The Role of Alcohol Consumption in Female Victimization: Findings

Substance Use & Misuse, 00:1–11, 2011
C 2011 Informa Healthcare USA, Inc.
Copyright ISSN: 1082-6084 print / 1532-2491 online
DOI: 10.3109/10826084.2011.606867
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The Role of Alcohol Consumption in Female Victimization: Findings
from a French Representative Sample
Laurent Bègue1 , Claudine Pérez-Diaz2 , Baptiste Subra5 , Emmanuelle Ceaux1 , Philippe
Arvers3 , Véronique Aurélie Bricout4 , Sebastian Roché8 , Joel Swendsen6 and Michel Zorman7
1
Laboratoire Inter-universitaire de Psychologie, Grenoble 2 University, Grenoble, France; 2 CERMES3 (Centre de
Recherche Médecine, Sciences, Santé, Santé Mentale et Société), CNRS UMR8211 Université Paris
Descartes-EHESS-INSERM U988, Paris, France; 3 Army Biomedical Research Institute (IRBA), Marseille, France;
4
Département Recherche Exercice, CHU de Grenoble, Grenoble, France; Médecine du Sport, Laboratoire HP2 INSERM U1042, Grenoble, France; UFR APS, Université J. Fourier, Grenoble, France; 5 Paris-Descartes University,
Paris, France; 6 CNRS Institute of Integrative Neuroscience, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France; 7 LSE
(Laboratory of Educational Sciences), University of Grenoble 2, Grenoble, France; 8 CNRS, Grenoble, France
2001; Murdoch, Pihl, & Ross, 1990; Parker & Rebhun,
1995; Pernanen, 1991; Roizen, 1997; Zhang, Wieczorek,
& Welte, 1997). In the past 25 years, more systematic and
extended research has been undertaken to understand the
correlation and the causal process linking alcohol consumption and aggression. This research was based on
various methodologies such as cross-sectional and longitudinal surveys (e.g., Fals-Stewart, 2003; Fothergill & Ensminger, 2006; White, 1997), historical studies (Graham,
2007), archival studies (Pérez, 2000), diary studies (FalsStewart, 2003), time series (e.g., Elin, 2007), geospatial
analysis (e.g., Gorman, Zhu, & Hiorell, 2005; Lipton &
Gruenwald, 2002), emergency room studies (e.g., Cherpitel, 1997; McDonald, Cherpitel, & De Souza, 2006) and
experimental studies (e.g., Bushman, 1993, 1997; Bushman & Cooper, 1990; Chermack & Giancola, 1997; Chermack & Taylor, 1995; Exum, 2006; Hull & Bond, 1986;
Ito, Miller, & Pollock, 1994; Lipsey, Wilson, Cohen, &
Derzon, 1997; Pedersen, Aviles, & Ito, 2002; Roizen,
1997).
Research has shown that drinking is an important vulnerability factor for victims (Shepherd, Sutherland, &
Newcombe, 2006), and that the intoxication of the victim is a causal or an aggravating factor for aggressive
interactions (Abbey, Mc Auslan, & Ross, 1998; Goldstein, 1985; Virkkunen, 1974). For example, Neff, Holamon, and Schluter (1995) observed that married women
who abstained from alcohol were 64% less likely than
high quantity drinkers to report being beaten, after controlling for other risk factors. Two general approaches
Alcohol is frequently related to interpersonal aggression, but information regarding the role of alcohol consumption by victims of severe aggression is however
lacking. In order to better understand the dynamic of
victimization, we investigated contextual, facilitator,
and psychological impact variables related to victimization in a French sample composed of 1,033 females
aged 18–74 years. The participants were recruited using quota sampling methodology, and responses were
measured using Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewer.
A logistic regression was conducted using a backward
elimination procedure to identify the significant predictors of blows and wounds suffered in the past 24
months. The results indicated that victims, relative to
nonvictims, did binge drink significantly more often,
had a higher aggression trait, and had experienced
more social hardships in the past. The study’s limitations are noted.
Keywords alcohol, binge drinking, aggression, victimization,
assault, aggression trait
INTRODUCTION
For victims or authors of aggression (defined as any behavior directed toward another individual carried out with
the proximate intent to cause harm), alcohol is known today as the psychotropic substance most frequently related
to aggressive and violent behavior (Boles & Miotto, 2003;
Fagan, 1990; Gmel & Rehm, 2003; Graham & West,
This research is a part of the Violence Alcohol Multimethods program funded by the French Ministry of Health (Addictive Practice Office), grant
no. MA 0508.
Address correspondence to Laurent Bègue, Laboratoire Inter-universitaire de Psychologi (LIP), Grenoble 2 University, 1251 Avenue Centrale, BP
47, 38040 Grenoble, Cedex 9, France; E-mail: [email protected]
1
2
L. BÈGUE ET AL.
have been used in research surveys to assess the relationship between alcohol and victimization. The first approach (event-based approach) focuses on aggression that
occurs when one or more individuals are under the influence of alcohol and the specific circumstances surrounding the event. The second focuses on the usual drinking patterns of the victim rather than drinking at the
time of the incident and its correlation to victimization.
Overall, the literature suggests that both drinking during
the event (Pernanen, 1991) and general drinking patterns
(Dawson, 1997; Swanson, 1994; Williams & Singh, 1986)
are associated with the experience of aggression by the
victim.
This first specific study on alcohol-consumptionrelated victimization in France begins by describing the
estimated amount of alcohol consumed by perpetrators
and victims prior to victimization incidents according to
the victim estimation (event-based approach). Later, the
focus is exclusively placed on a specific kind of serious
victimization: physical assault. The relationship of alcohol use to only one disaggregated subconcept of aggression was examined rather than cumulating heterogeneous
forms of aggression in order to reduce measurement error associated with the use of aggregated operationalizations of aggression (Roizen, 1997). The usual drinking
patterns of the victims were analyzed and victims were
compared to nonvictims on various demographic and psychological dimensions. By using data from a general population sample, the likelihood of selection bias that may
arise from criminal justice or experimental sampling was
reduced (Greenfield & Weisner, 1995). Due to the importance of controlling for confounding influences, which
was stressed in examining the relationship between alcohol consumption and aggression (Scott, Schafer, & Greenfield, 1999), the multivariate model used in the analysis
controls for relevant social and demographic variables that
may be associated with both drinking patterns and aggression. Finally, the hypothesis regarding the possible relation between three kinds of selected variables linked to
victimization—contextual, facilitator, and psychological
impact variables—was tested.
CONTEXTUAL VARIABLES RELATED TO
VICTIMIZATION
Social and Demographic Characteristics
Various social and demographic characteristics can be related to victimization because of the lifestyles that are
most often associated with it. For example, victim surveys indicate a lower rate of assaults by strangers for married young women with children. This may easily be interpreted as a consequence of their daily routines, social
companions, leisure activities, and family-centered obligations (Felson, 1998). Compared with individuals who
have been married, individuals who have never married
are 37% more likely to have been the victim of a physical assault (Scott et al., 1999). Official statistics and victimization surveys indicate that victims are disproportionately young (see McMillan, 2001, pp. 4–5, for PubMed
review). Moreover, immigrants and less educated people
are more frequent target of crime because their exposure
to risks is generally higher than the other people (Karmen,
2004). It was therefore hypothesized that being young,
living alone, having no children, a low educational background, and not having French origins and French nationality are factors related to a higher incidence of victimization.
Social Hardship
Social difficulties are important factors involved in victimogenesis. According to the routine activities proposed
by Cohen and Felson (1979), some people are prone to
victimization through their social interactions and living conditions. While the probability of victimization for
those experiencing social adversity being higher (Meadows, 2004), victimization was expected to be higher
among people having experienced involuntary professional inactivity in the past, lacking financial resources,
having experienced difficulties in paying for their rent, or
suffered from loneliness.
FACILITATORS OF VICTIMIZATION
Alcohol Use
Research on naturally occurring aggression indicates
that aggressive incidents involve a transactional process
among participants (Felson & Tedeschi, 1993) and therefore suggests that the “victim” sometimes initiates the incident (Murdoch et al., 1990; Wolfgang, 1958). As underlined by Wells, Graham, and West (2000), alcohol use by
any person involved in the incident may indeed contribute
to the escalation of aggression. For example, if alcohol
consumption results in someone taking more risks, being less effective at problem-solving, or becoming more
emotionally involved in the dispute (see Graham, Wells,
& West, 1997), these effects may influence the escalation process of aggression regardless of the specific role
of the person in the event. Alcohol use also impairs a
person’s ability to recognize and interpret cues from others about their reactions, feelings, or intentions. For example, various studies indicate that the understanding of
others facial expression of emotions is disrupted after alcohol ingestion (Borrill, Rosen, & Summerfield, 1987).
This is consistent with studies showing that alcohol use by
the victim is clearly associated with more severe aggression. In their analysis of a representative sample of Canadian drinkers, reported that people who drink five or more
units of alcohol per sitting at least occasionally were much
more likely to have been assaulted by another drinker than
those who drink the same amount less frequently. Therefore, it is important to measure not only frequency but
also overall volume of drinking as risks factors for aggression, as well as patterns of use in terms of high quantity drinking per occasion. It was therefore hypothesized
that “heavier drinking” (especially higher amounts per occasion) by respondents could be related to experiencing
assault.
ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND VICTIMIZATION
Aggression Trait
The personality characteristics of a victim could be a significant feature of victimization experience because aggressive incidents involve a transactional process among
participants (Felson & Tedeschi, 1993). In a study on
a probability sample of 2,058 participants, Scott et al.
(1999) observed that a very high impulsivity was found
to be associated with physical assault victimization. The
authors suggested that impulsive behavior, on the part
of a potential victim, may be interpreted as a justifiable
provocation by an aggressor. Many domestic or barroom
disputes that lead to fatalities result from victim retaliation (Swatt & He, 2006). If the individual fights back, this
could cause more anger in the abuser and result in more
serious victimization. Taking into account the fact that the
propensity to retaliate is linked to aggression trait, it was
hypothesized that a high level of aggression increases the
chances of victimization.
PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT OF VICTIMIZATION
It is widely acknowledged that violent victimization has
deep psychological consequences (Freedy, Resnick, Kilpatrick, Dansky, & Tidwell, 1994; McMillan, 2001; Norris, Kaniasty, & Thompson, 1997). In the present study,
we investigated anxiety.
Anxiety
As indicated by Janoff-Bulman (1995), victims of rape,
robbery, assault, sexual abuse, and physical abuse have often similar responses to their victimization (see also Harvey & Miller, 2000). They frequently feel helpless, out
of control, depressed, ashamed, anxious, frightened, and
disorganized. It was therefore hypothesized that anxiety
would be higher among assault victims than among nonvictims.
METHOD
Sampling Procedure and Participants
The sample was composed of 1,033 women aged 18–74
years representing people living in the region of Ile de
France (Paris and surrounding cities) and Nord (north of
France). We decided to focus on a sample of women because in serious aggression between heterosexual partners, women are generally more often victimized than
men and more seriously wounded. The participants were
interviewed between June and August 2006 following the
methodology of quota sampling crossing four criteria:
participant’s age, socioeconomic status (SES, based on
participant’s professional category), town’s size, and department. Participants were given flyers in the street for
introducing the survey as a national research on lifestyles
and social behaviour and were invited to participate. Eight
euros were given for participation. Questionnaires were
filled in by participants inside three trucks, each containing four laptops. To reduce interviewer or social desirability bias, the participants responded via Computer-Assisted
Self-Interviewer (CASI). CASI has been shown to in-
3
crease item response rates and also safeguards confidentiality. The length of the participation was approximately
1 hour.
Measures
Victimization. Event-based
analysis:
assaults
characteristics—Participants answered the question:
“Since June 2004 (two years ago), have you personally
been victim of aggressions or acts or violence, including
by people that you knew?” Various questions were then
asked regarding the nature of this specific victimization
(see Results section).
Physical Aggression (Blows and Wounds). When participants answered affirmatively to the general victimization question, they were asked the following question:
“Was this a physical aggression (blows, wounds)?” Subjects who experienced one or two physical aggressions
were coded 1, whereas others were coded 0.
Measure of Contextual Variables. Age was grouped
into three categories: (1) 18–28 years (32.1%), (2) 29–42
years (31.0%), (3) 43–74 years (36.9%). SES of the participant was distributed as follows: (1) employee and operatives (35.1%), (2) intermediary professions (21.4%),
and (3) white collars and business owners (10.9%). The
remaining of the sample was (4) without professional
activity (24.8%) or (5) retired (7.5%). Among participants, 34% had an educational level below baccalaureate1
(coded 1) and the remaining had a baccalaureate or a university degree (coded 2). In terms of marital status, 27.7%
were married (coded 1), 16.6% were living with a partner without being married (coded 2), 13.3% were widowed (coded 3), 1.4% were divorced or separated (coded
4), and 38.6% were single/never married (coded 5). Finally, 43.2% (coded 1) reported that they were in a close
romantic relationship, whereas 30.9% were living alone
(coded 2) and 14.7% (coded 3) lived with their parents or
their parents-in-law. About 52.2% participants had children (coded 1; having no child was coded 0).
Social adversity was measured by the following four
questions. The first question asked was whether they had
ever experienced periods of nonvoluntary professional inactivity for at least 6 months (because of illness or unemployment). Never was coded 0, Yes, once was coded 1, and
Yes, several times was coded 2. The second question asked
was whether they ever had difficulties in paying their rent,
their charges (including electricity and water), or their refund of a mortgage. No was coded 0, Yes, but I was able
to cope with it was coded 1, and Yes, and I wasn’t able to
cope with it was coded 2. The third question asked was
whether they had ever been housed by a close, by an association, in hotels, shelters, because of money problem.
Never was coded 0, Yes, once was coded 1, and Yes, several times was coded 2. The fourth question asked was
whether they had ever experienced loneliness following
events endured by their close relatives (change of country
1
Baccalaureate is a school-leaving examination leading to university
entrance qualification in the French school system.
4
L. BÈGUE ET AL.
or region, fostering, serious conflict, and incarceration).
No was coded 0 and Yes was coded 1.
Measure of Facilitator Variables. Aggression
trait—Participants completed the 10 items of the Physical
Aggression Subscale of the Buss–Perry Aggression
Questionnaire (BPAQ, Buss & Perry, 1992). An example
item is as follows: “If someone hits me, I hit back.”
Questions were coded (1) totally disagree to (5) totally
agree. The scale’s Cronbach’s alpha was .87.
Alcohol consumption patterns. Alcohol consumption
was measured by using the three first questions of the
AUDIT (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test; Saunders, Aasland, Babor, de la Fuente, & Grant, 1993). The
AUDIT was designated for the World Health Organization to screen for hazardous as well as harmful drinking
in various cultural settings. The three first questions of the
AUDIT (designated as AUDIT-C in literature) are considered as valid and reliable indicators of alcohol consumption (see Reinert & Allen, 2002, 2007 for reviews). The
first question was: “How often did you have a drink containing alcohol in the past year?” An iconographic scale
of equivalence between various kinds of drink was provided. Response options were: Never (coded 0); Monthly
or less (coded 1); two to four times a month (coded 2);
two to three times a week (coded 3); and four times a
week or more (coded 4). The second question was: “In
the past year, how many drinks have you had on a typical
day when you were drinking?” Response options were:
zero drinks (coded 0); one to two drinks (coded 1); three
to four drinks (coded 2); five to six drinks (coded 3); seven
to nine drinks (coded 4); or 10 or more drinks (coded 5).
The last question (binge drinking) was: “How often do you
have 6 drinks or more on one occasion?” Response options were: Never (coded 0); less than monthly (coded 1);
monthly (coded 2); weekly (coded 3); or daily or almost
daily (coded 4).
Measure of Psychological Impact Variables.
Anxiety—Anxiety was measured with the StateTrait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). The STAI is a self-report
inventory of 20 items designed to measure increasing
levels of anxiety (Spielberger, 1972). The items include
statement such as “I lack self-confidence.” The respondents were asked to endorse one of four degrees of
agreement ranging from Almost never (1) to Almost
always (4). The scale’s Cronbach’s alpha was .89.
Analytic procedure. The analytic procedure used by
Swahn and Donovan (2005, 2006) was followed. Before
initiating analysis, all of our items were organized into
three loosely defined domains (contextual variables,
facilitator variables, and psychological impact variable).
The primary purpose of these domains was to create
groupings of variables that would facilitate building
an empirically driven model of statistically significant
predictors of assault. The investigation relied on an
empirically based backward elimination strategy to
identify a statistical model in which all predictors were
significantly associated with the outcome. This strategy
was used primarily to reduce the number of variables by
omitting unimportant variables prior to identifying a final
multivariate model. This backward elimination strategy
is useful because there is less risk of failing to find a
relationship where one exists (Menard, 1995), and was
justified by the fact that there was limited information
about the multivariate predictors of victimization selected. The backward elimination modeling strategy was
applied in a two-step process. First, logistic regression
analyses for the outcome measure were performed within
each of the three domains while controlling for age. Professional status was not controlled because preliminary
analysis indicated that it was not significantly related to
the dependant variable. These analyses determined which
of the variables within each domain should be included
in the final multivariate model. The purpose of entering
all the variables within each domain simultaneously
was to reduce the number of models computed and to
identify variables not statistically important. All variables
with a p-value (Wald chi-square) greater than .15 were
excluded from further analysis. Variables not meeting
the p-value equal to .05 criterion (.15 > p > .05) were
retained because use of the .05 criterion may not identify
all variables, which may turn out to be important in the
multivariate model. Second, all variables from all three
domains that met the criterion in Step 1 were entered
simultaneously in a multivariate model while controlling
for age. All variables with a p-value greater that .05 were
removed from the model, one at a time, until the model
contained only significant variables. Finally, the interaction analyses were computed to determine whether the
significant predictor variables identified in the final model
were moderated by age. The purpose of the interaction
analyses was to assess whether or not the impact of the
predictors was consistent across age subgroups.
RESULTS
Event-based Analysis
Over the last two years, 21.3% of women in the sample had been victims of aggressions. About 10.1% of
them had been aggressed twice during this time. In the
results that follow, percentages between brackets correspond to the answer concerning a possible second victimization. This aggression happened in the main dwelling or
in an annex of it in 36.1% (29.3%), in the street in 31.2%
(36.4%), at work in 9.8% (8.1%), on a public transport
in 6.3% (7.1%), in a parking lot in 2.0% (0%), or elsewhere in 14.6% (19.2%). It was a physical aggression
(blows, wounds) for 44.2% (38.1%), insults for 18.4%
(21.6%), verbal threats for 18.9% (18.6%), verbal or physical threats in order to take money for 9.2% (9.3%), a
fight between several people for 3.4% (2.1%), and sexual aggression for 5.8% (10.3%). Regarding the circumstances of aggression, in 16.7% (15.2%) of the cases, victims were practicing their job when aggression occurred.
Seventeen percent (22.8%) of the victims had been threatened or aggressed with a weapon or a dangerous object
(such as knife, stick, tear-gas bottle, gun). Aggression induced wounds in 33% (30.7%) of cases. An incapacity
of work certificate was necessary in 13.6% (16.1%) of the
ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND VICTIMIZATION
5
cases and a job cessation was necessary in 16.7% (12.5%)
of the cases. This cessation lasted 1 week or less in 54.8%
(31.6%), from 1 week to 1 month in 23.8% (36.8%), or
more than 1 month in 21.4% (31.6%). Victims pressed
charges in 39.8% (33.7%) of the cases. The author of the
aggression was known in 65.5% of the cases (66%). It was
someone of the victim’s family in 30.7% (38.5%) of the
cases. When it was someone from the victim’s family, it
was her partner in 31.4% (26%), her father in 5.9% (6%),
her daughter or her son in 5.8% (4%), or someone else in
52% (58%) of the cases.
icant predictors were past financial toughness (odds ratio, OR = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.15–2.07), past loneliness after
experiencing hardship (OR = 2.09; 95% CI: 1.34–3.27),
binge drinking (OR = 1.26; 95% CI: 1.00–1.58), and aggression trait (OR = 1.76; 95% CI: 1.40–2.22). Interaction analysis between these predictors and age indicated
no significant effect. The determination coefficient of the
overall model was 0.129 (Nagelkerke R2; Nagelkerke,
1991).
Presence of Alcohol
This study demonstrated that alcohol use was associated
with the victimization events reported by the participants.
This is consistent with previous studies carried out in other
countries (Pernanen, 1991). Moreover, victims of assault
were more prone than nonvictims to consume excessive
amounts of alcohol in the same occasion (binge drinking). This association was observed after controlling for
contextual variables known to be related to alcohol use
and/or victimization. This result is consistent with studies suggesting that alcohol use increases vulnerability to
aggression. However, it should be acknowledged that this
observation is also consistent with studies showing that alcohol consumption increases after victimization (Miller,
Downs, & Testa, 1993; Stewart, 1996). For example, in a
longitudinal study of 3,000 women, those who were assaulted over the course of the study were more likely to
have abused alcohol at follow-up (Kilpatrick, Acierno, &
Resnick, 1997). Various other studies suggest an increase
of alcohol drinking following trauma exposure (Burnam,
Stein, & Golding, 1988; Kaysen et al., 2006; Kilpatrick
et al., 1997).
Our study also indicated that among alcohol consumption indicators, binge drinking (having six drinks or more
on one occasion) was more reliably related to victimization status than the others alcohol consumption variables,
thus providing confirmation of previous studies showing that alcohol-consumption-related injury risk was more
strongly related to acute exposure than measures of longterm exposure (Vinson, Borges, & Cherpitel, 2003). As a
risk factor associated to victimization, alcohol consumption’s contribution appeared however less important than
the other investigated facilitator, aggression trait. Consistent with a transactional view of aggression (Felson &
Tedeschi, 1993), victim’s personality characteristic was
a significant feature of victimization experience. To our
knowledge, it is the first time that the aggression trait
is shown to be related to victim status. As for alcohol
consumption, the possibility that aggressive propensities
might have developed after victimization cannot be ruled
out. However, given the stability of aggression trait (Laub
& Lauritsen, 1995), the hypothesis of a contribution of
trait aggression to assault is at least plausible. Social hardship is also an important statistical predictor: having suffered from past financial need and past loneliness after
hardship both predict victimization. Such results suggest
that contextual variables are important factors of victimization. As stated in a reference study on victimization of
Victim had drunk alcohol in 6.3% (6.1%) of the cases.
Among victims who had drunk alcohol, 31.8% (8.3%) had
drunk one or two glasses, 13.6% (0%) had drunk three to
four glasses, and 22.7% (42.6%) had drunk more. Finally,
31.8% (50%) did not remember how much glasses had
been drunk. The author had drunk alcohol in the 2 hours
before the aggression in 26% (26.3%) of the cases, according to the victims’ estimation. It was generally five
glasses or more in 66.7% (53.6%), three to four glasses
in 13.0% (17.9%), or one to two glasses in 5.6% (3.6%)
of the cases. In 14.8% (25%) of the cases, victims did not
remember the quantity of glasses drunk by the aggressor.
VICTIM AND NONVICTIMS OF PHYSICAL
AGGRESSION
Bivariate Results
Bivariate analyses were performed on the whole variables
before Step 1. In the whole sample, 9.6% had been victims of aggression; 6.8% experienced only one aggression, whereas 2.8% experienced two aggressions. Tables
1 and 2 indicate the relationships between contextual variables, the description of the quantitative variables, and the
univariate comparison between victims and nonvictims on
quantitative variables.
Multivariate Analysis
Main Effects. A logistic regression was used because the
outcome variable was dichotomous. The initial analyses
included the following variables: controlling for participants’ age; SES; educational level; nationality of the participants, their father, and their mother; language spoken
the most often (French versus another); marital status;
having children; past social difficulties (four items); frequency of alcohol consumption; quantity of alcohol ordinarily consumed; binge drinking; aggression trait; and
anxiety (STAI). Eight of these 16 variables examined were
significantly related to the outcome variable and were
therefore included in the multivariate model building step.
These predictors were marital situation, the four items of
social difficulty, frequency of alcohol consumption, frequency of drinking binge, aggression trait, and anxiety.
For all of the analyses, possible concerns about multicollinearity were addressed by checking the conditional
index (CI, lower than 10) and by controlling for age before
multiple logistic regression was applied. The final signif-
DISCUSSION
6
L. BÈGUE ET AL.
TABLE 1. Bivariate analysis: qualitative data
% of participants aggressed
in the past 24 months
Age
18–28 years
29–42 years
43 years and more
Educational level
Under baccalaureate
Baccalaureate or over
Professional category
Shopkeepers, craftsman
White collars
Intermediary
Employees
Operatives
French nationality: father
French
Foreign
French nationality: mother
French
Foreign
Language spoken the most often
French only
French and another language
Marital situation
Living alone
Living in couple
Has a child
Yes
No
Experience of professional inactivity (at least 6 months)
No
Yes, once
Yes, several times
Financial hardship
No
Yes, but I was able to cope with it
Yes, but I wasn’t able to cope with it
Been housed because of money problems
No
Yes, once
Yes, several times
Loneliness
No
Yes
Frequency of alcohol consumption
Never
1 time per month
2–3 times per month
2–3 times per week
4 times per week or more
Quantity of alcohol in one setting
1–2 units
3–4 units
5 units or more
Drinking binge
Never
Less than once per month
Once per month
Once per week or more
∗
p < .05, ∗∗ p < .01., ∗∗∗ p < .001.
Note: ns, not significant.
Statistical test and value
14.4
10.3
7.3
Chi-square (2) = 3.72, p = .15
10.1
9.1
Chi-square (1) = 0.32, ns
7.7
10.3
8.1
9.6
9.8
Chi-square (4) = 0.58, ns
9.2
12.0
Chi-square (1) = 1.07, ns
9.2
12.7
Chi-square (1) = 1.50, ns
9.5
10.8
Chi-square (1) = 0.16, ns
11.5
7.3
Chi-square (1) = 5.28, p < .02
9.8
9.3
Chi-square (1) = 0.07, ns
9.0
9.6
10.9
Chi-square (2) = 0.70, ns
5.9
8.8
17.0
Chi-square (2) = 20.84, p < .000
7.2
14.1
21.3
Chi-square (2) = 23.58, p < .000
6.5
17.3
Chi-square (1) = 28.28, p < .000
11.7
10.0
8.7
5.8
11.9
Chi-square (4) = 5.15, ns
8.4
16.5
14.6
Chi-square (2) = 9.13, p < .01
8.9
8.6
9.5
26.5
Chi-square (3) = 16.67, p < .001
ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND VICTIMIZATION
RESUMEN
TABLE 2. Bivariate analysis: quantitative variables
Nonvictims
Aggression trait
Anxiety (STAI)
∗
7
Victims
M
SD
M
SD
t value
1.89
2.18
0.77
0.48
2.44
2.37
0.96
0.47
5.49∗∗∗
3.63∗∗∗
p < .05, ∗∗ p < .01, ∗∗∗ p < .001.
women in France (Jaspard, 2003), our study indicates that
professional status does not seem to represent a critical
variable in victimization. However, the observation that
social hardship is the most important statistical factor underlined the role of economic hardship on victimization.
Study’s Limitations
As already suggested, the interpretation of our findings
is limited by the cross-sectional nature of the study. Another limitation is the self-report nature of the study, which
mostly relies on the memory of the respondents and is
therefore subject to error. However, there is substantial evidence to suggest that self-report of alcohol use in research
settings is fairly comparable with biological markers obtained from emergency department patients (Cherpitel,
1998). Considerable research suggests that self-report is a
viable means of collecting accurate data and that measures
utilized have been shown to be both reliable and valid, and
when confidentiality is assured (Babor, Stephens, & Marlatt, 1987), as was the case with the present study based
on the CASI methodology.
Declaration of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors
alone are responsible for the content and writing of the
article.
RESUME
Le role de l’alcool dans les violences envers les
femmes: Résultats d’une enquête française auprès d’un
échantillon representative
L’alcool est fréquemment lié aux agressions entre les personnes, mais on manque d’informations concernant les
victimes d’agression grave. Afin de mieux comprendre
la dynamique de la victimation, nous avons analysé le
lien entre des variables contextuelles, facilitatrices et psychologiques et la victimation dans un échantillon de 1,033
femmes françaises âgées de 18 à 74 ans. Les participantes
ont été recrutées en employant la méthode des quotas,
et les réponses ont été recueillies par auto-passation informatisée. Afin d’identifier les prédicteurs des coups et
blessures subis durant les 24 mois passés, une régression
logistique employant une procédure d’élimination descendante a été employée. Les résultats ont indiqué
que les victimes avaient eu davantage d’expériences
d’alcoolisations massives et concentrées (binge drinking),
avaient un niveau d’agressivité-trait plus élevé et avaient
vécu davantage de difficultés sociale dans le passé comparées aux non-victimes.
El papel del consumo de alcohol en la victimización de
la mujer: Los resultados de una muestra representativa
francesa
El alcohol se relaciona a menudo con la agresión interpersonal. Sin embargo, la información con respecto al rol
del consumo de alcohol de las vı́ctimas de agresión severa
carece. Paraentender mejor la dinámica de la victimación,
investigamos las variables contextuales, facilitadoras y del
impacto psicológico relacionadas con la persecución en
una muestra francesa de 1,033 mujeres de 18–74 años.
Los participantes fueron seleccionados por cuotas, y las
respuestas fueron medidas usando el Computer-Assisted
Self-Interviewer (CASI). Una regresión logı́stica fue conducida para identificar las variables predictivas de golpes
y heridas sufridos en los últimos 24 meses. Los resultados indicaron que las vı́ctimas, comparadas con novı́ctimas, fueron significativamente más frecuentemente
emborrachadas, tenı́an un rasgo de agresión más marcado,
y habı́an experimentado más dificultades sociales en el
pasado.
THE AUTHORS
Laurent Bègue, Ph.D., is a
professor (social psychology)
in Pierre Mendès-France
University (Grenoble 2), holds
a degree in alcohol research,
and he is the head of the
Interuniversity Laboratory of
Psychology (LIP), Grenoble.
His main research interest is
aggressive behavior. He is
the author of two books (in
French) and various articles
including Bègue, L., Subra,
B., Arvers, P., Muller, D., Bricout, V., & Zorman, M. (2009).
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 137–142; Bègue,
L., Bushman, B., Giancola, P., Subra, B., & Rosset, E. (2010).
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1301–1304;
Bègue, L., & Subra, B. (2008). Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 2, 511–538.
Claudine Pérez-Diaz, Ph.D.,
is a researcher in the Centre
de Recherche Médecine,
Sciences, Santé, Santé Mentale
et Société (Research Centre of
Medicine, Sciences, Health,
Mental Health, and Health
Policy). She specialized in the
field of criminology (justice
and risks: road safety, physical
violence, and sexual violence).
She published the following
articles: Perez-Diaz, C., & Huré,
M. S. (2011). Drug and Alcohol Review, 30, 490–495; PérezDiaz, C., & Huré, M. S. (2007). Alcoologie et Addictologie, 29,
13S–20S; Pérez-Diaz, C. (2004). Rev Epidemiol Santé Publique,
52, 368–375.
8
L. BÈGUE ET AL.
Baptiste Subra holds a Ph.D.
in social psychology and is
currently assistant professor
in Paris Descartes University.
His major field of research deals
with aggressive behavior, and
has recently published about
the link between alcohol and
aggression [Bègue, L., Subra,
B., Arvers, P., Muller, D.,
Bricout, V., & Zorman, M.
(2009). Journal of Experimental
and Social Psychology, 45,
137–142; Subra, B., Muller, D., Bègue, L., Bushman, B. J., &
Delmas, F. (2010). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
36, 1052–1057].
Emmanuelle Ceaux is a Ph.D.
student at Grenoble 2 University,
in the Interuniversity Laboratory
of Psychology (LIP). She
holds a Emmanuelle Ceaux,
master’s degree in experimental
psychology. She is mainly
interested in organizational
behavior, especially in the
impact of stress at work.
Philippe Arvers, epidemiologist
(M.D., Ph.D.) and addictologist,
has been working at the
Army Biomedical Research
Institute (Institut de Recherche
Biomédicale des Armées) for
the past 22 years. He has been
involved with the development
and validation of screening tests
in the field of drug misuse.
His research is focused on
prevention tools assessment
among students, promotion of
brief interviews, and early screening—brief intervention use in
the field of alcohol misuse. Recent publications include Bègue,
L., Subra, B., Arvers, P., Muller, D., Bricout, V., & Zorman,
M. (2009). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(1),
137–142; Fauvelle, F., Dorandeu, F., Carpentier, P., Foquin, A.,
Rabeson, H., Graveron-Demilly, D., Arvers, P., Testylier, G.
(2009). Toxicology, 267(1–3), 99–111.
Véronique Aurélie Bricout,
Ph.D., is a researcher in a
clinical research service
specialized in sports medicine.
Work focuses on muscular
fatigue and hormonal, metabolic,
and cardiac factors, with various
patients. Selected publications
are Bricout, V.-A., et al. (2010).
Autonomic Neurosciences, 154,
112–116; Begue, L., Subra,
B., Arvers, P., Müller, D.,
Bricout, V.-A., et al. (2009).
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 137–142; Bricout,
V.-A., et al. (2008). Annales de Réadaptation et de Médecine
Physique, 51, 683–691; Bricout, V.-A., et al. (2008). Journal of
Neuroendocrinology, 20, 558–565; Flore, P., Bricout, V.-A., et
al. (2008). European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and
Rehabilitation, 15(1), 35–42.
Sebastian Roché is senior
research fellow at the CNRS
(National Center for Scientific
Research), Institute of Political
Science, University of Grenoble,
France. He holds a Ph.D. in
political science at the Institute
of Political Science, University
of Grenoble, France, where
he heads the “Safety and
Cohesion” department. He
is specialized in the field of
criminology (juvenile crime and
juvenile justice, collective forms of violence, rioting, policing, and
order maintenance) and has recently published in Transnational
Criminology Manual, and with Jacques De Maillard in Policing: A
Journal of Policy and Practice, 3(1), 34–40.
Joel Swendsen is director of
research at the CNRS (National
Center for Scientific Research),
Bordeaux, France. He received
his Ph.D. in clinical psychology
from UCLA and his research
interests include the comorbidity
of substance use disorders with
other psychiatric conditions.
The majority of his recent work
has focused on ambulatory
monitoring techniques such as
the experience sampling method
and ecological momentary assessment in the study of daily life
mechanisms underlying comorbidity. Recent publications are the
following: Swanson, S. A., Crow, S. J., Le Grange, D., Swendsen,
J., & Merikangas, K. R. (2011). Archives of General Psychiatry;
Ben-Zeev, D., Morris, S., Swendsen, J., & Granholm, E. (2011).
Schizophrenia Bulletin.
ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND VICTIMIZATION
Michel Zorman is a physician
specialized in public health
and medical director of the
Center for Health of Grenoble 2
University. His clinical interests
are learning disabilities, reading,
reading difficulties, dyslexia,
oral language development, and
specific language impairment.
His research interests are
epidemiology and neurobiology
of learning disabilities, reading
difficulties and oral language
development, prevention of reading disabilities, assessment
practices with children, alcohol, drugs consumption, and their
consequences. Recent publications are the following: Fayol, M.,
Zorman, M., & Lété, B. (2009). British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 1–14; Bianco, M., Bressoux, P., Doyen, A. L.,
Lambert, E., Lima, L., Pellenq, C., & Zorman, M. (in press).
Scientific Studies of Reading.
GLOSSARY
Aggression: Any form of behavior directed toward the
goal of harming or injuring another living being who
is motivated to avoid such treatment.
Trait aggression: It consists of three basic dimensions:
(1) affective, made up of emotions such as anger or
loathing; (2) cognitive, consisting mainly of negative
thoughts about human nature, resentment, and cynical
distrust; and (3) behavioral, defined by various forms
of aggression, such as physical or verbal aggression.
Victimization: Unwarranted singling out of an individual
or group for subjection to crime, exploitation, tort, unfair treatment, or other wrong.
REFERENCES
Abbey, A., McAuslan, P., & Ross, L. T. (1998). Sexual assault perpetration by college men: The role of alcohol, misperception of
sexual intent, and sexual beliefs and experiences. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 17, 167–195.
Babor, T. F., Stephens, R. S., & Marlatt, G. A. (1987). Verbal report
methods in clinical research on alcoholism: Response bias and
its minimization. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48(5), 410–424.
Boles, S. M., & Miotto, K. (2003). Substance and violence: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 8(2),
155–174.
Borrill, J. A., Rosen, B. K., & Summerfield, A. B. (1987). The influence of alcohol on judgement of facial expressions of emotions.
British Journal of Medical Psychology, 60, 71–77.
Burnam, M. A., Stein, J. A., & Golding, J. M. (1988). Sexual assault and mental disorders in a community population. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 843–850.
Bushman, B. (1997). Effect of alcohol on human aggression: Validity of proposed explanations. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism, volume 13: Alcoholism and violence
(pp. 227–243). New York: Plenum Press.
Bushman, B. J. (1993). Human aggression while under the influence of alcohol and other drugs: An integrative research review.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 148–152.
9
Bushman, B., & Cooper, H. M. (1990). Effects of alcohol on human aggression: An integrative research review. Psychological
Bulletin, 107, 341–354.
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452–459.
Chermack, S. T., & Giancola, P. (1997). The relationship between alcohol and aggression: An integrated biopsychosocial
approach. Clinical Psychology Review, 6, 621–649.
Chermack, S., & Taylor, S. (1995). Alcohol and human physical
aggression: Pharmacological versus expectancy effects. Journal
of Studies on Alcohol, 56, 449–456.
Cherpitel, C. J. (1997). Alcohol and violence-related injuries in the
emergency room. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments
in alcoholism, Alcohol and violence: Epidemiology, neurobiology, psychology, family issues (pp. 105–118). New York: Plenum
Press.
Cherpitel, C. J. (1998). Differences in performance of screening instruments for problem drinking among Blacks, Whites and Hispanics in an emergency room population. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 59, 420–426.
Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate
trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.
Dawson, D. A. (1997). Alcohol, drugs, fighting and suicide attempt/ideation. Addiction Research, 5(6), 451–472.
Elin, B. K. (2007). Alcohol and violence: Use of possible confounders in a time-series analysis. Addiction, 102, 369–376.
Exum, M. L. (2006). Alcohol and aggression: An integration of
findings from experimental studies. Journal of Criminal Justice,
34(2), 131–145.
Fagan, J. (1990). Intoxication and aggression. In M. Tonry & J.
Q. Wilson (Eds.), Drugs and crime. volume 13: Crime and justice: A review of research (pp. 241–320). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Fals-Stewart, W. (2003). The occurrence of partner physical aggression on days of alcohol consumption: A longitudinal diary study.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 41–52.
Felson, M. (1998). Crime and everyday life (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Felson, R. B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1993). Aggression and violence.
Social interactionist perspectives. Washington: American Psychological Association.
Fothergill, K. E., & Ensminger, M. E. (2006). Childhood and adolescent antecedents of drug and alcohol problems: A longitudinal study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 82, 61–76.
Freedy, J., Resnick, H., Kilpatrick, D., Dansky, B., & Tidwell, R.
(1994). The psychological adjustment of recent crime victims in
the criminal justice system. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
9, 450–468.
Gmel, G., & Rehm, J. (2003). Harmful alcohol use. Alcohol Research & Health, 27, 52–62.
Goldstein, P. J. (1985). The drugs/violence nexus: A tripartite conceptual framework. Journal of Drug Issues, 15, 493–506.
Gorman, D. M., Zhu, L., & Horel, S. (2005). Drug “hot-spots”, alcohol availability and violence. Drug and Alcohol Review, 24,
507–513.
Graham, K. (2007). Using historical context to identify confounders, mechanisms and modifiers in aggregate level studies of the relationship between alcohol consumption and violent
crime. Addiction, 102, 348–349.
Graham, K., & West, P. (2001). Alcohol and crime: Examining
the link. In N. Heather, T. Peters, & T. Stockwell (Eds.), International handbook of alcohol dependence and problems (pp.
439–470). New York, NY: John Wiley.
10
L. BÈGUE ET AL.
Graham, K., Wells, S., & West, P. (1997). A framework for applying
explanations of alcohol-related aggression to naturally occurring aggressive behaviour. Contemporary Drug Problems, 24,
625–666.
Greenfield, T. K., & Weisner, C. (1995). Drinking problems
and self-reported criminal behavior, arrests and convictions:
1990 US alcohol and 1989 county surveys. Addiction, 90(3),
361–373.
Harvey, J. H., & Miller, E. D. (2000). Loss and trauma. General
and close relationship perspectives. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor &
Francis.
Hull, J. G., & Bond, C. F. (1986). Social and behavioral consequences of alcohol consumption and expectancy: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 347–360.
Ito, T., Miller, N., & Pollock, V. (1994). Alcohol and aggression: A
meta-analysis of the moderating effects of inhibitory cues, triggering cues, and self-focused attention. Psychological Bulletin,
120, 60–82.
Janoff-Bulman, R. (1995). Victims of violence. In G. S. Everly Jr.
& J. M. Lating (Eds.), Psychotraumatology: Key papers and
core concepts in post-traumatic stress (pp. 73–84). New York:
Plenum Press.
Jaspard, M. (2003). Les violences envers les femmes en France, une
enquête nationale [Violence against women. A national survey].
Paris: La documentation Française.
Karmen, A. (2004). Crime victims: An introduction to victimology.
Belmont: Wadsworth.
Kaysen, D., Simpson, T., Dillworth, T., Larimer, M. E., Gutner, C.,
& Resick, P. (2006). Alcohol problems and posttraumatic stress
disorder in female crime victims. Journal of Traumatic Stress,
19(3), 399–403.
Kilpatrick, D. G., Acierno, R., & Resnick, H. S. (1997). A 2-year
longitudinal analysis of the relationships between violent assault
and substance use in women. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 65(5), 834–847.
Laub, J. H., & Lauritsen, J. L. (1995). Violent criminal behaviour
over the life-course: A review of the longitudinal and comparative research. In B. R. Ruback & N. A. Weiner (Eds.), Interpersonal violent behaviour (pp. 43–61). New York: Springer.
Lipsey, M. W., Wilson, D. B., Cohen, A., & Derzon, J. H. (1997). Is
there a causal relationship between alcohol use and violence ? In
M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism, volume
13: Alcoholism and violence (pp. 245–281). New York: Plenum
Press.
Lipton, R., & Gruenewald, P. (2002). The spatial dynamics of violence and alcohol outlets. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63,
187–195.
McDonald, S., Cherpitel, C. J., & DeSouza, A. (2006). Variations
of alcohol impairment in different types, causes and contexts of
injuries: Results of emergency room studies from 16 countries.
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 38, 1107–1112.
McMillan, R. (2001). Violence and the life course. The consequences of victimization for personal and social development.
Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 1–22.
Meadows, R. J. (2004). Violence and victimization. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson.
Menard, S. 1995. Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousands
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miller, B., Downs, W., & Testa, M. (1993). Interrelationships between victimization experiences and women’s alcohol use. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 11, 109–117.
Murdoch, D., Pihl, R., & Ross, D. (1990). Alcohol and crimes of
violence: Present issue. International Journal of the Addictions,
25, 1065–1081.
Nagelkerke, N. J. (1991). A note on a general definition of
the coefficient of determination. Biometrika, 78(3), 691–
692.
Neff, J. A., Holamon, B., & Schluter, T. D. (1995). Spousal violence among Anglos, Blacks, and Mexican Americans: The role
of demographics variables, psychosocial predictors, and alcohol
consumption. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 1–21.
Norris, F., Kaniasty, K., & Thompson, M. (1997). The psychological consequences of crime: Findings from a longitudinal
population-based study. In R. Davis, A. Lurigio, & W. Skogan (Eds.), Victims of crime (146–166). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Parker, R. N., & Rebhun, L. A. (1995). Alcohol and homicide: A
deadly combination of two American traditions. Albany: State
University NY Press.
Pedersen, W. C., Aviles, F. E., & Ito, T. A. (2002). Psychological
experimentation on alcohol-induced human aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 293–312.
Pérez, R. L. (2000). Fiesta as tradition, fiesta as change: Ritual,
alcohol and violence in a Mexican community. Addiction, 95,
365–373.
Pernanen, K. (1991). Alcohol in human violence. New York: Guilford Press.
Reinert, D., & Allen, J. P. (2002). The Alcohol Use Disorders
Identification Test (AUDIT): A review of recent research. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 26(2), 272–
279.
Reinert, D., & Allen, J. P. (2007). The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: An update of research findings. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 31(2), 185–199.
Roizen, J. (1997). Epidemiological issues in alcohol-related violence. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism,
volume 13: Alcoholism and violence (pp. 7–39). New York:
Plenum Press.
Saunders, J. B., Aasland, O. G., Babor, T. F., de la Fuente, J. R., &
Grant, M. (1993). Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders
Screening Test (AUDIT). WHO collaborative project on early
detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumption. II. Addiction, 88, 791–804.
Scott, K., Schafer, J., & Greenfield, T. K. (1999). The role of alcohol in physical assault perpetration and victimization. Journal of
Studies of Alcohol, 60, 528–536.
Shepherd, J. P., Sutherland, I., & Newcombe, R. G. (2006). Relations between alcohol, violence and victimization in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 29(4), 539–553.
Spielberger, C. D. (1972). Anxiety: Current trends in theory and
research. Oxford: Academic Press.
Stewart, S. H. (1996). Alcohol abuse in individuals exposed
to trauma: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 120,
83–112.
Swahn, M. H., & Donovan, J. E. (2005). Predictors of fighting attributed to alcohol use among adolescent drinkers. Addictive Behaviours, 30, 1317–1334.
Swahn, M. H., & Donovan, J. E. (2006). Alcohol and violence: Comparison of the psychosocial correlates of adolescent involvement in alcohol-related physical fighting versus other physical fighting. Addictive Behaviors, 31, 2014–
2029.
Swatt, M. L., & He, P. (2006). Exploring the difference between
male and female intimate partner homicide: Revisiting the concept of situated transaction. Homicide studies: An Interdisciplinary and International Journal, 10, 279–292.
Vinson, D. C., Borges, G., & Cherpitel, C. J. (2003). The risk of
intentional injury with acute and chronic alcohol exposures: A
ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION AND VICTIMIZATION
case-control and case-crossover study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 64(3), 350–357.
Virkkunen, M. (1974). Alcohol as a factor precipitating aggression
and conflcit behaviour leading to homicide. British Journal of
Addiction, 69, 149–154.
Wells, S., Graham, K., & West, P. (2000). Alcohol-related aggression in the general population. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
61(4), 626–632.
White, H. R. (1997). Longitudinal perspective on alcohol use and
aggression during adolescence. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent
developments in alcoholism, alcohol and violence: Epidemiol-
11
ogy, neurobiology, psychology, family issues (pp. 81–103). New
York: Plenum Press.
Williams, J. S., & Singh, B. K. (1986). Alcohol use and antisocial experiences. Advances in Alcohol & Substance Abuse, 6(1),
65–75.
Wolfgang, M. E. (1958). Patterns in criminal homicide. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press
Zhang, L., Wieczorek, W. F., & Welte, J. W. (1997). The nexus between alcohol and violent crime. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 21(7), 1264–1271.