Normative misperceptions and temporal precedence of perceived norms and drinking

Descriptive social norms have been pervasively incorporated in adolescent and college student alcohol interventions based on two key relationships; (1) perceived norms are typically higher than actual norms, and (2) perceived norms are positively correlated with drinking. With few exceptions (Marks et al 1992; Read el al., 2005), most studies have been cross-sectional or have examined only how perceived norms are associated with later drinking, rather than how drinking relates to later perceived norms (Kahler et al., 2003; Larimer et al., 2004; Read el al., 2002). The present research was designed to evaluate the stability of normative misperceptions, perceived norms, and drinking. In addition, the ability of perceived norms to predict future drinking is compared with the ability of drinking to predict future perceived norms. As a general term, “social norm” usually refers to what is considered to be normal within a given population of people. Terminology used in empirical investigations related to social norms is discordant and varied but can perhaps best be understood by considering two dimensions: injunctive versus descriptive norms and perceived versus actual norms. The “injunctive versus descriptive” distinction was suggested by Cialdini and colleagues (1990). “Injunctive norms” refer to the extent to which some population approves or disapproves of a given behavior. “Descriptive norms” refer to the frequency or quantity of a given behavior within some population. The present research focuses on descriptive norms. The “perceived versus actual” distinction is important because people often do not know the extent to which others approve, disapprove, or engage in a particular behavior. It is usually the perception of others’ attitudes or behaviors that is directly influential on the individual rather than others’ actual attitudes or behaviors (Lewin, 1943). Past research has shown that college students overestimate the prevalence of peers’ drinking (Borsari and Carey, 2003). Moreover, the magnitude of overestimation is associated with more problematic drinking (Baer and Carney, 1993; Baer et al 1991; Lewis and Neighbors. 2004; Perkins and Berkowitz, 1986). Perceived approval and prevalence of peer drinking is associated with one’s own drinking (Borsari and Carey, 2001; Lewis and Neighbors, 2004; Perkins, 2002; Prentice and Miller, 1993). It is clear from previous studies that perceived norms and behaviors go hand in hand: the reason for this, however, is less clear. Several explanations have been offered regarding normative misperceptions, including pluralistic ignorance (Miller and Prentice, 1996; Prentice and Miller, 1993), false consensus (Ross et al., 1977; Marks and Miller, 1987), and false uniqueness (Suls et al., 1988). The temporal relationship between perceived norms and drinking remains unclear. In theory, perceived norms about drinking will influence people’s behavior to the extent that they are motivated to be seen as similar to the group. If individuals are afraid to be viewed as deviants, they will behave in accordance with what they believe the group norm to be. These ideas are supported by classic research on conformity (Asch, 1951; Deutsch and Gerard, 1955; Sherif, 1936), as well as by a host of literature related to social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954), social impact theory (Latane, 1981), and social identity and self-categorization theories (Tajfel and Turner, 1986; Turner et al., 1987). Empirical support for the notion that perceived norms temporally precede drinking can be derived indirectly from intervention studies incorporating normative feedback. Perceived norms are experimentally manipulated by providing feedback that highlights the discrepancies between one’s own drinking, one’s perceptions of peer drinking, and peers’ actual drinking. A number of studies have found provision of normative feedback to result in drinking reductions (Agostinelli et al., 1995; Collins et al., 2002; Walters and Neighbors, 2005; Walters et al., 2000). Other studies have shown that reductions in perceived norms mediate drinking reductions (Borsari and Carey, 2000; Mattern and Neighbors, 2004; Neighbors et al., in press). In contrast to the notion that perceived norms temporally precede drinking, at least two phenomena—projection and social selection—suggest the opposite. Students may base their estimates of others’ drinking on their own behavior This idea is consistent with false consensus (Marks and Miller, 1987; Ross et al., 1977) and false uniqueness (Suls et al., 1988) effects. An alternative is that heavier drinkers may choose to associate with heavier-drinking peers, which may influence both their perceived norms and subsequent drinking. Previous research suggests that social or peer selection has a clear impact on student drinking (Bullers et al., 2001; Kahler et al., 2003; Read et al., 2005). In sum, previous research and theory suggest three possibilities: perceived norms will be better predictors of later drinking, drinking will be a better predictor of later perceived norms, or both will be equally predictive of the other. The present study was designed to examine mean differences in, and correlations between, perceived and actual drinking norms among college students over time.