Drinking, Alcohol Policy, and Attitudes Toward a Campus Riot

Journal of College Student Development, Sep/Oct 2004 by Kaplowitz, Stan A, Campo, Shelly

Model Fit. The over-identifying restrictions in this model also fit very well; the standardized loadings and the CFI were almost identical to the measurement model, and the RMSEA was even better (.046). The model explains over 60% of the variance in condoning the riot and over 50% of the variance in enjoying the riot. The errors of prediction of three riot attitudes had substantial correlations (absolute values range between .270 and .466), showing that these attitudes have substantial influence on each other.

Hypothesis Tests. Consistent with Hypothesis 1, alcohol consumption had a large effect on all riot attitudes. It had a substantial direct positive effect on enjoying the riot and a moderately large negative effect on negative consequences (Table 3).

Consistent with Hypothesis 2, objections to restrictions also had a major effect on riot attitudes, especially condoning. It explained over 60% of the total variance and almost all of the explained variance in condoning. But consistent with Hypothesis 3, alcohol consumption explained almost 25% of the variance (and virtually all of the explained variance) in objecting to restrictions.

Because objecting to restrictions was an important intervening variable between the exogenous variables and the riot attitudes, in Table 4 we present the standardized total effects of the predictors on our three riot attitudes. There we see that whereas alcohol consumption had a small and nonsignificant direct effect on condoning, alcohol consumption had a very large total effect on this variable.

Contrary to Hypothesis 4a, being in large classes did not have a significant effect on two of the riot attitudes. It had an unexpected, but significant, positive effect on viewing the riots as having negative consequences. Hypothesis 4b, which deals with satisfaction with professors, fared somewhat better. Satisfaction had a moderate and highly significant negative direct effect on objecting to restrictions (Table 3). Moreover, as Table 4 shows, those who were more satisfied were less likely to condone the riot or to enjoy it.

Contrary to Hypothesis 5a, the total effect of GPA on all three riot attitudes was minimal. Hypotheses 5b, 6, and 7 received partial support. Studying more, working more hours, and having higher class standing each led people to be slightly less likely to enjoy the riot (Tables 3 and 4). However, these variables did not have a significant effect on the other two riot attitudes.

Demographic Variables, Residence and Riot Attitudes. Because alcohol was such an important determinant of riot attitudes, the groups that had higher rates of alcohol consumption should have had a more positive attitude towards the riot. Consistent with previous studies, we found that drinking was more common among Whites and males than among other groups (see Tables 3 and 4).

The results shown in Table 4 also show that African Americans were substantially less likely to condone the riot or to enjoy it than were either Whites (the reference category) or Asians. Males were more likely to object to restrictions and to be approving of the riot on all three dimensions than were females. Although the age of the student had minimal effect on alcohol consumption, younger students were much more likely to enjoy the riot. This finding is a result of both the strong correlation between age and class standing, and the direct effect of class standing on enjoying the riot.