal research to understand the origins of problem drinking and its relationship
to alcoholism.

A number of investigators have described heavy drinking in young men. Midanik (1983) has
observed that the highest proportion of alcohol problems are concentrated in this population.
Engs (1977), defining heavy drinking as five or more drinks more than once a week, found
that 20% of male college students were heavy drinkers. Humphrey, Stephens, and Allen
(1983) found white male college students to be intoxicated an average of 2.3 times a month.
Wechsler and Rohman (1981) reported that eight percent of the college men they studied
consumed four or more drinks per sitting at least once a week and drank to intoxication at
least weekly. Hilton (1987) reported that 12% of men aged 18-29 got drunk at least once a
week. Donovan, Jessor, and Jessor (1983) reported findings on two groups of young men.
Defining “problem drinking” as having been intoxicated six or more times in the past year
or having experienced negative consequences of drinking in at least three of six life areas,
two or more times in the past year, they found that 26 of 87 (30%) college freshmen were
‘ ‘problem drinkers. ’ ’ The second group consisted of men aged 23-25 who had previously

This research was supported by the Medical Research Service of the Veterans Administration and by NIDA
Research Center Grant DA05186.
Requests for reprints should be sent to Arthur I. Alterman, Ph.D., VA Medical Center, University and
Woodland Aves., Philadelphia, PA 19104.

95
96 ARTHUR I. ALTERMAN et al

been studied 7 to 10 years earlier when they were in the seventh to ninth grades. Fifty-four of
172, or 31%, of these men were determined to be problem drinkers, defined as either being
intoxicated six or more times in the past six months or having experienced three or more of
nine negative consequences of drinking in the past six months. Alterman, Bridges, and Tarter
(1986) adopted a similar definition of problem drinking in a study of male college freshmen
and sophomores; that is, either intoxication two or more times monthly or having
experienced two or more negative consequences of alcohol use. Using these criteria, they
found that 42% of their sample of 34 subjects were problem drinkers.
Given these findings, recent investigators have sought to identify the background factors
which are most clearly related to heavy drinking in the young adult population. A small set
of variables has thus far been implicated as predictors of young adult heavy drinking. A
number of studies have found that early use of illicit drugs and other deviant behavior were
significant predictors of heavy drinking (Donovan et al., 1983; Jessor, 1987; Jessor & Jessor.
1975: Wechsler & McFadden, 1979; Wechsler & Rohman, 1981). Alterman et al. (1986)
found adolescent antisocial behavior and sensation seeking to be predictive of heavy drinking
in college men. There is some question whether familial alcoholism predicts heavy drinking
in this age group. Wechsler and McFadden (1979) reported that heavy drinkers were twice
as likely as abstainers to have fathers who were heavy or problem drinkers, although a
significant correlation was not obtained between amount of drinking and parental drinking
patterns (Wechsler & Rohman, 1981). However, Alterman et al. (1986) failed to find
differences between the sons of alcoholic and nonalcoholic fathers in either the frequency of
drinking or intoxication or in the number of negative consequences of drinking. In a recent
large scale study of 21- 25-year-old men, Schuckit and Sweeney (1987) found no differences
in alcohol intake between those with and without familial risk for alcoholism, but did find
more negative consequences of drinking and drug use in a small group of individuals having
both first and second degree alcoholic relatives. Finally, there is some indication that
negative mood states and psychopathology may be associated with heavy alcohol use in this
age group. For example, Mellinger and his colleagues (Mellinger, Balter, Manheimer. Cisin,
& Parry, 1978) found drinking to be heavy in a subgroup of highly distressed young adult
men, but the evidence for an association between psychological status and heavy drinking in
this population is still relatively weak.
The findings on heavy drinking described above are from large-scale survey studies which
obtained only limited information on drinking behavior. Given the widely reported finding
of heavy drinking in young adult males as well as the few and disparate background factors
that have been shown to be predictive of young adult heavy drinking, we undertook the
present study to examine the drinking behavior of a sample of college males in greater detail,
and to examine a range of subject variables that could potentially be related to this drinking.

METHOD

Subjects
The research subjects were 98 male college students between the ages of 17 to 22 attending
a private university in a metropolitan area. As shown in Table 1, the subjects were primarily
white (92%) and they tended to be middle class; 56% were Catholic. They averaged 19
years of age, were largely unmarried, and had completed nearly 13 years of education. Based
on the conceptual and historical importance of familial drinking as a predictor of alcoholism,
we attempted to select subjects with varying levels of familial involvement with alcohol.
Thus, 28 (29%) had a father whom they reported as having at least one serious drinking
related problem, for example, laid off or fired from work, separated or divorced, two or more
drunk driving arrests (see Alterman et al., 1986); 32 (33%) had either a sibling or second
 Heavy drinking and its correlates 91

Table 1. Sociodemographics characteristic of study sample

Variables Mean SD N %

Sex (Male) - - 98 100

Age 19.02 1.13 98
Race (Caucasian) - 90 92
Years education 12.67 1.09 98
Catholic religion - _ 55 56
Raised by both parents - 77 79
Social class of father 3.30” 1.59 -
Working - 43 44
Married - 2 2
Fraternity member - 26 27
Resides on campus - 71 72

“Range is l-7; 3 = administrative personnel, etc; 4 = clerical and sales.

degree relative with a drinking-related problem; and 38 (39%) reported neither alcohol-
related nor serious psychiatric problems in either first or second degree relatives.

General procedure
The majority (80%) of the subjects were freshmen and sophomores who were contacted by
mail or telephone using student registration lists. The upperclassmen included in the study
were contacted via their participation in Introductory Psychology and Humanities courses.
Subjects were individually evaluated in 1986 or 1987 during the middle to latter part of a
semester (excluding holidays) in a one-hour session and were paid $15.00 for their
participation. The assessment procedures employed were virtually identical to those
described previously by Alterman et al. (1986) and are briefly described below.

Test instruments
Background interview. This interview,in combination with the earlier screening question-
naire, was adopted from a questionnaire employed by Schuckit (1982). It inquired about the
subject’s current and past (six months) drinking behavior and adverse consequences of
drinking, for example, blackouts, car accidents, disorderly conduct. Information was also
obtained on sociodemographic characteristics, drug use, self-reported health status, psycho-
logical problems and treatment,and drinking-related as well as other serious psychiatric
problems and treatment in various family members. A section on adolescent antisocial
behavior (ex: playing hookey, fights at school, lying, stealing, running away from home),
taken directly from the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule (Robins, Helzer, Croughan, &
Ratcliff, 1981), was added by the investigators.
MAST-IO. This abbreviated, lo-item version of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test
was developed by Pokomy, Miller, and Kaplan (1972) and is highly correlated with the full
MAST (0.95 for alcoholics; 0.96 for nonalcoholics). As such it may be used as a measure
of the existence and relative severity of alcoholism. A score of six or above is considered to be
indicative of alcoholism.
Childhood History Questionnaire. This 50-item checklist, developed by Tarter and his
associates (Tarter, McBride, Buonpane, & Schneider, 1977), inquires about the presence of
various childhood behavior problems. The total score is the sum of endorsements and is
based on the subject’s retrospective report. Separate studies by Alterman and McLellan
(1986) with male alcoholics and Sher and Alterman (1988) with male college students have
derived four primary factors consisting of hyperactivity/impulsivity, attentional/social
98 ARTHUR I. ALTERMAN et al.

Table 2. Alcohol-related behaviors and adverse consequences

Variables Mean SD N c/c

Drinking behavior

Days drinking/month 7.82 5.42 97 _

Average No. drinks/day 5.22 2.99 97
Days intoxicated/month 3.36 3.23 97
four or more times monthly - 36 37
Quantity/frequency index 0.77 0.67 97
No. adverse consequences 1.53 1.31 98 _
two or more consequences _ _ 48 49

Specific consequences
Missed time school/job 40 41
Age first happened 17.85 0.83 40
Binged for 2 or more days 23 23
Age first happened 17.26 1.48 23 _
Had shakes _ 21 21
Age first happened 17.33 1.24 21 -
Blackouts 52 53
Age first happened 17.67 1.23 52 -

Other ale. rel. behaviors

Age first drink 14.35 2.56 96 -
Age > I time intoxicated 16.68 1.66 78 -
Age first hangover 16.57 I .66 81 -
Mast- 10 score 0.72 1.52 98 -
Mast-10 score > 5 - _ 2 2
MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale 21.42 3.43 98 -
Felt should stop drinking 3 3
Attended AA meeting _ - 1 1
Received alcoholism TX - I 1
Group TX for alcoholism - 3 3
Felt alcohol harmed health - _ 2 2

problems, antisocial behavior, and learning problems.

Sensation Seeking Scale. This 40-item, self-report scale consists of four IO-item
factors - thrill and adventure seeking, experience seeking, disinhibition, and boredom
susceptibility. The total score is based on the sum of the four factors. The Sensation Seeking
Scale has been found to be associated with alcohol use and heavy drug use, although not
alcoholism, per se (Alterman et al., 1986; Zuckerman, 1974, 1978).
MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale. This 49-item, MMPI-derived scale has been shown to
discriminate alcohol and other drug abusers from the general population and has even been
found to predict future substance abuse. Responses of individuals are stable over time and
scores are not related to years of alcohol abuse. The instrument has minimal face validity,
as none of its items are related directly to alcohol or drug use, and is therefore thought to
reflect an underlying characterological type susceptible to alcohol or substance misuse
(Jacobson, 1983).

RESULTS

Drinking behavior and its adverse consequences

As shown in Table 2, a substantial amount of drinking, intoxication, and adverse
consequences of drinking were reported by the sample of young men. The group as a whole
 Heavy drinking and its correlates 99

Table 3. Significant correlates of drinking

Days Days Amount No. of

Variables drink intox drink QF conseqs.

Sociodemographic
Social class (Father) - -0.20* - -0.20 -
College class - - - - 0.24
Frat. member 0.30** - - 0.29 0.23

Personality
MacAndrew 0.34 0.20 - 0.20 -
Sensation seeking
Experience seeking 0.22 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.36
Disinhibition 0.43 0.43 0.40 0.47 0.39
Sensat seek Total 0.25 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.36

Adol. antisocial behav.

Hookey - - - - 0.38
Runaway - _ 0.28 - -
Damage - - - 0.20
Drug/alcohol < age 15 0.25 0.35 0.23 0.31 0.32
Drugs
Cigarette use 0.23 0.27 - 0.20 0.31
Amphetamine use 0.37 0.44 0.33 0.42 0.42
Cocaine use 0.47 0.51 0.34 0.51 0.37
Marijuana use 0.40 0.47 0.43 0.45 0.52
Hallucinogen use 0.24 0.36 0.35 0.38 -
Barbiturate use 0.30 0.23 - - 0.31
Family member
Had AA/ale. TX - 0.26 - - 0.25
Psycho1 TX - _ - _ 0.25

*r > ,194 = p < .05.

**r > .253 = p < .Ol.

averaged nearly eight days drinking per month with an average of more than five drinks on
a typical drinking day. It averaged more than three intoxications monthly and reported
one-and-a-half adverse consequences of drinking within the past year. Thirty-seven percent
of the subjects reported that they became intoxicated at least four times a month and 49%
reported having recently experienced two or more adverse consequences of drinking within
the past year. The most commonly reported adverse consequences were: blackouts- 53%;
missed time from school or work due to drinking- 41%; binges of two or more days- 23%;
and the shakes- 21%. Indeed, 40% of the subjects (39 of 98) could be categorized as
problem drinkers based on a more conservative definition than any of those described above,
namely, intoxication two or more times per month and having suffered at least two adverse
consequences of drinking within the past year. Nevertheless, despite the evidence of heavy
drinking and its adverse consequences in a substantial proportion of the subjects, very few
of these young men considered their drinking to be problematic, as reflected by the fact that
very few felt that they should stop drinking or had sought treatment for their drinking-related
problems.
Correlates of drinking
Those variables significantly correlated with the five dependent measures: (a) frequency of
drinking; (b) frequency of intoxication; (c) the number of drinks consumed per typical
100 ARTHUR I. ALTERMAN et al.

Table 4. Correlations between independent variables in regression analysis

Drug Smoking Fraternity MacAndrew Dmg/alc Relative

factor factor member ale. score < 15 ale. TX

SS factor 0.31 0.34 0.07 0.20 0.12 0.17

Drug factor _ 0.00 0.01 0.29 0.24 0.20
Smoking factor - 0.10 0.16 0.27 0.17
Fraternity member - - 0.06 0.11 -0.17
MacAndrew ale. score - _ _ -0.01 0.08
Drugialc. < 15 - _ 0.28
Relative ale. TX _ - _

*r 1 .I94 = p < .05.

**r > .253 = p < .Ol.

drinking day; (d) absolute ounces of alcohol consumed daily; and (e) the number of drinking
related adverse consequences experienced in the past year, are shown in Table 3. This
indicates that drinking behavior was most highly and consistently correlated with the use of
illicit drugs,illustrated by correlations ranging from 0.40 to 0.52 with marijuana use or 0.34
to 0.5 1 with cocaine use. The Disinhibition and Experience Seeking factors of the Sensation
Seeking scale were also found to be consistently correlated with the five measures of drinking
behavior, with correlations for Disinhibition ranging in magnitude from 0.39 to 0.47. Other
variables, such as being a fraternity member, the MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale score,
drug/alcohol use before age 15, and a history of alcoholism treatment in a family member,
were also found to be significantly correlated with at least several of the measures of drinking
behavior. The subjects’ sociodemographic characteristics, physical health, mental health
treatment, childhood problem behaviors, adolescent antisocial behavior,and familial alco-
holism, per se, were by and large not found to be related to their drinking behavior.

Data reduction
To simplify presentation of the results, separate principal components factor analyses with
varimax rotation were completed for: (a) the five measures of drinking behavior; (b) the four
sensation seeking factors; and (c) six measures of drug use - tobacco, marijuana, cocaine,
amphetamines, barbiturates, and hallucinogens.
The analysis of the measures of drinking behavior yielded one primary factor (eigen-
value = 3.34), accounting for 67% of the variance. All of the measures loaded substan-
tially (>.70) on this factor, with the alcohol quantity/frequency index loading most heavily
(0.94). The factor analysis of the four sensation seeking measures also yielded one primary
factor (eigenvalue = 2.03), accounting for 51% of the total variance. All of the measures of
sensation seeking loaded substantially (>.62) on this factor, with disinhibition (0.78) and
experience seeking (0.77) loading most heavily. The factor analysis of the six illicit drugs of
use yielded two factors (eigenvalues = 2.65 and 1 .Ol , respectively), accounting for 61%
of the total variance. All of the drugs other than tobacco loaded substantially (> .54) on the
first factor, with the highest loadings being found for cocaine (0.89)and amphetamine (0.84)
use. Tobacco use was the greatest contributor to the second factor (loading = 0.82), with
marijuana use also loading significantly (0.40). Thus,the first factor mainly reflected heav)l
drug use, and smoking the second factor.

Regression analysis
A stepwise multiple regression analysis with forward selection was performed to
determine the extent to which various subject variables contributed to the observed patterns
 Heavy drinking and its correlates 101

Table 5. Multiple regression analysis results predicting

drinking behavior

Cumulative
Independent variables explained variance Beta weights

Dtug factor 0.23 0.44

Smoking factor 0.43 0.38
Fraternity member 0.49 0.56
Drug/alcohol < age 15 0.50 0.20
Relative had alcohol TX 0.51 0.18
Sensation seeking factor ns
MacAndrew ale. score ns -

of drinking. The weighted factor score of drinking behavior was used as the dependent
variable. Three weighted factor scores-the sensation seeking factor, and the heavy drug use
and “smoking” factors - and four other variables shown to be consistently correlated with
drinking behavior - fraternity membership, MaeAndrew Alcoholism Scale score, drug/
alcohol use before age 15, and a family member having received alcoholism treatment -
were entered as the independent variables. The intercorrelations between these seven
independent variables are presented in Table 4. These reveal some of the correlations to be
moderate (r = 0.30) and the majority to be quite low, thus indicating that multicollinearity
among the independent variables was not present.
The results of the multiple regression analysis are shown in Table 5. As can be seen, five
variables - the drug and tobacco use factors, fraternity membership, drug/alcohol use
before age 15, and having a family member who received AA/alcoholism treatment - were
found to account for 5 1% of the total variance. Interestingly, the characteristics measured by
the MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale and the sensation seeking factor did not contribute unique
variance to the prediction of drinking and appear to be accounted for by the other
behavioral/familial variables.

DISCUSSION

The findings of the study attest to the surprisingly heavy and serious drinking behavior of
a substantial proportion of the college aged men studied. The fact that 40% of the subjects
could be characterized as problem drinkers - defined as being intoxicated two or more
times monthly and suffering at least two adverse consequences of heavy drinking -
provides further indication of the extent of heavy drinking in the subjects. Previous
investigators had employed more liberal definitions of problem drinking on the assumption
that these were more suitable for the relatively young populations under study. However,
when we applied such a definition to our current sample, that is, intoxication more than once
monthly or two or more adverse consequences of drinking, 74% of the subjects were
categorized as problem drinkers. The more conservative definition of problem drinking just
described is more consistent with current conceptualizations of alcoholism and would appear
to be more appropriate in the current context.
Although it is possible that the results are specific to the particular sample studied, the
frequency and extensiveness of drinking in the young men studied are in themselves worthy
of attention and consideration. Although the majority of the heavy drinkers revealed in the
study cannot be considered to be alcoholic (only 2 of 98 had MAST scores greater than 5),
and it is perhaps probable that many of them will not become alcoholic (Donovan et al.,
1983; Fillmore, 1975), heavy drinking may still have serious consequences for these
102 ARTHUR I. ALTERMAN et al

individuals. The large number of drinking-related consequences reported by the subjects,

such as blackouts, shakes, missing time on the job or school, in themselves attest to both
negative physical and social consequences of drinking in these young men. Cowan and his
colleagues (Cowan, Massey, & Greenfield, 1985) have shown that heavy drinking
individuals in this age group can be discriminated from nonheavy drinkers on the basis of a
multivariate analysis of blood chemistry values. This implies that certain physiological
indicators may be sensitive to heavy drinking even in young men. It may be speculated that
these deviations are indicative of future medical problems. Along similar lines, Collins
(personal communication) has found heavy drinking to be associated with both psychiatric
and medical visits to a university student health service.
A number of correlates of drinking were revealed. Use of other drugs such as marijuana
or cocaine correlated more significantly and consistently with drinking behavior than any
other variables. These findings are consistent with those reported previously by a number of
other investigators (Donovan et al., 1983; Jessor, 1987; Jessor & Jessor, 1975; Wechsler &
McFadden, 1979; Wechsler & Rohman, 1981) and may be interpreted in terms of Jessor’s
(1987) problem behavior theory which considers youthful heavy drinking, along with other
deviant behaviors such as early sex or drug use, to be responses to stressful life transitions
associated with adolescence and young adulthood. The disinhibition and experience seeking
factors of the sensation seeking scale were also found to be consistently associated with
drinking behavior and its adverse consequences. This is consistent with Alterman et al.‘s
(1986) previous finding that the total Sensation Seeking score was a significant predictor of
drinking behavior and its consequences. It is not surprising that significant relationships
obtained with the disinhibition factor, which describes the need to disinhibit behavior in the
social sphere by drinking, partying, and seeking variety in sexual partners. The experience
seeking factor measures a tendency to seek experiences by engaging in an unconventional,
nonconforming style of life (Zuckerman, 1978). Disinhibition and experience seeking appear
to bear at least a nominal resemblance to novelty seeking and low harm avoidance,
personality characteristics which Cloninger (1987) has recently described as being linked to
one form of alcoholism (type 2). It should be noted, however, that our sensation seeking
factor failed to contribute unique variance to the prediction of drinking over and beyond that
of the other predictor variables.
Our data also indicated that drug/alcohol use before age 15 and alcoholism treatment in a
family member were also associated with more drinking. Thus, four of the five variables
found to predict drinking behavior in the regression analysis reflected substance use in the
subject or in his family. It should be noted that the existence of alcoholism in a family
member was not associated with increased drinking in the subject. It may be that familial
alcoholism is in itself not predictive of heavy drinking in the proband, but rather that more
serious familial alcoholism requiring treatment is predictive of heavy drinking. Finally,the
diversity of correlates of heavy drinking found in the study indicate that further prospective
longitudinal research is needed, if we are to understand and place into perspective the heavy
drinking that occurs in young adult men in our society and the relationships between heavy
drinking and alcoholism.

REFERENCES

Alterman, A.I., Bridges, R.K., & Tarter, R.E. (1986). Drinking behavior of high risk college men: Contradictory
preliminary findings. Alcohdism, 10,305-3 10.
Alterman, A.I., & McLellan, A.T. (1986). A factor-analytic study of Tarter’s hyperactivity/MBD questionnaire.
Addicrive Behaviors 7, 41342 1.
Cloninger, C.R. (1987). Neurogenetic adaptive mechanisms in alcoholism. Science. 236, 410-416.
Cowan, R., Massey, L.K., & Greenfield, T.K. (1985). Average, binge and maximum alcohol intake in healthy
 Heavy drinking and its correlates 103

young men: Discriminant function analysis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 46, 467-472.
Donovan, J.E., Jessor, R., & Jessor, L. (1983). Problem drinking in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of
Studies on Alcohol, 44, 109-136.
Engs, R. (1977). Drinking patterns and drinking problems of college students. Journal of&dies on Alcohol, 38,
2144-2156.
Fillmore, K. (1975). Relationships between specific drinking problems in early adulthood and middle age: An
exploratory 20-year follow-up study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 36, 882-907.
Hilton, M.E. (1987). Drinking patterns and drinking problems in 1984: Results from a general population survey.
Alcoholism, 11, 167-175.
Humphrey, J., Stephens, V., & Allen, D. (1983). Race, sex, marihuana use and alcohol intoxication in college
students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 44, 733-738.
Jacobson, G.R. (1983). Detection, assessment, and diagnosis of alcoholism: Current techniques. In M. Galanter
(Ed), Recent developments in alcoholism (Vol. 1, pp. 377-413). New York: Plenum.
Jessor, R. (1987). Problem-behavior theory, psychosocial development, and adolescent problem drinking. British
Journal of Addiction 82, 33 l-342.
Jessor, R., & Jessor, S.L. (1975). Adolescent development and the onset of drinking Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 36, 27-5 1.
Mellinger, G., Balter, M., Manheimer, D., Cisin, I., & Parry, H. (1978). Psychic distress, life crisis, and use of
psychoatherapeutic medications. Archives of General Psychiatry, 35, 1045-1052.
Midanik, L. (1983). Familial alcoholism and problem drinking in a national drinking practice survey. Addictive
Behaviors, 8, 133-141.
Pokomy, A.D., Miller, B.A., & Kaplan, H.B. (1972). The brief MAST: A shortened version of the Michigan
Alcoholism Screening test. American Journal of Ps.whiatry, 129, 342-345.
Robins, L.N., Helzer, J.E., Croughan, N.J., & Ratcliff, K.S. (1981). National Institute of Mental Health
Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Archives of General Psychiatry, 38, 381-389.
Schuckit, M. (1982). A study of young men with alcoholic close relatives. American Journal of Psychiatry, 139,
791-794.
Schuckit, M.A., & Sweeney, S. (1987). Substance use and mental health problems among sons of alcoholics and
controls. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48, 528-534.
Sher, K.J., & Alterman, A.1. (1988). The HWMBD questionnaire: Replication and validation of distinct factors in
a nonclinical sample. Alcoholism, 12, 233-238.
Tarter, R.E., McBride, H., Buonpane, N., & Schneider, D.U. (1977). Differentiation of alcoholics: Childhood
history of minimal brain dysfunction, family history, and drinking history. Archives of General Psychiatry, 34,
761-768.
Wechsler, H., & McFadden, M. Drinking among college students in New England. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
40,969-996.
Wechsler, H., & Rohman, M. (1981). Extensive users of alcohol among college students. Journal of&dies on
Alcohol, 42, 149-155.
Zuckerman, M. (1974). The sensation seeking motive. In B.A. Maher (Ed), Progress in experimental personality
research
(Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press.
Zuckerman, M. (1978). Sensation seeking. In H. London & J. Exner (Eds.), Dimensions ofpersonality. John Wiley
& sons, Inc.