alcohol and drugs in youth lifestyles.pdf

8/15/2019 Alcohol and drugs in youth lifestyles.pdf

1/26

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cirs20

Download by: [b-on: Biblioteca do conhecimento online UBI] Date: 21 November 2015, At: 08:55

International Review of Sociology

Revue Internationale de Sociologie

ISSN: 0390-6701 (Print) 1469-9273 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cirs20

Just for fun? Alcohol and drugs in youth lifestyles:a survey

Serena Fabrizio, Franca Faccioli, Gabriella Fazzi, Francesca Marconi &Fabrizio Martire

To cite this article: Serena Fabrizio, Franca Faccioli, Gabriella Fazzi, Francesca Marconi& Fabrizio Martire (2013) Just for fun? Alcohol and drugs in youth lifestyles: a survey,

International Review of Sociology, 23:3, 622-646, DOI: 10.1080/03906701.2013.856164

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164

Published online: 28 Nov 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 222

View related articles

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=cirs20&page=instructionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=cirs20&page=instructionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/03906701.2013.856164http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cirs20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cirs20


2/26

Just for fun? Alcohol and drugs in youth lifestyles: a survey

Serena Fabrizioa , Franca Facciolia *, Gabriella Fazzi b, Francesca Marconia and

Fabrizio Martirea

a Department of Communication and Social Research, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy;b Istat, Italian National Institute of Statistics, Rome, Italy

( Received 30 July 2012; accepted 30 January 2013)

The article presents an analysis of the relationship between young people and alcoholand drug use, examining both their attitudes and behaviors. The analysis is based on

statistics collected through a structured-questionnaire survey of 1071 students from thesecondary schools of Rome and the Province. The first part of the article examines

patterns and levels of alcohol and drug use and typical places of use. The central part isdedicated to the perceptions and opinions on alcohol and drugs, with particular regardto the dimensions of risk and sociality, and to the different roles of school and family inraising risk awareness. Sociality appears as a crucial element in young people’stendency to associate alcohol and drugs with an effect of relaxation and disinhibitionthat makes social relations easier. The article finally examines the relationship betweenyoung people and social norms, identifying transgressive models and habits. On thewhole, the study highlights a connection between alcohol and drug use and desire of sociality, which is experienced more as a situational and ever-changing practice than asa search for close friendships.

Keywords: young people; lifestyle; alcohol/drugs; risk; norms

1. Introduction

The consumption of alcohol and various kinds of drugs has become an increasingly

common practice for today’s youth. According to the statistics collected both in Italy

and abroad, in the last few years drinking with the intention of getting ‘high’ and using

psychoactive substances has become a growing phenomenon which mainly involves

young people. Even though the latest statistics by ESPAD (2011) register a slight decline

compared to 2007, in 2011 in Italy the consumption of alcohol between meals by

teenagers aged 14 through 17 increased, despite an overall reduction in the consumptionof alcoholic beverages, while children between 11 and 15 years are at a particularly high

risk of binge drinking (Collicelli 2010, CENSIS 2011, ISTAT 2012).

The Eurobarometer survey of 2011 on the use of drugs in Europe points out that

cannabis use is perceived by many of the young people interviewed as ‘normal’ and

without serious health risks. This perception varies across European countries, and also

depends on the type of drug: according to the young Italians interviewed, the health risks

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] The present article is the result of a collective research work. Franca Faccioli wrote the Introduction(Section 1) and the Conclusions (Section 5); Francesca Marconi wrote Section 2; Serena Fabrizioand Gabriella Fazzi wrote Section 3; Fabrizio Martire wrote Section 4.

International Review of Sociology — Revue Internationale de Sociologie, 2013

Vol. 23, No. 3, 622 – 646, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164

© 2013 University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’

http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-mailto:[email protected]://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.856164mailto:[email protected]://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-http://-/?-


3/26

associated with using cannabis are quite low, while ecstasy and cocaine are perceived as

having a much higher risk (Dipartimento Politiche Antidroga, Presidenza del Consiglio

dei Ministri 2011, Eurobarometro 2011).

In contrast, the Annual Report presented to the Parliament by the Italian Drug Policy

Department in 2011 records an overall decline in the use of drugs and alcohol; however, it

does point out that, among young people aged between 15 and 19, the decrease in the use

of psychoactive substances is minimal, while the use of cannabis shows a fluctuating

trend with a slight increase in the last month of observation.

In exploring the motives that are at the basis of these behaviors, many studies have

pointed out that the consumption of some alcoholic beverages (aperitifs and liquors) is

mostly related to social occasions and leisure activities, even of short duration, which

happen away from home, such as so-called ‘happy hours’ (Osservatorio permanente sui

giovani e l’alcol 2011). Regardless of the trends, which can vary depending on the research

methods adopted, it is unquestionable that the consumption of alcohol and use of stimulant

and psychoactive drugs are particularly relevant in the experiences of young people of

different ages, due to the meanings and symbolic values associated with them in the processes of construction of their identity and emancipation from adult control.

Schematically, it is possible to identify two main lines of research which specifically

focus on the Italian context: one examines the consumption of alcohol with the aim of

investigating and identifying drinking styles and cultures; the other analyzes the use and

abuse of alcohol and psychoactive substances from the perspective of a risk culture.

The studies belonging to the first line of research show that youth drinking behaviors

and their main consumption patterns are necessarily related to the process of construction

of identity, to the willingness to experience emancipating practices and contexts that, in a

way, allow young people to get away from their families, to escape. People mainly drink

to be together with others and have fun; alcohol has a disinhibiting effect, helping peoplerelax and socialize more easily (Forni 1997b, Beccaria and Rolando 2010), even if the

single practices and contexts may differ in relation to the individual’s social class and

gender. Some studies (Beccaria and Rolando 2010) trace a line of continuity between

convivial drinking practices and the traditional Italian culture, which is labeled as ‘wet ’1

due to the widespread habit of consuming alcohol, especially wine, at meal times, and to

the positive perception of this kind of drink as an element integrated into their daily lives

and associated with special occasions and festivities.

In this ‘socializing’ context, youth drinking practices are often integrated with the use

of psychoactive substances, in particular cannabis and synthetic drugs, which enhance the

disinhibiting effects and favor transgressive behaviors.2 Binge drinking , i.e. drinking for

the main purpose of getting drunk and testing one’s limits, is instead analyzed from a

different perspective. Even in this case, the abuse is not perceived as a kind of pathology,

but as a situational challenge that is beyond the formal and informal control of the adults,

following the rules dictated by the group of friends where the ritual of drinking is

performed. According to Charlie Barnao (2008), binge drinking can be regarded as a

goal-oriented rational action, to use the famous definition of Max Weber, where the

drinker selects the most suitable tool to achieve the goal of getting ‘high’, of becoming

intoxicated by heavy consumption of alcohol. Besides, drawing on Barnao’s observation,

we would like to point out that a ‘goal-oriented rational action’ should also be adopted by

prevention and awareness campaigns against drinking and driving, when referring to the

need to identify a designated driver who agrees to abstain from alcohol and beresponsible for driving others home. In this case, the goal is to have fun, even using

International Review of Sociology — Revue Internationale de Sociologie 623


4/26

alcohol as a vehicle for sociability and disinhibition, but starting from a rational

assessment of the situation, which should be able to reconcile the desire to have fun and

get ‘high’ with life protection.

The social dimension is also at the center of another line of research, which regards

the addiction to alcohol and drugs as the result of a process of self-construction, wavering

between instability and adaptivity. People drink because they find it difficult to ‘ be in’,

but also because it helps them ‘ be with’ (Frontini 2007). People smoke cannabis or sniff

cocaine, even in a ‘controlled’ way, to experience their social relations better (Frontini

2007). These behaviors are accompanied by the awareness of the risks associated with

drinking and using drugs and of the pleasantness of these experiences (Järvinen and

Østergaard 2011).

In this context, the risk perception takes on a particular meaning: on the one hand, it

implies the awareness of the dangers related to alcohol abuse and the use of psychoactive

substances, along with the fact that they make people lose control; on the other hand, it is

also a challenge that an individual poses to himself or herself and to the world to prove

the ability to experience strong emotions and be in control of a situation (Buzzi 2007).The focus groups conducted in a previous study (see note 2) with young people from

different Italian cities showed that drinking to get ‘high’, which is often accompanied by

the use of drugs, is an act of transgression that allows them to have an ‘experience

beyond the limits’ and to engage in risky behaviors as a ‘rite of passage’ to adulthood.

After all, the strength of these behaviors is confirmed by the general perception of

drinking and using cannabis as legitimate activities carried out within leisure spaces that

are becoming increasingly ‘recreational’, nocturnal, and mobile, as it involves moving

from one area of the city to another. Quoting Giampaolo Fabris (2003), we could say that

alcohol has become a sort of social icon which takes on particular meanings and perhaps

turns into having a value in the passage to maturity. Franca Beccaria and Sara Rolando(2010) underline the function that the consumption of alcohol may serve in the

youngsters’ self-construction; the young people interviewed stated that they take on a

different role by adopting different consumption patterns that allow them to communicate

a specific identity to the others, an identity that may fit in that specific situation but not

necessarily in other contexts. We could say that these transgressive behaviors supply

drinking with new immaterial meanings. What really matters is not so much the

consumption of alcohol in itself but the atmosphere that surrounds it. It is the whole set of

values and meanings associated with drinking – from the pleasure of the product to the

sociability, to the challenge of holding one’s drink – that takes on great importance at that

age. To put it in the language of advertising, we could say that drinking allows them to

carry out a process of semantization of the product : alcohol can be a game, an opportunity

for meeting, for establishing relationships; it is an object that generates feelings of

escapism and entertainment. With their multiple identities and plurality of behavior

patterns, young people perfectly embody the post-modern consumer described by Fabris,

driven by desire rather than need (Buzzi 2007).

The picture provided by the above-mentioned studies shows the youth wavering

between the fear of going over the limit and the desire of transgression and extreme

experiences, between the search for new forms of sociality and sociability and the

construction of changeable identities accor ding to specific circumstances.

This is where the present study fits,3 involving 1071 students with the aim of

(1) exploring the relationship that young people establish with the use of alcohol anddrugs, (2) their personal experiences related to these substances, (3) their perception of

624 S. Fabrizio et al.


5/26

this issue and of the risks associated with them, and (4) their knowledge of the regulations

on the use of alcohol and drugs, and of the information and prevention campaigns about

these issues.4 In particular, the aim of the study is to point out how the use of these

substances is intertwined with the meanings that the interviewees associate with the

concept of ‘ being young’ today; to explore how and whether it redefines the spaces and

places of sociality; how it affects the role that young people attribute to parents, school,

and friends; and how it changes the search for sociability, but also the desire to go over

the limits and violate social norms.5

This is the main question that guided the research: among the young, is there a

relationship between risk and the wish of sociability?

2. Alcohol and drugs in the experiences of the youth

Adolescence is a critical period during which young people undergo a series of physical,

cognitive, and emotional changes which affect their relationship with themselves and

others, placing them in the difficult time of finding emotional, relational, and socialreference points (Arcidiacono 2000, Bonino 2001). Every boy or girl faces this condition

of vulnerability in a different way, depending on their gender and socio-cultural context,

and even involving the type of school they attend (Bacchini et al . 2000). The social

environment in which they find themselves can actually favor or hinder their process of

growth (Cantor and Kihlstrom 1987, Ross and Nisbett 1991, Cervone and Williams 1992,

Mischel and Shoda 1995, among others), introducing protective factors that support their

personal development as well as elements of risk (Boykin McElhaney and Allen 2001).

For instance, young people who start gaining increased autonomy from their parents,

spending more time away from home with their friends, even at night, may have more

exposure to risky situations like alcohol abuse and use of drugs. The tendency to make

use of these substances, which in the past was easily identifiable by typically small and

marginalized social groups, has now extended to young people who are well-integrated in

their social environment (Pani 2011).

Considering the relevance of this issue, we have conducted a survey among young

people aged between 14 and 19, who live in Rome and in the Province of Rome and

attend secondary school. We have chosen to interview students because most of the boys

and girls in this age group attend school (and can therefore be reached more easily);

moreover, schools are generally willing to support this kind of initiative which can help

transmit knowledge, values, and behavior patterns.

The survey took place from the second half of November 2010 to the end of April

2011. The questionnaire was administered to a total of 1071 students attending the first and fifth classes of two sections in each participating school.6

The drinking experience

What emerges from the analysis of the data collected is that the consumption of alcohol is

a particularly widespread habit among young people: 70% of the interviewees said t hey

habitually drank alcohol, versus 23.3% of young people who said they were teetotal.7

Established autonomously and away from their homes, the first contact of young

people with alcohol generally occurs between the ages of 13 and 15 (for 34.7% of the

interviewees who remember the age of their first experience), while only 18.4% of the

young people interviewed do not remember the age of their first drinking experience.8

Beer is the most consumed beverage (26.8%) followed by spirits (13.7%) and soft drinks



6/26

(12.4%). Wine only ranks fourth, indicated as the first alcoholic beverage drunk away

from home by 10.9% of the interviewees. Rather than their first drinking experience ever,

it is perhaps more common for young people to remember their first repeated experiences,

that is, the beginning of their consumption of alcohol, although consumed occasionally or

in small quantities.

Consumption of alcohol generally occurs at parties with friends (as indicated by

63.5%) and in public places (mainly in pubs 40.3%, discos 28.3%, restaurants or

pizzerias 24%). A good percentage of young people, 18.3%, said they drank alcohol at

home during meals, confirming the relevance of the first experiences being with parents

and family members, which is also generally associated with the consumption of food or

with a convivial context – a consumption that is typical of the so-called ‘Mediterranean’

tradition (Beccaria 2010). Other drinking places showed less significant percentages

(in open bars 16%, on the street or somewhere else outside 13.4%, in bars 12.3%, rave

parties 5.8%, at home between meals 4.9%, at home alone 4.3%, at school 1.4%). As for

the other occasions indicated by young people (5.3% of the answers), they are mainly

family occasions, such as ‘at the grandparents’ home’, or ritual and ceremonial occasions,

such as weddings, christenings, birthdays, and festivities like Christmas or New

Year ’s Eve.

We need to consider that drinking places have their own rules, even if implicit or

informal, which can encourage or hinder the consumption of alcohol, depending on the

type and quantity of beverage consumed (Beccaria and Rolando 2010). A party, for

example, presents itself as an occasion of freedom and intimacy, where it is possible to

drink with friends and where there are no adults keeping the situation under control. This

occasion can also be regarded as suitable for trying out the effects of the consumption –

even an excessive one – of alcohol. The first drinking experiences with friends are not

always as moderate and gradual as ones with the family, and drinks consumed on these

occasions are usually stronger than wine or beer (Doxa 2010). As for consumption in

nightclubs, some researchers (e.g. Pollo 2002) explain that this is not only related to the

need to be approved by others (peer pressure) or to feel more uninhibited, but also to the

fact that drinks are often included in the ticket. Analysis can also be made relating to

the higher flexibility in the home curfew.

At least 22.9% of the sample only go to open bars occasionally (only 5% had gone

once a week or more, 8.3% at least once a month, 20.4% a few times over the year),

while pub-crawling , an organized event consisting of drinking in multiple pubs in a

single night, seems to be almost completely foreign to the interviewees (only 9.5% say

they have engaged in this activity, 67.5% have never engaged, the others are teetotal).The aperitif has become an increasingly common practice: 21.4% of the interviewees

admitted having drunk alcohol in bars offering aperitifs and happy hours at least once a

month (2.9% of them more than once a week), while 21.1% only go to this kind of bar

occasionally (less than once a month). Of course, we need to consider that they are

teenagers, and it is probably easier for them to go out for an aperitif at six in the

afternoon, rather than staying out all night pub-crawling .

Simultaneously considering the various drinking places, we have created a typolo-

gical index in relation to the context of consumption, in order to understand whether

young people tend to consume alcohol in one single occasion, for example only when

they go out to pubs or nightclubs, or instead drink on a number of different occasions(Figure 1).



7/26

We labeled the ones who prefer drinking on one single occasion as single-place

drinkers; two to four habitual occasions as mobile drinkers; and five or more habitual

drinking places as globe-trotters, who generally drink regardless of where they are or,

from another perspective, who create multiple occasions for drinking more. The non-

drinkers are those who have declared themselves to be teetotal.

Putting in relation the index of consumption with the place of residence (Table 1), we

would not notice relevant differences in the habits of those living in Rome versus the

Province of Rome, were it not for the fact that, among the first ones, the percentage of

globe-trotters is slightly higher (19.4% vs. 10.6%) and that of the mobile drinkers islower (38.5% vs. 43.2%). It could be said that this difference is due to a large city

offering more opportunities for drinking: there are many bars and pubs, and it is quite

easy to move around and go from one place to the other; additionally, there are districts

with a high concentration of bars and pubs, while small cities do not necessarily offer the

same variety.

Figure 1. Alcohol consumption in relation to the places of consumption, percentage distribution.

Table 1. Index of consumption in relation to the place of consumption, percentage distribution.

Place of

residence

Non-

drinkers

Single-place

drinkers

Mobile

drinkers

Globe-

trotters

Total

(%)

Rome 24.3 17.7 38.5 19.4 100

Province 25.3 21.0 43.2 10.6 100

Total 24.8 19.3 40.7 15.2 100

Table 2. Index of consumption in relation to gender, percentage distribution.

Non-drinkers Single-place drinkers Mobile drinkers Globe-trotters Total (%)

Male 20.7 17.6 41.7 20.0 100

Female 28.3 21.2 39.0 11.5 100Total 24.8 19.5 40.3 15.4 100



8/26

By correlating the index of consumption with gender (Table 2), we can see that the

percentage of globe-trotters is higher among males (20% vs. 11.5% of females), while the

percentage of the non-drinkers is higher among females (28.3% vs. 20.7 of males).

The main difference between the various types of schools concerns the percentage of

non-drinkers, which is higher among the students of the secondary schools specializing in

classical studies and humanities9: this difference is due to the greater presence of girls in

these types of schools. Similarly, the high incidence of mobile drinkers in science high

schools and technical schools is due to the greater presence of males in these schools.

Excessive drinking generally occurs at parties (35%), in pubs (14.4%), nightclubs

(8.5%), and at meal times (4.6%). These statistics seem to confirm the findings of others

conducted both on a national level (such as the ISTAT Multipurpose Survey or the Doxa

Survey conducted on behalf of the Permanent Observatory on Youth and Alcohol) and on

a global scale (such as the ESPAD Survey and the HBSC – Health Behavior in School-

aged Children), which show that the consumption of alcohol among young Italians is

mostly a social, convivial practice.

Examining their answers about the ‘threshold’, i.e. how many glasses of alcohol they

can take before they get drunk, we see that the main alcoholic drinks they consume are

beer (indicated by 16.4%), spirits, which are mostly taken in the form of cocktails (13%

of the interviewees), and wine (although this last one is not favored, as indications show a

low 6.3%).10 These three are the ones most often related to alcohol abuse, with regard to

which the ‘threshold’ indicated by the young people exceeds (in some cases even

abundantly) five glasses per night. For instance, if we consider only the first alcoholic

drink that young people have indicated in their answers, 25% reported drinking from two

to four glasses, 18% identify the ‘threshold’ as between five and seven glasses, and 6.5%

believe they can drink more than eight glasses.11

Additionally, 41% of the young people admitted having gotten drunk at least once

(429 students); among them, 6.8% answered ‘last week ’, 8.4% ‘last month’, 15.8% ‘more

than a month ago’, and 10% ‘more than a year ago’. The first two answers were mostly

provided by boys; while regarding the type of school, most of those who claimed to have

recently gotten drunk came from technical schools.

Figure 2. Typology of alcohol consumption, percentage distribution.



9/26

To understand better the consumption patterns of the young people surveyed, we have

constructed an index and obtained a typology (Figure 2).12 The index summarizes five

types of drinkers: compulsive drinkers, who tend to drink excessively and frequently;

habitué drinkers, who drink in moderation, but quite regularly; transgressive drinkers,

who drink rarely, but excessively; occasional drinkers, who drink infrequently and in

moderation; teetotalers, who have never drunk or only taste alcohol on special occasions

(such as New Year ’s Eve).

The relationship between index and place of residence (Table 3) shows some

significant differences between the young people living in Rome and those in the

Province: among the first, there is a higher percentage of compulsive drinkers (16.7% vs.

9.6%) and a lower percentage of occasional drinkers (24.3% vs. 34.6%).

As for gender differences (Table 4), the percentage of compulsive drinkers is higher

among males (19.2% vs. 8.7% of females), whereas the percentages of teetotalers and

occasional drinkers are higher among females.

Finally, we analyzed the relation between the index of alcohol consumption and that

related to the drinking places (Figure 3) in order to understand the relationship betweenthe access to a greater number of drinking places and/or occasions and the tendency to

drink more, as argued by some studies (among others, Doxa 2010).

Observing the distribution patterns, there seems to be a relationship between the

consumption of alcohol in many places or occasions and the higher consumption of

alcohol. The chi-square test shows a significant relationship ( χ 2 = 1377.32; sig. 0.000);

however, it is not possible to determine which variable is influencing the other. Is it the

heavy drinker who looks for more drinking occasions or is it the greater number of

drinking occasions that drives him/her to drink more?

The experience of drugs

On the question of the use of drugs, most of the young people (72.6%) state they have

never taken drugs. Among those who answered affirmatively (27.4%), 57% are males and

43% females, with 32.6% of the young people who live in Rome claiming to have taken

drugs at least once in their life versus 21.6% of the residents in the Province. As already

noted about alcohol abuse, drugs use is more prevalent among young people living in

urban areas than in the hinterland.

Table 3. Typology of alcohol consumption (%) in relation to place of residence.

Compulsive Habitué Transgressive Occasional Teetotal Total (%)

Rome 16.7 18.2 18.4 24.3 22.4 100

Province 9.6 14.5 16.8 34.6 24.4 100

Total 13.3 16.5 17.6 29.3 23.3 100

Table 4. Typology of alcohol consumption (%) in relation to gender.

Compulsive Habitué Transgressive Occasional Teetotal Total (%)

Male 19.2 18.2 19.9 25.3 17.4 100

Female 8.7 14.6 16.2 32.5 28.1 100Total 13.5 16.2 17.9 29.2 23.2 100



10/26

Students of technical schools are characterized by a great propensity to use drugs; by

the way, generally speaking, the type of school attended by the students does not seem to

affect the experiences of drug use.

The consumption is mostly limited to one type of substance: cannabis. On the whole,

241 young people declare that they use it and, among them, 137 can be seen as regular

users (more than once a month). The statistics available do not seem to support the

hypothesis of a simultaneous and regular consumption of more substances in more than a

few cases.13 On the other hand, drugs consumption seems to be scarce; very few

interviewees (only 45) have experienced drugs once or twice. Contrary to the findings

illustrated about alcohol experience, drugs consumption is a typical street experience (194

interviewees). Moreover, young people saying they consume cannabis at school are

quantitatively significant (105 interviewees). Contrary to private houses, schools and

streets are places under the public authorities’ control. For this reason, drugs consumption

on the streets and at school could be related to the wish of going beyond the limits.

However, parties and at home are the more indicated as places of drugs consumption (166

Figure 3. Typology of alcohol consumption in relation to the drinking place.

Figure 4. Relationship between alcohol consumption and use of drugs.



11/26

interviewees for ‘ parties’ and 128 for ‘at home’). This sounds quite expected because

parties and homes are places where the control is perceived less full of consequences.

To identify youth consumption patterns better, we have statistically analyzed the

relation between drugs and alcohol consumption (Figure 4).

We see that higher alcohol consumption seems to be associated with a more

widespread tendency to try psychoactive substances: the use of drugs is higher among

compulsive drinkers (73.9%); while 97.1% of teetotalers have declared no drugs

experience.

3. Young people, alcohol, and drugs: perception and risky behaviors

As we said before, a number of studies (Buzzi et al . 2007, CENSIS 2011, ISTAT 2011)

exploring ‘risky practices’ performed by young people (which include alcohol abuse and

use of psychoactive substances) show a progressive increase in behaviors that imply a

redefinition of the concepts of ‘limit ’ and ‘danger ’. In particular, Buzzi (2007) states that

there is an increasing trend toward a sort of ‘risk culture’ related to the need to experience

strong emotions through practices that challenge one’s limits and push them forward. The

risks associated with some behaviors are underestimated or even ‘accepted’ as a

necessary condition for experiencing strong emotions or feelings (Buzzi 2007, on

‘addiction culture’).

The roots of this phenomenon can be traced back to the cultural changes that have

affected new generations; society has changed and with it some features of youth culture.

The elements that characterize the contemporary age – high flexibility, uncertainty,

constant changes – have a deep impact on youth life experiences, self-construction, and

practices. Buzzi (2007) identifies four main consequences: the fragmentation and

relativization of values; the tendency to live in a constant present, without pursuing

long-term goals; the reversibility of the decisions considered as non-definitive choices

(‘here and now’); and, finally, the tendency to not take responsibility for one’s actions,

even when one’s health is at stake.

Confirming some findings of previous researches, our study shows some trends

concerning risk perception (attitude toward alcohol and drugs), the relationship between

perception and risky behaviors, and the influence of school and family on attitudes and

behaviors.

Consumer profiles

Highlighting the possible relationships between alcohol abuse14/smoking/drugs, we have

built up a type of ‘identikit ’ picture of multiple users in order to understand what

practices are most associated with alcohol abuse.

Analyzing the consumption behaviors reported, with regard to cigarettes, alcohol, and

drugs we identified the following types: virtuous users (about half of the sample), who

have never used psychoactive substances or used alcohol and cigarettes excessively;

single-substance users (about 20% of the sample) who overindulge in one of the three

substances; regulars, who habitually consume at least two of the substances indicated

(15%); and vicious users, who habitually smoke more than five cigarettes per day, use

illegal substances, and tend to overindulge in drink (accounting for 12% of the

interviewees).

Regulars and vicious users account for more than a quarter of the sample (about 27%). Their behavior shows the tight connection that can be established between the



12/26

consumption of alcohol and the access to other harmful substances such as tobacco and

drugs. Therefore, these users can be regarded as potentially ‘at risk ’. Consistently with

our findings about alcohol consumption, girls, youngsters, and those who live in the

Province have declared more ‘virtuous’ behaviors.

What they think about drugs and alcohol

In addition to the analysis of behaviors, we have considered what the interviewees think

about drugs and alcohol.

An index of the attitude toward drinking was built from a factorial analysis conducted

on an array of Likert scale items. We have selected seven items with high factor loading:

‘When you drink you have more fun’; ‘Drinking makes you more sociable’; ‘Alcohol

makes you feel more confident ’; ‘Drinking makes you forget your problems’; ‘Drinking

makes you lose your inhibitions’; ‘Getting drunk once in a while is normal’; and

‘Drinking is a way to escape from boredom’. The first factor accounts for 52% of the

overall variance, with the single items all having a high component score.15

The itemsreferring to the social implications of drinking have the highest scores, and therefore

contribute more significantly to the construction of the index. As Mazzara notes, ‘Alcohol

can present itself as a facilitating factor, both for its specific biochemical effects of

relaxation and disinhibition, and for the symbolic values that it is currently taking on as

an element of aggregation and distinctiveness for youth groups’ (2011, p. 22).

As expected, the index is directly related to age (Pearson’s R is equal to 0.255): as the

youngsters move closer to coming of age, drinking becomes a habit and, as such, is

regarded as a ‘habitual means of expression of sociality’ (Mazzara 2011, p. 22). There is a

significant difference in the value of the index between the under-16 group (−0.37 for 13-

year-olds;−

0.28 for 14-year-olds; 0 for 15-year-olds) and the age group from 16 years up(on average, 0.32). Living in a metropolis, it seems, contributes to a more disenchanted

attitude toward alcohol: the young people living in Rome have a medium index score of

0.90; while those in the Province have a negative score (−0.13). On average, girls seem to

have a more critical attitude toward alcohol (−0.13 versus 0.14).

As expected, habitual use is the variable that better correlates with a positive attitude:

those who often drink in pubs and bars, and those who drink wine and alcoholic

beverages a few times a week or every day, tend to regard their behavior and the effects it

produces positively. Indeed, the 87 young people who have practiced binge drinking in

the last few months have index values higher than 1; while those who have never been

intoxicated with alcohol to the extent of losing control, even partially, have instead an

average value of the index equal to −

0.30.

The attitude toward drinking is also negatively correlated with all the indices of

risk perception16 which we have constructed: those who have an essentially positive

perception of drinking are more inclined to underestimate the risk associated with alcohol

abuse and, in general, with the use of drugs. The underestimation of the risk is also

reflected in the behaviors of those who have an essentially positive view of the use of

alcohol: among those who drive under the influence of drink (38 individuals in all

responded with ‘often’ or ‘sometimes’), the index of the attitude is higher than 1.2. The

same value can be found among those who often ride in cars or on scooters driven by

people in a state of drunkenness.

However, the practice of identifying a designated driver 17 among a group of friendsdoes not seem very compatible with a positive view of drinking: if drinking makes people



13/26

more sociable, uninhibited and self-confident, and allows them to have more fun, it is

quite unlikely that each of them, in turns, will decide to stay ‘out of the group’. In the

groups of friends where everybody drinks, the index of the positive attitude is indeed

equal to 1.1.

Nevertheless, in this context characterized by a non-negative view of drinking,

alcohol abuse is mostly regarded by the interviewees as a high-risk practice, especially by

girls and younger people (on a scale from 1 to 10, the average risk score of girls is 8.6 vs.

8.1 of boys; among the 14–16-year-olds it is 8.45 vs. 8.22 of the people aged 17 years

and over) who, as we have seen, declared lower level of drugs and alcohol consumption.

Oddly enough, many of the interviewees consider alcohol abuse more risky than the

consumption of some drugs. As Figure 5 shows, alcohol abuse is evaluated as being more

risky than ecstasy and cocaine and less dangerous than smart drugs,18 heroin, and

hallucinogenics. Moreover, in line with the findings of the Eurostat survey (2011),

cannabis is regarded as less risky than other substances (Figure 5). Besides the differences

among each substance, the abuse of alcohol and the consumption of drugs are consideredrisky first and foremost because they may cause road accidents. So, we can say that the

interviewees enhance their awareness of dangers in everyday life. The fact that young

people aged 17 years and over are more aware of the risk of consumption of drugs and

alcohol than 14–16-year-olds confirms this consideration.

The role of school and family

School and family should act as reliable reference points for young people, helping them

become aware of the risks related to the abuse of alcohol and drugs and, in general,

the search for pointless extreme experiences. In particular, the school should be a reliable

source of support and advice, acting as a reinforcement of family care especially in the

cases of weak family relations. Nevertheless, several studies have shown that the school

experience is perceived as a sort of ‘necessary evil’ whose function is little understood by

young people (Galimberti 2008). These differences between school and family emerge

from the analysis of the relationship between risk perception and the roles of these social

institutions.

Figure 5. Average score of the risk indexes per substance.



14/26

As a matter of fact, the perceived risk related to alcohol abuse is higher among the

young people who have a dialogue with their parents on these issues. This confirms the

role that the family still plays in the lives and choices of children. The mutual

understanding and the shifting of parent –child relationships toward a more emotional

level than in the past, with more love than rules (Tagliaferro 2010), can result in children

becoming more responsible and reasonable, but also more aware of a problem if the

one who talks about it is regarded as a ‘reference model’ (see also Beccaria and

Rolando 2010).

The activity of the parents in raising children’s awareness of risk is particularly

effective also with respect to drugs consumption. The risk perceived in relation to the use

of all drugs is indeed higher for young people who have talked about the subject with

their parents (Table 5).

Although cannabis, as we have seen, is considered a not so dangerous drug, parental

involvement contributes to raising awareness about the risk related to its consumption.

Observing the same dynamics in relation to the role of the school, it is interesting tonote that in recent years educational institutions have been confronted with issues related

to the decline of their credibility and authority (Buzzi 2007, Galimberti 2008). First of all,

this is evidenced by the number of activities aimed at raising student awareness of the

issues investigated by this study: in 64% of the cases students have not been involved in

any awareness campaign; almost the 30% of interviewees attend schools that organized

campaigns about both the risk of alcohol abuse and drugs consumption; only 6% of them

have been involved in campaigns addressing one of the two issues.

In the context of schools, those which have carried out alcohol and drug awareness

activities have a higher percentage of young people engaging in risky behaviors

(Table 6 and 7). This seems to indicate a certain attention to promoting specific activitiesin the context where the problem is particularly relevant; on the whole, these activities,

although occasional, seem to be targeted.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that classroom awareness activities, where

performed, seem to have no impact on the perception of the risks associated with alcohol

abuse and the use of drugs, revealing a lack of effectiveness of these activities on the

attitudes of young people (Table 8).

From this, and in particular from the comparison of Table 5 with Table 8, it emerges

that family and schools play different roles in influencing young people’s attitudes toward

‘risky’ experiences related to the use of alcohol and drugs: parents are acknowledged as

an influential reference point, while school is not sufficiently influential.

Table 5. Perception of the risk associated with the use of the various types of drugs in relation to

awareness-raising activity by parents.

Risk perception in relation to the type of drug

Parents’ warnings Cannabis Cocaine Ecstasy Hallucinogens Amphetamines Smart drugs

Yes 6.6 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.3 8.8

No 5.7 7.7 7.9 8.1 7.8 7.4

Total 6.5 8.1 8.3 8.5 8.3 8.7 Note: The figures represent average scores.



15/26

4. Risky behaviors and social normsIn the study, the attitudes toward alcohol and drugs are also investigated as a limited field

of observation where it is possible to explore the relationship between young people and

rules. More in general, the use of alcohol and drugs can be seen as a lack of compliance

with, or defiance of, a basic rule that, in its starkest and strictest form, is probably seen by

young people as a recommendation that has nothing to do with their daily life.

With regard to use, we need to make a clear distinction between alcohol and drugs.

About 72% of the interviewees claim that they do not use – even occasionally – any type

of drug; the percentage of interviewees who do not drink any alcohol is instead about

23%. This macroscopic difference shows the varying degree of acceptability of these two

types of substances.

Tables 7. Relationship between risky behaviors (dangerous driving) and drug awareness activities

at school.

Drug awareness activities

No Yes Total

Drug/driving None 493 237 730

67.5% 32.5% 100%

At least one risky behavior 127 107 234

54.3% 45.7% 100%

Total 620 344 964

64.3% 35.7% 100%

Tables 6. Relationship between risky behaviors (dangerous driving) and alcohol awareness

activities at school.

Alcohol awareness activities

No Yes Total

Drink/driving None 506 187 693

73% 27% 100%

At least one risky behavior 161 119 280

57.5% 42.5% 100%

Total 667 280 973

68.6% 31.4% 100%

Table 8. Perception of the risk associated with the use of drugs in relation to classroom awareness

activities.

Perception of the risk in relation to the drug

Classroom

activities Cannabis Cocaine Ecstasy Hallucinogens Amphetamines

Smart

drugs Heroin

Yes 6.4 8.1 8.1 8.3 8.3 8.6 8.4

No 6.6 8.1 8.4 8.5 8.2 8.8 8.6

Total 6.6 8.1 8.3 8.4 8.3 8.7 8.5

Note: The figures represent average scores.



16/26

Not surprisingly, however, this difference is actually consistent with the dividing line

– crucial for every sociological analysis of the use of psychotropic substances – drawn

between legal and illegal substances (Goode 2001, Barbagli et al . 2003). In Italy, the

production, distri bution, and consumption of alcoholic beverages are activities subject to

fewer restrictions19; whereas drugs fall within the category of illegal psychotropic

substances. Nevertheless, the use of alcohol – especially when it is excessive – is socially

prescribed and prosecuted by the law in some situations20; it therefore makes sense to

regard it as a form of deviance.

As to the connection between young people and the norms, some parts of the

questionnaire have allowed us to investigate the relationship that young people have with

social and legal regulations concerning the use of psychotropic substances. We made sure

to ask the interviewees the frequency with which they engage in dangerous situations

and/or put other people in danger by driving under the influence of drugs (or alcohol) or

traveling in cars or on scooters driven by someone who has taken drugs (or has drunk too

much). These questions make it possible to assess on a behavioral level the risk

perception associated with alcohol and drugs and the degree of responsibility (towardoneself and others) that, independently of the use, guide young people in their choices.

Primarily, it is interesting to note that, contrary to what we have seen with use,

statistics show there are no significant differences between alcohol and drugs:

tendentially, the interviewees who adopt responsible behaviors, showing that they are

aware of the risks of alcohol, have the same attitude toward drugs. In considering this

result, we can say that the behaviors of each individual are ascribable to a general sense

of responsibility (which of course varies from one interviewee to another) rather than to

specific beliefs on the dangers of alcohol and drugs. Additionally, these results show that

the distinction between legal and illegal substances (which, as we have seen, is consistent

with the differences in the levels of use) becomes less relevant when we focus on thedimension of the risk associated with different types of psychotropic substances.

Using these considerations as a base, we have constructed a typology which

simultaneously takes into account both use and dimensions of responsibility, dividing

the interviewees into four types:

. The first, defined as dutiful , includes all the interviewees who do not use alcohol

or drugs and do not engage in risky situations (i.e. they have never ridden in a car

driven by someone who has taken drugs or has drunk too much);

. The second, the unaware, are those who tend to expose themselves to risky

situations even if they keep a low profile in terms of personal use (we have

therefore excluded from this group the interviewees who said they use both

alcohol and drugs);

. The third, the smart , consists of those who admitted using alcohol and/or drugs,

but have never engaged in risky situations or put others in danger by driving under

the influence of alcohol or drugs;

. The last, the transgressive, refers to those who admitted using alcohol and drugs,

and engage in risky situations such as driving under the influence of drugs (or

alcohol) or riding in a car or on a scooter driven by someone who has taken drugs

(or has drunk too much).

About half of the interviewees (45%) fall within the smart category; the attitude based onan awareness of the risks and dangers associated with alcohol and drugs in daily life



17/26

experiences is therefore more common than the attitudes of the dutiful (about 20%),

which are based on the ignorance of the problems that alcohol and drugs may cause.

Additionally, quite worrying is the significant incidence of the transgressive (about 20%),

the group that appears to be more at risk. Although less consistent than the other, the type

we define as unaware (about 15%) is also worth mentioning; it includes people

potentially at risk, even if characterized by a low level of alcohol and drugs consumption.

To some extent, these statistics seem to provide a less negative picture than those

contained in the latest report that the Italian Society of Alcohology presented in April

2012 at the Italian National Institute of Health. The report contains the results of a

monitoring operation (carried out through repeated interviews) over a three-month period

on a sample of very young people (aged from 12 to 13) who live in different cities of

Liguria. Anticipating some of the results of the survey being broadcast on some of the

most important national media, Testino (the coordinator of the survey) pointed out the

low awareness of the risks associated with alcohol among younger people. What actually

emerges from the statistics collected is that about 64% of the interviewees said: ‘If you

don’t drink too much you can certainly drive a scooter ’.

The results of our study cannot be strictly compared with those of the Italian Society

of Alcohology: the demographic and social contexts of Liguria and of the Roman area are

vastly different. However, if we wanted to find some connection between the two studies,

we could say that the disturbing unawareness that seems to characterize younger people

gives way to more mature attitudes toward alcohol as they grow out of their early teens

(our interviewees are generally aged between 15 and 18).

What is the socio-demographic profile of the above-described types? The attitude we

defined as transgressive seems to be more a male rather than female trait: among the

boys, the incidence of the transgressive type is equal to 25%, versus 15% among girls

(Table 9).

This difference seems to be completely in line with the results of many Italian and

international studies, which show that males approach alcohol and drugs before females

(Ravenna 1997, Johnston et al . 2002).

According to our data, even the age of the interviewees seems to make a difference.

As we can see from Table 10, the two age groups that we considered – with 17 pegged as

a threshold age – show considerable differences in terms of incidence of the different

types of attitude.

Among the younger people, the share of smart and dutiful individuals is very high,

but this could also depend on the opportunity structures available rather than on risk-

Table 9. Gender distribution of the types of attitudes toward alcohol and drugs.

Types of attitude toward alcohol and drugs

Dutiful Unaware Smart Transgressive Total

Gender Male Frequency 69 77 206 115 467

Row % 14.8% 16.5% 44.1% 24.6% 100.0%

Female Frequency 139 74 254 86 553

Row % 25.1% 13.4% 45.9% 15.6% 100.0%

Total Frequency 208 151 460 201 1020Row % 20.4% 14.8% 45.1% 19.7% 100.0%



18/26

aware assessments and decisions. In other words, it is likely that younger people do not

engage in risky situations related to the use of alcohol and drugs mainly because they

have fewer occasions than their older peers to move around (as drivers or passengers)

with a car or a scooter. If this interpretation in terms of opportunity structures is

appropriate, the high incidence (about 36%, i.e. more than one out of three) of

transgressive types among the older age group is particularly worrying; as if with age

the occasions for engaging in risky behaviors increase, but the sense of responsibility that

is necessary to prevent risky situations does not.

The cultural climate in which a youngster forms his/her own opinions and criteria for

assessing the legitimacy of specific behaviors is another factor that may significantly

affect his/her attitude toward alcohol and drugs. In this regard, it would be possible to

assume that the intellectual resources offered by the family of origin to a youngster

somehow play a role in the development of more or less responsible behavioral codes.

The statistics available seem to confirm this assumption. Following a well-established

practice, we have empirically defined the cultural level of the interviewees’ families,

focusing on the educational qualifications of their parents.21 Correlating this variable with

Table 10. Distribution by age groups of the type of attitude toward alcohol and drugs.

Type of attitude toward alcohol and drugs


Age groups Under 17 years Frequency 176 71 295 48 590Row % 29.8% 12.0% 50.0% 8.1% 100.0%

17 years

or over

Frequency 30 79 160 150 419

Row % 7.2% 18.9% 38.2% 35.8% 100.0%

Total Frequency 206 150 455 198 1009

Row % 20.4% 14.9% 45.1% 19.6% 100.0%

Table 11. Distribution of the types of attitudes toward alcohol and drugs according to the cultural

level of the family of origin.

Type of attitude toward alcohol and drugs


Cultural level of

the family of

origin

Low Frequency 71 52 115 58 296

Row % 24.0% 17.6% 38.9% 19.6% 100.0%

Medium-low Frequency 50 43 138 55 286

Row % 17.5% 15.0% 48.3% 19.2% 100.0%

Medium-high Frequency 38 30 103 39 210

Row % 18.1% 14.3% 49.0% 18.6% 100.0%

High Frequency 39 19 78 33 169

Row % 23.1% 11.2% 46.2% 19.5% 100.0%

Total Frequency 198 144 434 185 961

Row % 20.6% 15.0% 45.2% 19.3% 100.0%



19/26

the typology of attitudes toward alcohol and drugs, we can see that there are no

substantial differences (Table 11).

As is possible to note, the incidence of the transgressive type does not vary

significantly from the lower to the higher level; therefore, the development of

irresponsible and dangerous attitudes toward alcohol and drugs does not seem dependent

on the intellectual resources of the family of origin.

As for the family climate, the relational aspects instead seem to be much more

decisive. Some questions were aimed at reconstructing the relationships that the

youngsters interviewed have with their parents; in particular, one of these questions

allows us to identify the level of dialogue and mutual understanding on which the parent –

child relationship is based.

Among the transgressive type, the incidence of intergenerational non-communication

is very high: 41% say that they do not confide in their parents (Table 12). It is difficult to

establish a univocal causal relationship between the two variables: whether it is the non-

communication with parents that determines (presumably along with other factors) the

transgressive attitude; or it is the latter that has a negative impact on the dialogue between parents and children. In all probability, it is a vicious circle where the two tendencies are

fueling each other.

Adopting a broader definition of the concept of cultural climate, it may be interesting

to understand whether different levels of responsibility toward the risks associated with

alcohol and drugs are related to the place of residence. From this perspective, it may be

useful to compare the two subgroups of the sample: those who live in Rome and those in

one of the cities in the Province. The only substantial difference between the two

subgroups is that of the incidence of the transgressive type: 23.3% among the youngsters

who live in Rome versus less than 16% among those in the Province.

These statistics seem to highlight some differences between the cultural and socialcontext of the metropolis and that of the small cities in the Province, which results in

different levels of exposure to the risks associated with alcohol and drugs. Nevertheless,

Table 12. Relationship between type of attitude toward alcohol and drugs and degree of agreement

with the statement ‘My parents are persons in whom I confide’.

Degree of agreement with the statement: ‘My parents

are persons in whom I confide’

Totally or

partially indisagreement

Neither in

agreement nor disagreement

Totally or

partially inagreement Total

Types of

attitudes

toward

alcohol

and drugs

Dutiful Frequency 29 28 151 208

Row % 13.9% 13.5% 72.6% 100.0%

Unaware Frequency 35 21 94 150

Row % 23.3% 14.0% 62.7% 100.0%

Smart Frequency 118 62 277 457

Row % 25.8% 13.6% 60.6% 100.0%

Transgressive Frequency 83 32 86 201

Row % 41.3% 15.9% 42.8% 100.0%

Total Frequency 265 143 608 1.016

Row % 26.1% 14.1% 59.8% 100.0%



20/26

the differences between metropolis and small cities refer to only one of the types of

attitude we are analyzing, so these differences can be considered not particularly

noticeable. This seems consistent with the trends emerging from the scientific literature:

the diachronic analysis of the international studies on this subject actually shows a

progressive weakening of the relationship between urbanization and use of psychotropic

substances (Kandel 1993, Johnston et al . 2002).

Apart from the socio-demographic level, the analysis of the typology of attitudes

toward alcohol and drugs may also be conducted on a personality/psychological level.

Through a series of semantic differentials we have asked the interviewees to describe

themselves. Each semantic differential is marked by two bipolar adjectives generally used

to describe an individual’s personality,22 which were placed at the ends of a 10-point

rating scale. For each pair, respondents were asked to put a check mark in the box closest

to the adjective best describing their personality; the more appropriate an adjective

seemed, the closer they had to put their check mark to it. Each box was associated with a

numerical value, so that the one chosen by the interviewee can be regarded as an estimateof how much the individual thinks to be represented by one adjective or another.

From a personality and psychological perspective, the various types that we have

considered show some significant differences. Some of them are very predictable: for

example, the dutiful types generally consider themselves as more shy, calm, and careful

than all other groups; while the transgressive types tend instead to describe themselves as

rebels. Other differences are, however, less predictable and deserve further consideration.

The unaware types and, to a slightly greater extent, the transgressive types are

characterized by a higher sense of distrust of others and a certain pessimism about their

future (Figures 6 and 7). From this perspective, the careless attitude of these two types

toward rules does not seem to be either the effect of an alleged self-confidence or therecklessness of people who think to have their destiny in their hands and are at peace with

the world; but rather, a resentful recklessness tinged with uneasiness.

This interpretation evokes some aspects of Parsons’s complex sociological analysis of

deviance and of the relationship between individual and social norms. As Gallino notes

(1996, p. xviii–xxi), in Parsons’s view every detachment from socially shared norms is

the result of an interrupted process of interpenetration between social system and

personality.

Figure 6. Relationship between types of attitude toward alcohol and drugs and tendency to declareoneself distrustful of others, rather than trusting.



21/26

The association between transgression, resentment, and pessimism might also be

interpreted as a type of ‘labeling effect ’, through which the individual internalizes and

embodies a certain social stigma. Adapting Becker ’s reflections on deviance to our case

study, we could actually assume that, by declaring themselves distrustful and pessimistic,

the transgressive types adhere to a specific social representation that associates certain

behaviors (the lack of respect for the rules) with specific personality traits (antagonism,

defeatism, etc.) (Becker 1966).

5. Conclusions

Among the most significant aspects highlighted by the study is the relationship between

the experience of drinking and/or using cannabis and the search for excitement beyondmore or less formal rules. As has been shown, drinking alcohol is common practice at

parties and, in general, in pleasant social situations with friends and other young people,

which are beyond adult control. However, drinking is also an occasion not only to

experience new places, but to move from one place to another, meeting and talking to old

and new friends.

The experience of drinking is described by the interviewees as a search for social

relations, excitement, and spaces where they can be sociable. Paraphrasing what Simmel

(1917) wrote about conversations, we could say that alcohol and cannabis are a means to

create a role-playing game in a specific context and within a particular setting. Content,

value, and space only make sense in the functional play of entertainment and the form of

the exchange of relationships and emotions, which is special and particularly significant

(Simmel 1917). What seems to matter to young people is to be in the ‘here and now’, to

be in the company of peers, to take on a mobile identity that today is good, but tomorrow

could be different. In this respect, it is not surprising that those who admit having some

experience with drinking associate it with a dimension of sociability and search for

identity. Drinking in moderation is regarded not so much as an act in itself but as a set of

meanings that this act takes on in the creation of an atmosphere, a climate of sociability

and disinhibition.

While this is the dominant scene, it must also be noted that, on the whole, young

people tend to describe themselves as virtuous – indeed half of them say they have never

used alcohol or drugs – and are aware of the difference between use and abuse of thesesubstances.

Figure 7. Relationship between types of attitude toward alcohol and drugs and tendency to declare

oneself optimistic rather than pessimistic.



22/26

Risk perception places alcohol abuse as the highest risk, surpassed only by smart

drugs, heroin, and hallucinogens, whereas cannabis use is regarded by the interviewees as

less harmful than all other substances. The danger of alcohol abuse, along with the use of

hallucinogens and cannabis, is particularly associated with driving and with the

awareness of the risk of causing road accidents.

This awareness is accompanied by a particular sense of responsibility that could be

defined as ‘goal-oriented rationality’.23 The reference is to the presence of 45% of ‘smart ’

people, among the youngsters interviewed, who admit using alcohol and drugs, but say

they do not engage in risky situations such as driving under the influence or riding in a

car or on a scooter driven by someone who has drunk too much or taken drugs.

In this context, what is the image of the traditional socialization agencies? Family is

described by the youngsters as a reliable reference point, regarded not so much as an

authority that dictates rules but as a place of relationships and exchange of views and

affection, which in turn provides guidance and suggestions about behaviors, marking the

line between norms and transgressions. Its role is recognized by the interviewees and has

an influence on their perceptions and awareness in their experience of drinking and usingdrugs.

The school is instead considered differently and nearly as an after-thought; its

function is poorly recognized by young people and does not seem to have much influence

on their value references and their behaviors, in spite of the commitment of some of the

schools to the promotion of information and prevention activities related to alcohol abuse

and to the use of drugs.

Notes

1. On the distinction between ‘wet ’ cultures and ‘dry’ cultures in relation to the consumption of alcohol, and on the current trends compared to the past, see Room 2010 and the comments byCottino 2010.

2. This combination of alcohol abuse, of spirits in particular, cannabis, and synthetic drugs hadalready emerged in a previous study entitled ‘Public issues, social policies and communicationcampaigns. How to prevent the spread of alcohol abuse and smoking among young people’,which I coordinated. The study was based on 10 focus groups organized in 2008 in manyItalian cities, involving 82 high school students. The results of the study are partially reportedin Fazzi and Fabrizio 2011.

3. The study ‘Social representations and public discourse: young people and psychoactivesubstances’, funded by the Sapienza University in Rome, consists of two parts: a surveyconducted through a questionnaire administered to a sample of high schools in Rome and in the

Province of Rome; the lexical and textual analysis of the articles on the use of psychoactivesubstances among young people featured in some Italian newspapers in some particularlysignificant years, selected on the basis of the lexicometric analysis of the laws. With regard tothis second part, some findings have been published in Leone et al . (2012).

4. Information about methodology and sampling techniques adopted is provided in Section 2.5. To explore the above-mentioned topics better, the study also focuses on the personal

experiences of the youth in relation to their reference values, their relationship with theinstitutions, the media, and their peer group, and, more in general, their perception of their ownidentity and the future. These aspects remain in the background of the present analysis and will

be analyzed in-depth in another publication.6. In selecting schools, we conducted a multistage sampling, considering upper-secondary schools

as primary sampling units; the school sections as secondary units; and the students of the first and fifth classes as tertiary units. After drawing up a complete list of all upper-secondaryschools, selecting them from the public schools registered by the Italian Ministry of Educationin the school year 2010/2011 (with an overall reference population of 298 schools, of which



23/26

181 were located in the Municipality of Rome and 117 in the other cities of the Province), wehave ordered the list according to three criteria, in order of relevance: the location of the school,whether in Rome or in other cities of the province; the types of secondary school (vocational,technical, or grammar); and the post code. In consideration of our involvement of 15 schools,the skip was set at 20 (Skip = N/n = 298/15 = 19.9). The number drawn at random between 1and 20 was 14; therefore, the sample included all the schools ranked 14th in each of thesegments considered (basic sampling unit). To obviate the possibility that a school might refuseto participate, for each choice we also drew two extras to be used as back-ups. The interviewswere conducted in nine schools of Rome and in five schools located in the followingmunicipalities (one school for each municipality): Anzio, Bracciano, Colleferro, Fiumicino, andVelletri. In the first two weeks of November 2010, we contacted the principal of the selectedschools by telephone, at which time a date for the administration of the questionnaire wasagreed with the referring persons from the schools accepting participation. The schools that were not willing to participate in the survey were instead replaced by chosen back-ups. Of 15schools contacted, six were replaced. The choice of the sections was entrusted to the referringteachers, so as not to complicate further the already difficult organizational situation of theschools. Some schools were actually ‘comprehensive’ schools (i.e. two or more different typesof secondary schools that, in spite of being sometimes located in different sites – even at a

considerable distance from each other – are gathered under the same name and coordinated byone single school principal).

7. The remaining 6.7% answered ‘ No, but I used to drink alcohol in the past ’.8. The complete distribution is the following: ‘ before 12 years of age’, 12.5%; ‘ between 13 and

15 years’, 34.7%; ‘from 16 years up’, 10.8%; ‘I have never drunk ’, 23.6%; ‘I don’t remember ’ 18.4%.

9. Including the psycho-pedagogical schools and the ones specializing in artistic education.10. Of the young people interviewed, 7.5% reported drinking alcohol, but without specifying the

type; 18% were not able to identify a threshold level.11. It is worth noting that 44.2% do not know or do not specify.12. The index of alcohol consumption is the summary of three questions aimed at determining

whether the young people interviewed consume alcohol and how frequently. The questions

were: ‘Do you drink or have you ever drunk alcoholic beverages?’ (‘Yes’/ ‘ No, but I used todrink in the past ’/ ‘ No, I’m teetotal’); ‘How often do you drink wine or alcoholic beverages?’(‘Every day’/ ‘A few days a week ’/ ‘Seldom’/ ‘ Never ’); ‘In the last year, have you ever drunk at least six glasses of alcoholic beverages, even of different types, on the same occasion?’ (‘Yes,on more than 10 occasions’/ ‘Yes, on 5 to 9 occasions’/ ‘Yes, on less than 5 occasions’/ ‘Yes,once’/ ‘ Never ’). Before proceeding, we observed the univariate distribution; in the cases of skewed distributions, we opted for re-aggregations of the categories of the specific variableanalyzed, on the basis of their semantic affinity and of the number of cases related to thevarious modalities.

13. These findings confirm those of Pani (2011).14. By alcohol abuse we refer to the practice of binge drinking (consuming six or more alcoholic

drinks in a single session which can be more or less extended in time, MacLachlan and Smyth

2004); as for smoking, we considered medium-high levels of regular consumption (five or morecigarettes per day).15. ‘When you drink you have more fun’, 0.84; ‘Drinking makes you more sociable’, 0.82;

‘Alcohol makes you feel more confident ’, 0.75; ‘Drinking makes you forget your problems’,0.71; ‘Drinking makes you lose your inhibitions’, 0.68; ‘Getting drunk once in a while isnormal’, 0.65; ‘Drinking is a way to escape from boredom’, 0.56.

16. The different risk indices have been constructed as a summary of two series of questions whereinterviewees were asked how much, on a scale from 0 to 10, the people who use drugs(cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, hallucinogens, amphetamine, and others) or overindulge in alcoholrun the risk of: causing road accidents; engaging in risky sexual behaviors; having violent,self-destructive behaviors; having violent behaviors against others; causing damage to objects.We constructed eight risk indices for each substance (calculated as an average of the risk that each of the listed events may occur) and six risk indices for each event (calculated as anaverage of the risk for each of the events in relation to the use of the various substances). For example, the index of the perceived risk associated with alcohol results from the average of the



24/26

perceived risk that any of the above-mentioned events may occur; the index of risk for road

accidents results from the average of the scores attributed to the possibility that the use of

alcohol, cannabis, heroin, etc., may cause road accidents.17. The ‘designated driver ’ (for a night a group of friends ask a person inside the group to drive

everyone home and consequently to not drink for that night) has been proposed by the

European Campaign Eurobob 2004–

2005, coordinated by the Belgian institute for road safety.18. The terms ‘smart drugs’ defines ‘that mixes of natural and/or synthetic substances not banned

by law and including psychoactive properties’ (IIstituto Superiore di Sanità 2008).19. According to article 689 of the Criminal Code, sale of alcohol is not permitted to persons under

16 years old.20. As is known, the regulations in force forbid driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol,

and punish it with sanctions ranging from driver ’s license suspensions to prison sentences (see

Legislative Decree 117/2007).21. In particular, we have assigned a low cultural level to the families where both parents have not

attained upper secondary education; a medium-low level to those where both parents have an

upper secondary education; a medium-high level where only one has a university degree; and

high-level where both have a university degree.

22. By way of an example, some of the binary oppositions we considered were: ‘

restless / calm’

,‘self-confident / shy’, ‘reckless / careful’, ‘undisciplined / disciplined’.23. We draw on the reference to Weber proposed by Charlie Barnao (2008) to explain binge

drinking, mentioned in the Introduction.

References

Arcidiacono, F., 2000. Prima adolescenza e sviluppo dell’identità. Età evolutiva, 66, 109–115.Bacchini, D., Freda, M.F., and Cesaro, A.N., 2000. Determinanti socio-culturali dell’immagine di sé

in adolescenza. Psicologia clinica dello sviluppo, IV (2), 223–243.Barbagli, M., Colombo, A., and Savona, E., 2003. Sociologia della devianza. Bologna: il Mulino.Barnao, C., 2008. No alcol? No party! Etnografia e ricerca qualitativa, 2, 249–275.Beccaria, F., 2010. Stili del bere delle giovani generazioni: vent ’anni di ricerche qualitativa. In:

F. Prina and E. Tempesta, eds. Salute e Società. I giovani e l ’alcol: consumi, abusi, politiche.Una rassegna critica multidisciplinare, XIX (3), 62–82.

Beccaria, F. and Rolando, S., 2010. Cambiamenti di stile e stili di cambiamento. In: F. Beccaria, ed. Alcol e generazioni. Roma: Carocci, 41–180.

Becker, H.S., 1966. Outsiders. Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.Bonino, S., 2001. La famiglia e il benessere degli adolescenti. Nucleo monotematico. Età evolutiva,

69, 61–71.Boykin McElhaney, K. and Allen, J.P., 2001. Autonomy and adolescent social functioning: the

moderating effect of risk. Child development , 72 (1), 220–235.Buzzi, C., 2007. I giovani nell’era della flessibilità. In: C. Buzzi, A. Cavalli and A. de Lillo, eds.

Rapporto giovani. Sesta indagine dell ’ Istituto IARD sulla condizione giovanile in Italia.Bologna: il Mulino, 355–366.

Buzzi, C., Cavalli, A., and De Lillo, A., eds., 2007. Rapporto giovani. Sesta indagine dell ’ Istituto IARD sulla condizione giovanile in Italia. Bologna: il Mulino.

Cantor, N. and Kihlstrom, J.F., 1987. Personality and social intelligence. Englewood Cliffs, NY:Prentice Hall.

CENSIS, 2011. Bevande alcoliche in Italia 1991 – 2010: consumi e mutamenti sociali [online].Available from: http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r = http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_ id%253D35 [Accessed 3 July 2012].

Cervone, D. and Williams, S.L., 1992. Social cognitive theory and personality. In: G.V. Caprara andG.L. Van Heck, eds. Modern personality psychology: critical reviews and new directions . NewYork: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 200–252.

Collicelli, C., 2010. Stili di vita e culture del bere in Italia. In: F. Prina and E. Tempesta, eds. Salutee società. I giovani e l ’alcol: consumi, abusi, politiche. Una rassegna critica multidisciplinare,

XIX (3), 19–46.


http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35http://www.censis.it/censis/xeditor/visual_edit/35?r=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.censis.it%252Fcensis%252Fattachment%252Fprotected_download%252F3942%253Fview_id%253D35


25/26

Cottino, A., 2010. Culture “asciutte” e culture “ bagnate”: un De Profundis? In: F. Prina andE. Tempesta, eds. Salute e Società. I giovani e l ’alcol: consumi, abusi, politiche. Una rassegnacritica multidisciplinare, XIX (3), 241–242.

Dipartimento Politiche Antidroga, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, 2011. Relazione annualeal Parlamento 2011 Sull ’uso di sostanze stupefacenti e sullo stato delle tossicodipendenze in

Italia [online]. Available from: http://www.interno.it/mininterno/export/sites/default/it/assets/ files/21/0493_rapporto_droghe.pdf [Accessed 3 July 2012].

Doxa, 2010. Gli italiani e l’alcol. Consumi, tendenze e atteggiamenti in Italia. Sesta indagine DoxaOsservatorio permanente sui giovani e l’alcol. La salute umana, (229–230), Jan–Feb–Mar – Apr,9–11.

Espad, 2011. 2011 Espad Report. Substance use among students in 36 European countries [online].Available from: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_157437_EN_2011ESPAD%20summary_EN.pdf [Accessed 3 July 2012].

Eurobarometro, 2011. Youth attitudes on drugs. Analytical report [online]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_330_en.pdf [Accessed 3 July 2012].

Eurostat, 2011. Health. In: Europe in figures — Eurostat yearbook 2011. Bruxelles: EuropeanUnion, 159–190

Fabris, G., 2003. Il nuovo consumatore: verso il postmoderno. Milano: Franco Angeli.

Fazzi, G. and Fabrizio S., 2011. Bere tra socialità e sballo: la parola ai giovani. In-Formazione,V (7), 27–30.

Forni, E., 1997a. La ricerca sui giovani e l’alcool all’estero e in Italia. Somiglianze e differenze. In:A. Cottino and F. Prina, eds. Il bere giovane. Saggi sul rapporto tra giovani e alcool . Milano:Franco Angeli, II, 49–74.

Forni, E., 1997b. Stili e significati del bere. In: A. Cottino and F. Prina, eds. Il bere giovane. Saggi su giovani e alcol . Milano: Franco Angeli, III, 77–132.

Frontini, M., 2007. L’addiction: propensione individuale e influenza del contesto. In: C. Buzzi,A. Cavalli, and A. de Lillo, eds. Rapporto giovani. Sesta indagine dell ’ Istituto IARD sullacondizione giovanile in Italia. Bologna: il Mulino, 341–352.

Galimberti, U., 2008. L’ospite inquietante. Il nichilismo e i giovani. Milano: Feltrinelli.Gallino, L., 1996. Introduzione. In: T. Parsons, ed. Il sistema sociale. Milano: Comunità, ii–xlii.

Goode, E., 2001. Deviant behaviour . London: Prentice-Hall.Istituto Superiore di Sanità 2008. Smart drugs. Italy: Istituto Superiore di Sanità.ISTAT, 2011. L’uso e l’abuso di alcol in Italia. Statistiche in breve. http://www.istat.it/it/archivio/

22390 [Accessed 1 July 2011].ISTAT, 2012. L’uso e l’abuso dell’alcol in Italia. Statistiche in breve [online]. Available from: http://

www.istat.it/it/files/2012/04/alcol11aprileDEF.pdf?title= Uso + e+abuso + di + alcol + +- + 11%2Fapr%2F2012 + -+Testo+ integrale.pdf [Accessed 3 July 2011].

Järvinen, M. and Østergaard J., 2011. Dangers and pleasures: drug attitudes and experiences amongyoung people. Acta sociologica, 54 (4), 333–350.

Johnston, L.D., O’Malley, P.M., and Bachmann, J.G., 2002. Demographic subgroups trends for various licit and illicit drugs, 1971 – 2001. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research.

Kandel, D.B., 1993. The social demography of drug use. In: R. Bayer and G.M. Oppenheimer, eds.Confronting drug policy. Illicit drugs in a free society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

24–77.Leone, G., et al ., 2012. Alcohol as an object of social construction: a mixed methods

alcohol and drugs in youth lifestyles.pdf

Documents