Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2003 May;64(3):331-41.
doi: 10.15288/jsa.2003.64.331.

Descriptive and injunctive norms in college drinking: a meta-analytic integration

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Descriptive and injunctive norms in college drinking: a meta-analytic integration

Brian Borsari et al. J Stud Alcohol. 2003 May.

Abstract

Objective: Many college students overestimate both the drinking behaviors (descriptive norms) and the approval of drinking (injunctive norms) of their peers. As a result, consistent self-other discrepancies (SODs) have been observed, in which self-perceptions of drinking behaviors and approval of drinking usually are lower than comparable judgments of others. These SODs form the foundation of the currently popular "social norms approach" to alcohol abuse prevention, which conveys to students the actual campus norms regarding drinking behaviors and approval of alcohol use. However, little attention has been paid to the factors that can influence the magnitude of SODs. This research was conducted to address these issues.

Method: This meta-analytic integration of 23 studies evaluated the influence of five predictors of SODs: norm type (injunctive or descriptive), gender, reference group, question specificity and campus size. These studies rendered 102 separate tests of SODs in descriptive and injunctive forms, representing the responses of 53,825 participants.

Results: All five predictors were significantly related to self-other differences in the perception of norms. Greater SODs were evident for injunctive norms, estimates by women, distal reference groups and nonspecific questions, as well as on smaller campuses.

Conclusions: More systematic attention should be given to how norms are assessed. In particular, SODs can be maximized or minimized, depending on the specificity of the behaviors/attitudes evaluated and the reference groups chosen for comparison.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Adams C, Nagoshi CT. Changes over one semester in drinking game playing and alcohol use and problems in a college sample. Subst Abuse. 1999;20:97–106. - PubMed
    1. Agostinelli G, Brown JM, Miller WR. Effects of normative feedback on consumption among heavy drinking college students. J Drug Ed. 1995;25:31–40. - PubMed
    1. Agostinelli G, Floyd TE, Grube JW, Woodall G, Miller JH. Alcohol problem recognition as a function of own and others’ perceived drinking. Addict Behav. in press. - PubMed
    1. Alva SA. Self-reported alcohol use of college fraternity and sorority members. J Coll St Dev. 1998;39:3–10.
    1. Baer JS. Effects of college residence on perceived norms for alcohol consumption: An examination of the first year in college. Psychol Addict Behav. 1994;8:43–50.

Publication types