FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1736373188> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1736373188 endingPage "891" @default.
• W1736373188 startingPage "890" @default.
• W1736373188 abstract "The commentaries on my paper 1 are thought-provoking. Simons-Morton & Kuntsche 2 state that the paper provides new perspectives on an old ‘truth’, while Perkins 3 seems to suggest that it adds nothing at all. Borsari and Carey 4 think that I raise some interesting questions, but reject my conclusion that adolescents' overestimation of peer substance use (SU) has been exaggerated. Conversely, Hannigan & Delaney-Black 5 argue that this conclusion is understated because research on biological markers of SU indicates that young people's reports about their peers' SU are more reliable than their self-reports. Borsari & Carey state that ‘notably absent from this review is the recognition that international studies suggest that the phenomenon of exaggerated substance use norms is highly generalizable’ (p. 886). However, referring to research from 11 different countries, I point out that norm misperception in relation to alcohol use seems to be ‘widespread across nations and drinking cultures’ (p. 878). It may be added that almost all studies in the field are confined to young people, but a Canadian study 6 concluded that adults also overestimate others' drinking. The existence of the phenomenon thus appears to be well documented, but its prevalence and magnitude are probably far smaller than the research literature indicates. To ensure self–other comparability, I suggested that data on own and perceived peer SU could be collected in a real-time group setting using ‘the other survey participants’ as a comparison target. Borsari & Carey's response is that LaBrie et al. 7 have already applied this approach. The study in question evaluated a group-specific normative feedback intervention and data on SU were indeed collected in a group context. However, ‘the typical student’ was the only target, and the respondents' perception of the other group members' SU was thus not assessed. To my knowledge, the suggested group-based data collection strategy has not been employed in any study. Perkins also describes some studies incorrectly. He refers to two studies based on objective measures [i.e. blood alcohol concentration (BAC)] rather than self-reports, and claims that both showed that students typically exaggerate peer drinking. However, one of these studies 8 indicated that the majority (62%) believed that other students had about the same or lower BAC than themselves and that the modal tendency was to hold ‘accurate’ beliefs about the issue. The other study 9 included no measures on the perception of peers' BAC. There are several reasons why the research literature is likely to be biased in favour of demonstrating that youth overestimate peer SU, and many of my arguments are equally relevant with respect to studies on (mis)perceived attitudinal norms. While I focused mainly on methodological issues, Simons-Morton & Kuntsche suggest that publication bias also may have been at work. Indeed, when one considers all the weaknesses that characterize this literature, the paucity of critical voices is remarkable. The assumption that perceived SU norms influence adolescents' drinking and drug use (cf. 2-4) is worth some final comments. Few well-conducted studies have addressed the issue, but due to its longitudinal design, high response rate and the inclusion of several important confounders in the analyses, the study by Juvonen et al. 10 stands out. It revealed that adolescents' perceived SU norms did not predict subsequent drinking and drug use independently. High-quality studies demonstrating the effectiveness of the social norms approach to SU prevention are also lacking 11. Moreover, it should be noted that to the extent that young people exaggerate peer SU, their misbeliefs are mainly about distal social groups 12, 13—which are the least likely to have an influence on behaviour 14. None." @default.
• W1736373188 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1736373188 creator A5069124430 @default.
• W1736373188 date "2012-04-04" @default.
• W1736373188 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W1736373188 title "STANDING STILL OR MOVING FORWARD? A RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTARIES" @default.
• W1736373188 cites W1597091882 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W1670198326 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W1903875820 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W1958535772 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2003037646 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2038152705 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2043262259 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2063945299 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2107097705 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2107614200 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2130474878 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2157116383 @default.
• W1736373188 cites W2166809474 @default.
• W1736373188 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03858.x" @default.
• W1736373188 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22471573" @default.
• W1736373188 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W1736373188 type Work @default.
• W1736373188 sameAs 1736373188 @default.
• W1736373188 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1736373188 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1736373188 hasAuthorship W1736373188A5069124430 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C114614502 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C136815107 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C138496976 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C191795146 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C197947376 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C50335755 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C111472728 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C114614502 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C136815107 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C138496976 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C138885662 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C15744967 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C17744445 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C191795146 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C197947376 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C199539241 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C33923547 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C50335755 @default.
• W1736373188 hasConceptScore W1736373188C77805123 @default.
• W1736373188 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W1736373188 hasLocation W17363731881 @default.
• W1736373188 hasLocation W17363731882 @default.
• W1736373188 hasOpenAccess W1736373188 @default.
• W1736373188 hasPrimaryLocation W17363731881 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W1988185375 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2075959928 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2100254726 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2166481065 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2269628346 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2349811140 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W2901825012 @default.
• W1736373188 hasRelatedWork W4313494065 @default.
• W1736373188 hasVolume "107" @default.
• W1736373188 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1736373188 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1736373188 magId "1736373188" @default.
• W1736373188 workType "article" @default.