↓ Skip to main content

A rank based social norms model of how people judge their levels of drunkenness whilst intoxicated

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#12 of 16,682)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
120 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
39 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A rank based social norms model of how people judge their levels of drunkenness whilst intoxicated
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3469-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon C. Moore, Alex M. Wood, Laurence Moore, Jonathan Shepherd, Simon Murphy, Gordon D. A. Brown

Abstract

A rank based social norms model predicts that drinkers' judgements about their drinking will be based on the rank of their breath alcohol level amongst that of others in the immediate environment, rather than their actual breath alcohol level, with lower relative rank associated with greater feelings of safety. This study tested this hypothesis and examined how people judge their levels of drunkenness and the health consequences of their drinking whilst they are intoxicated in social drinking environments. Breath alcohol testing of 1,862 people (mean age = 26.96 years; 61.86 % male) in drinking environments. A subset (N = 400) also answered four questions asking about their perceptions of their drunkenness and the health consequences of their drinking (plus background measures). Perceptions of drunkenness and the health consequences of drinking were regressed on: (a) breath alcohol level, (b) the rank of the breath alcohol level amongst that of others in the same environment, and (c) covariates. Only rank of breath alcohol level predicted perceptions: How drunk they felt (b 3.78, 95 % CI 1.69 5.87), how extreme they regarded their drinking that night (b 3.7, 95 % CI 1.3 6.20), how at risk their long-term health was due to their current level of drinking (b 4.1, 95 % CI 0.2 8.0) and how likely they felt they would experience liver cirrhosis (b 4.8. 95 % CI 0.7 8.8). People were more influenced by more sober others than by more drunk others. Whilst intoxicated and in drinking environments, people base judgements regarding their drinking on how their level of intoxication ranks relative to that of others of the same gender around them, not on their actual levels of intoxication. Thus, when in the company of others who are intoxicated, drinkers were found to be more likely to underestimate their own level of drinking, drunkenness and associated risks. The implications of these results, for example that increasing the numbers of sober people in night time environments could improve subjective assessments of drunkenness, are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 60 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 23%
Researcher 8 13%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 4 6%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 13 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 27%
Social Sciences 10 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 16 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 974. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2021.
All research outputs
#16,286
of 25,016,456 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12
of 16,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251
of 329,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 352 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,016,456 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 352 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.