INTRODUCTION
This paper examines the use of an idea referred to as expectancy as a predictor
of teen alcohol use. Expectancies are concepts that a society reinforces which
go on to influence a person's behavior. Current clinical and field studies show
that alcohol expectancies are reasonably accurate tools in estimating future
drinking patterns. This paper sets out to determine the practical applications
of this knowledge in the real classroom.
HISTORY
Prior to the early 1960s, virtually no clinical studies were available on the
topic of teen drinking, as literature mostly focused on negative social and
moral implications of the activity (Maddox and McCall, 1964). Contrary to
somewhat popular notion, however, adolescent drinking is not unique on to the
last few decades. In fact, the best indicators show that "drinking among
youth has been a longstanding phenomenon" that has shown no significant
change over the course of the last 120 years (Barnes, 1982). In the sixties,
the issue grew in prominence probably due to the rise of the counterculture and
an increase in teen drinking and driving accidents. A number of pioneering
social scientists set out to determine basic information about the commonalty
and frequency of alcohol use in this age group. Though specific data varied
from study to study due to methodology and demographics, a striking picture
emerged that "alcohol use is very prevalent among teenagers and young
adults." In fact, Barnes (1982) co
n
Once research findings established the basic foundations, further questions
soon arose on the psychological reasons behind the increase in consumption.
Though the answers are still not definitive by any means, a few commonly
accepted theories arose. Teens almost consistently report one of three reasons
for drinking: partying, self-expression, and anxiety (Maddox and McCall, 1964).
None of this information, however, is of particular alarm. Regardless of the
reason, most adolescent drinkers consume only occasionally and generally
responsibly (Barnes, 1982; Finn, 1979). In fact, a few authors contend that
teenage drinking can be a fairly normal step in the process of identity
development (Finn, 1979). "Drinking," claims Maddox and McCall
(1964), "is important for validating their self-conceptions as adults or
their claims to adult status." A great deal of controversy exists on whether
time spent with peers in reckless activities such as drinking is a positive
aspect of the socialization process as well.
E
PROBLEM DRINKING
In the late 1970s and into the 1980s researchers begun to realize that they had
not designed their studies to examine this much more destructive phenomenon of
problem drinking. Differing definitions of problem drinking exist, but
virtually all contemporary authors agree that it involves drinking often, and
to the point of extreme intoxication. A very complex web of answers began to
unfold which included, peer pressure, parental permissiveness, boredom,
parental substance abuse and emotional problems (Finn, 1979). Further, it
became clear that psychological perceptions of drinking influenced these
adolescents' behaviors as much as the physical effects of alcohol (Christiansen
et al., 1989).
EXPECTANCIES
Researchers began a continuing effort piece together a single explanation for
problem drinking. Given the vast set of variables involved, this goal proved to
be a formidable task. They shifted focus to the emerging theory of expectancies
as a method of prediction. Goldman et al. (1987) defined alcohol expectancy as
referring,
to the anticipation of a systematic relationship between events or objects in
some upcoming situation. The relationship is understood to be of an if-then
variety: If a certain event or object is registered then a certain event is
expected to followÉ
Expectation can be inferred to have causal status in that an individual with
his/her own actions, may produce a certain consequence upon noting that an if
condition is fulfilled.
More simply stated, drinkers learn certain behavior about drinking from their
society. When exposed to alcohol, or alcohol-related cues, they accept and act
upon these understandings. Aas (1995) believes, "children learn what to
expect of alcohol and those expectations are reinforced throughout our
societies." These expectancies develop early in life, perhaps as early as
the fourth grade (Miller et al., 1990).
A number of surveys can detect expectancies. The one most commonly used for
adolescents is the Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire- Adolescent Form, (AEQ-A).
Other significant surveys include both the Alcohol Effects Scale (AES), and the
Effects of Drinking Alcohol (EDA). These questionnaires involve extensive
self-reporting that target expectancy in normal populations of adolescents (Aas
et al., 1995). The results of these surveys can detect both the transition from
non-drinker to drinker and problem drinking when analyzed using two detection
constructs, or models.
Baker (1987) outlines the two basic constructs that psychologists know as the
Conditioned Withdrawal Model (CWM), and the Conditioned Appetitive-Motivational
Model (CAMM). The CWM can detect problem drinking based on the notion that
certain expectancies are conditioned responses to avoid or escape signs of
withdrawal (Baker et al., 1987). It uses craving and negative affect as
indicators of an intention to drink. Users who fit into the CWM model often
perceive alcohol as an "antidepressant and a euphoriant (Johnson and
Fromme, 1994)." The CAMM, on the other hand, uses positive cues as its
main indicator. It "proposes that positive mood states characterize the
pursuit of alcohol (Johnson and Fromme, 1994)." This model associates
exposure to alcohol or alcohol cues is with positive outcomes, eliciting a
response to drink. "Positive alcohol outcome experiences are reliably
associated with drinking practices, with heavy drinkers holding stronger
expectancies than light drinkers (Johnson and Fromme, 1994).
"
However, several problems have developed in the process of using these
constructs as predictive models both in clinical studies and in individual
cases. A person develops expectancies in childhood and early adolescence, but
they may not influence actual drinking until much later (Christiansen, et al.,
1989). In other words, teenagers may have developed a set of expectancies long
before, but having never been directly exposed to alcohol or alcohol-cues, they
have yet to act upon them. Those unfamiliar with expectancies can think of this
effect as a time bomb that the socialization process can trigger any given
time. Studies have overcome this barrier by setting up a period between taking
the batteries of expectancy surveys and self-reporting studies on actual use.
Because of the 'time bomb' effect and study limitations, such long-term
tracking can be difficult as an immediate predictor of alcohol use in the
individual. Additionally, it has been difficult to find a point at which to
discriminate the resp
o
CURRENT RESEARCH
Current research on expectancies is focusing on combining personal and social
statistics with current knowledge on the topic as a better indicator. For both
expectancy models, high-risk youngsters clearly hold higher than average
expectancies (Christiansen et al., 1989.) A number of studies in recent years
have focused on differentially equating individual factors and alcohol
expectancies to come up with a better model. In essence, these studies are
focusing on integrating expectancy theory into the classic model of
risk-detection. Initial studies on certain fronts have shown to provide
marginally better constructs at predicting both frequency and quantity of
alcohol use. However, "a major controversy exists in the literature
concerning whether personal and social expectancies predict different types of
outcomes (Reese, 1994)."
DISCUSSION
Though the literature and research to date have been very effective at showing
the accuracy of adolescent alcohol expectancies, I feel it is quite inadequate
as to its practical use in the classroom. A few authors make vague and general
references to practical utility, but never discuss the topic. I believe, based
on the research findings, however, that the potential for incorporating
expectancy theory into prediction method in public school is still great. In no
way, would it replace the classic model of risk detection, but would serve as a
highly effective tool to enhance it. Furthermore, as new findings accumulate we
may determine that classic risk detection and expectancies are not so different
in their conclusions.
If schools administered expectancy surveys over the span of an adolescent's
academic career, then a much clearer picture of potential problem drinking
would develop. Tracking over a long period would overcome the methodological
problems encountered in some of the clinical research. If schools track
expectancies, known drinkers who may be consuming responsibly and in moderation
would be less likely to be mislabeled as problem drinkers. Similarly, the
system could more clearly identify the child with the resources to effectively
cover up his drinking problems. Since research has shown that most expectancies
develop even before adolescence begins, perhaps if the child begins taking
these surveys early in development, effective intervention into their
perceptions of alcohol might be possible.
A number of problems could also arise if schools were to adopt this theory. For
example, surveys or constructs provide no definite answers. If the educational
system relies to heavily on this theory alone, it dooms the idea to be no
better than traditional detection methods. Additionally, the educational system
would have to address the issue of confidentiality. Clinical research relies on
a high degree of anonymity to elicit accurate responses (Christiansen, 1989).
If children complete expectancy surveys, a guarantee does not exist that they
will respond honestly. This effect, however, is likely minimal for two reasons.
First, the student is less apt to lie, as expectancy surveys deal with
attitudes and perceptions rather then reporting actual drinking behavior.
Second, as with similar issues, counselors should maintain a high level of
confidentially.
The final complication of long term tracking would not be so simple to solve;
few in the educational profession are likely to lack training in expectancy
theory. It would be a costly effort to attempt to train counseling staffs to
understand and interpret survey results within either the CWM or CAMM
constructs, or any new highly specific models that are emerging.
FURTHER STUDY
Further study must begin to explore specifically the practical applications of
expectancies in the educational system such as I discuss. Prior research
studies have certainly laid the groundwork to show that expectancies can
provide a reasonably accurate prediction and detection tool. Now, both the
research and educational communities need to come together to make their use a
reality. Additionally, current research on differentially equating specific
personal and social factors with expectancy constructs must continue; the more
accurate and precise that construct models become, the easier it becomes to use
them. Finally, scientists must work to better understand "how children's
backgrounds, through the socialization process, can influence their drinking
patterns (Aas et al., 1995)." In other words, applying expectancy to the
real world beckons a better understand of what events in an adolescent's socialization
process are likely to set off the "time bomb" expectancies.
CONCLUSIONS
No research has been conducted on the practical applications of what we know
about alcohol expectancies. This observation neither nor denies my thesis, but
instead merits further investigation. On the basis of on the accumulated
knowledge of 30 years of classic model prediction and nearly a decade devoted
to expectancy research, I believe that expectancy models do have an appropriate
place in today's school systems. Their use may be problematic but the long term
benefits of saving the problem drinking adolescents far outweigh the potential
negative consequences. More extensive professional investigation is definitely
warranted.