Validation of a Seven-Factor Structure for the Motives for Playing Drinking Games Measure

Abstract

Playing drinking games can be characterized as a high-risk drinking activity because games are typically designed to promote heavy alcohol consumption. While research suggests that young adults are motivated to play drinking games for a variety of reasons (e.g., for thrills/fun, for the competition), the Motives for Playing Drinking Games measure has received limited empirical attention. We examined the psychometric properties of this measure with a confirmation sample of young adults recruited from Amazon's MTurk ( N = 1,809, ages 18-25 years, 47% men; 41% not currently enrolled in college) and a validation sample of college students ( N = 671; ages 18-23 years; 26% men). Contrary to the 8-factor model obtained by Johnson and Sheets in a study published in 2004, examination of the factor structure with our confirmation sample yielded a revised 7-factor model that was invariant across race/ethnicity and college student status. This model was also validated with the college student sample. In the confirmation sample, enhancement/thrills and sexual pursuit motives for playing drinking games were positively associated with gaming frequency/consumption and negative gaming consequences. Furthermore, conformity motives for playing drinking games were positively associated with negative gaming consequences, while competition motives were positively associated with gaming frequency. These findings have significant implications for research and prevention/intervention efforts.

Keywords: MTurk; alcohol use; drinking games; drinking motives.

Figure 1

We conducted two separate structural equation models, one for the confirmation sample (MTurk; includes both college attending and non–college attending young adults) and another for the validation sample (college students only). Presented in bold are the standardized parameter estimates from the confirmation sample; the validation sample estimates are in italics. In the validation study, we did not measure negative gaming consequences. To reduce the risk of Type I error and for ease of presentation, only paths that are statistically significant at p < .001 are presented.