Perpetration of Alcohol-Related Aggression by Male and Female College Students: An Examination of Overt and Relational Aggression

Abstract

Existing literature exemplifies the relationship between alcohol and overt aggression, especially for adult males. Less clear is the relationship between alcohol and aggression among male and female college students, in particular, the nature of this aggression and the co-occurrence of drinking and aggression on the same day (temporal proximity). This study examines the chronic and temporal nature of males’ and females’ alcohol-related aggression among college students. Two hundred fourteen students completed a web-based 7-day event-level survey measuring alcohol consumption and perpetration of physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger, and relational aggression over 4 weeks, resulting in 4,256 observations (days). The global analysis revealed students who are heavy drinkers are more likely to perpetrate all four forms of aggression, whereas the event-level analysis revealed that specific forms of aggression are associated with drinking at the time, while other forms were not linked to drinking occasions. Cross-tabulation revealed males and females were more likely to use verbal and physical aggression when drinking. For females, drinking was also associated with relational aggression and anger. Despite often being overlooked in research on aggression during emerging adulthood, relational aggression was prevalent. Discrepancies between the global and temporal analysis revealed factors other than alcohol might explain the relationship between chronic alcohol consumption and specific forms of aggression. This is one of the first event-level studies to show the temporal relationship between alcohol and relational aggression. The distinctions in the current study, exemplifying the diversity of alcohol-related aggression, are critical for understanding aggressive behavior, potential gender differences, and for developing interventions. The temporal relationship between alcohol and aggression suggests health interventions should target drinking and aggression simultaneously.

Keywords

aggression alcohol students gender

Background

Alcohol is a serious and well-established risk factor for aggression; however, the role of alcohol in the nature of younger adult’s perpetration of aggression is in its infancy. This study aimed to identify the nature of alcohol-related aggression among emerging adults, focusing in particular on first-year university students. Emerging adulthood is defined as a period in which individuals develop autonomy and their identities, typically between the ages of 18 and 25 (Arnett, 2000). Of particular relevance to the current study, emerging adults are susceptible to taking risks and abusing substances, due to their stage of brain development (Bava & Tapert, 2010) and because of the new contexts and freedom they typically experience during this life stage (Arnett, 2004). Substance abuse, including binge drinking, peaks during emerging adulthood (Naimi et al., 2003; Stone, Becker, Huber, & Catalano, 2012) and shapes later adult development (Stone et al., 2012). Of particular concern is the drinking behavior of college students, among whom drinking has been found to be the heaviest (Carter, Brandon, & Goldman, 2010) and thus a serious public health concern (Ham & Hope, 2003; Kypri, Langley, & Stephenson, 2005; Stone et al., 2012; White & Hingson, 2014).

Students who drink heavily experience numerous problems including health risks, academic problems, legal consequences, and interpersonal problems (Mallett et al., 2013; Perkins, 2002). Such heavy drinking has been associated with externalizing behavior including less concern for others and less compliance for laws or societal standards (Nelson & Padilla-Walker, 2013). Relatedly, alcohol-related aggression has been reported as a serious and enduring problem among college students (Hingson, Zha, & Weitzman, 2009). In the United States alone, more than 600,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are assaulted each year by another student who has been drinking, with 95% of all violent crime on college campuses involving the consumption of alcohol by the assailant, victim, or both (National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, 2011). Understanding risks associated with negative health behaviors such as aggression is an important component of prevention science (Coie et al., 1993).

Notably, in the academic literature, although we know students engage in alcohol-related aggression (e.g., Hingson et al., 2009), we know less about the various types of aggression (the nature of aggression) male and female students perpetrate (Dumas, Wells, Tremblay, & Graham, 2013). Most research to date has focused on overt aggression (e.g., Swahn & Donovan, 2006). In a review of recreational drug use and aggression, Tomlinson, Brown, and Hoaken (2016) discuss that the way aggression has been measured might capture male aggression more so than female-perpetrated aggression, and as such, the relationship between alcohol and aggression among female adolescents remains unclear. In accordance, some research reveals young males and females might engage in differing types of aggression, with males more likely to engage in overt aggression, while females are more likely to engage in relational aggression (e.g., Nelson, Springer, Nelson, & Bean, 2008; Putallaz et al., 2007), although findings have not been consistent (Loudin, Loukas, & Robinson, 2003). Thus, to understand the nature of alcohol-related aggression during emerging adulthood, it is important to extend the various types of aggression examined as well as identify the types of aggression more common to males and females.

Theoretical Grounding and Literature Review

Theories of Sex and Aggression

To understand sex differences in alcohol-related aggression, it is important to consider dominant theories on sex and aggression, namely, sexual selection theory (SST; Trivers, 1972), social role theory (SRT; Bettencourt & Kernahan, 1997; Eagly & Steffen, 1986), and social learning theory (SLT; Bandura, 1973). SRT postulates that historical sex divisions in labor, with women working inside and men outside of the home, led to expectancies in sex-typed behavior, which continue to be transmitted through socialization (Archer, 2004; Eagly, 1987). Expectancies include men having more masculine agentic traits, while women are expected to have communal traits, and as a result, boys learn that responding aggressively is appropriate (Archer, 2004). Similar to SRT, SLT also focuses on the socialization of cultural values (Bandura, 1973), and aggression is argued to be learnt through exposure to violent role models, peers, and programming (see Côté, 2007). Sex-typed differences in aggression are said to arise because the socialization of boys and girls differs. For instance, the tendency for girls to value and play in small close friendship groups offers opportunities to develop alternatives to physical aggression such as negotiation skills (Maccoby, 1998); however, the importance of these groups has also been suggested to provide a context in which indirect aggression develops (Galen & Underwood, 1997). However, the socialization of boys, which often involves competitive physical play, has been argued to encourage aggressive behavior (Archer, 2004; Côté, 2007; Maccoby, 1998). SLT predicts that sex differences in aggression should increase throughout development; however, research does not support this trajectory (Archer, 2004; Côté, 2007).

Another evolutionary model explaining sex differences in aggression is the SST, which argues that sex differences in aggression are an adaptation to parental investment (Trivers, 1972). According to SST, males are less invested in their offspring, experience more competition for mates, and use overt aggression to fight off competitors (Archer, 2004; Hess & Hagen, 2006). Females, however, might be expected to use more indirect aggression because they need to protect their own lives for the survival of their offspring (Campbell, 1999). Indirect aggression might also help to remove a rival from competition (Archer & Coyne, 2005). Indeed, indirect aggression has been conceptualized as an intrasexual competition strategy (Vaillancourt, 2013). Based on SST, sex differences will be largest when reproductive competition is highest, during the peak of sexual activity (Archer, 2004).

Empirical research has found partial support for the dominant theories and, in particular, for SST. In a large meta-analysis, Archer (2004) found males were more likely than females to use physical aggression and that the use of physical aggression peaked during the sexually reproductive years, aligning with predictions from SST. However, findings regarding indirect aggression did not support SST, with sex differences either absent or only slightly in the female direction. Similar findings have been reported with children and adolescents (Card, Stucky, Sawalani, & Little, 2008). Experimental evidence with adults, however, revealed that when provoked, women show a greater desire than men to want to retaliate through the use of indirect aggression (Hess & Hagen, 2006). Thus, in the context of social alcohol consumption, where students are most likely to “hookup” (Grello, Welsh, & Harper, 2006; Paul & Hayes, 2002), and in fact premeditate hooking up (Paul & Hayes, 2002), it is possible that provocation and competition is at its highest and sex differences in aggression might be evident.

Theories of Alcohol-Related Aggression

Theoretical explanations of alcohol-related aggression reflect the fact that aggression is associated with chronic and temporal consumption. The temporal relationship between alcohol and aggression is theoretically underpinned by the proximal-effects model (aka acute effects model) that posits that there is a direct relationship between alcohol and consequences; the acute effect of alcohol impairs information processing leading to decreased inhibitions (Leonard, 1984) and a distortion of cues (Steele & Josephs, 1990), although it is most likely that a disposition toward aggression (Eckhardt & Crane, 2008; Giancola, 2006) and the expectation that alcohol leads to aggression (Barnwell, Borders, & Earleywine, 2006) must also be present. The chronic-effects model, however, suggests that individuals who engage in chronic alcohol consumption are more likely to be aggressive, regardless of whether they have consumed alcohol at the time (Lipsey, Wilson, Cohen, & Derzon, 1997; see White, Jackson, & Loeber, 2009, for an overview of the two theories). Research exploring both drinking at the time of the incident and global drinking behavior finds support for both models (e.g., Neal & Carey, 2007), reinforcing the importance of both theories for understanding alcohol-related aggression. Given the theoretical underpinnings of alcohol-related aggression, a global analysis examining the relationship between typical alcohol consumption and aggression will be employed to examine the chronic-effects model, while an event-level analysis examining the co-occurrence of drinking at the time and aggression will be employed to examine the proximal-effects model. Event-level analyses offer strengths over global analyses because the method enables inferences regarding the temporal link between alcohol and aggression among students and young people (Margolin, Ramos, Baucom, Bennett, & Guran, 2013; Neal & Fromme, 2007; Wells, Graham, Speechley, & Koval, 2005; Wells, Mihic, Tremblay, Graham, & Demers, 2008).

Focus on Overt forms of Aggression

The tendency of past event-level research to focus on physical and verbal aggression has meant that less is known about the links between alcohol and other forms of aggression. Authors have noted that the characteristics of emerging adulthood, in particular developing ones identity and developing new and diverse relationships, might form part of a context in which relational forms of aggression are likely (Nelson et al., 2008). Indeed, relational aggression is apparent among students (e.g., Basow, Cahill, Phelan, Longshore, & McGillicuddy-DeLisi, 2007; Loudin et al., 2003; Storch, Bagner, Geffken, & Baumeister, 2004; Werner & Crick, 1999). The dearth of event-level research between alcohol and relational aggression is surprising given that the risk factors for overt and relational aggression have been found to overlap (Herrenkohl et al., 2007). Furthermore, relational aggression has been linked to global (i.e., typical) alcohol misuse (Dahlen, Czar, Prather, & Dyess, 2013), especially among women (Storch et al., 2004) and is argued to be similar to physical aggression in terms of perceived harm (Archer & Coyne, 2005; Williams, Richardson, Hammock, & Janit, 2012). Relational aggression has been given various names (e.g., indirect, social), each associated with slightly different behaviors; however, it is generally accepted that the different forms are similar in that they all involve aggression intended to harm social relationships (Archer & Coyne, 2005) through such behaviors as gossiping, spreading rumors, and social exclusion (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). In line with leading researchers in the area, we also considered hostile electronic messages as a form of relational aggression given it is only the medium that differs rather than the act itself (Kellerman, Margolin, Borofsky, Baucom, & Iturralde, 2013). There is a lack of research on relational aggression perpetrated via electronic media (Bennett, Guran, Ramos, & Margolin 2011), despite growing concern in the widespread use, and associated negative consequences, of such aggression (Kowalski, Giumetti, Schroeder, & Lattanner, 2014; Vieno et al., 2014), especially among college students (Kellerman et al., 2013). Indeed, electronic victimization is apparent among student samples and for females, alcohol use is associated with being the victim of electronic aggression (Bennett et al., 2011) and the perpetrator of electronic aggression (Selkie, Kota, Chan, & Moreno, 2015). However, the temporal association between relational electronic aggression and alcohol is not known. Moreover, given that indirect aggression has been referred to as “the sword of a woman” (McAndrew, 2014), relational aggression needs to be considered as a separate type of aggression in addition to more commonly examined forms of aggression (i.e., verbal and physical aggression).

Knowledge regarding the specific forms of aggression associated with alcohol has been limited by the way aggression has been operationalized in past event-level research (Tomlinson et al., 2016), typically analyzed as an overarching aggression score encompassing multiple forms of aggression (Neal & Fromme, 2007). In fact, the dearth of information on the types of aggression associated with alcohol has been argued to be a limitation across the field of alcohol-related aggression (Sheehan, Linden-Carmichael, & Lau-Barraco, 2016). Thus, questions remain about the specific types of aggression that are more likely to be associated with drinking.

The way aggression has been operationalized might also account for reported variations in findings across studies, especially with regard to sex differences. For instance, some find male and female students are equally likely to perpetrate alcohol-related aggression when aggression is measured as “getting into a physical fight” (Barnett et al., 2014). Aggression measured as “became angry or engaged in verbal/physical fights,” has been found to be more likely to be reported by females than males (Neal & Fromme, 2007). Similarly, females have been found to report more alcohol-related arguments than males (Dumas et al., 2013). However, when aggression has been measured as an overarching item, based on different types of aggressive behavior, associations have been found for men but not women (Margolin et al., 2013). Sugarman, DeMartini, and Carey (2009) recommended future event-level research be conducted to examine the relationship more closely. Thus, the present study aims to clarify sex-specific relationships between alcohol and aggression, addressing diversity in aggression and extending the hotly debated topic of sex and interpersonal aggression (Grych & Swan, 2012). Thus, the present study extends the field by examining the relationship between alcohol and specific forms of aggression for a sample of male and female New Zealand university students. A recent study of New Zealand university students found more than 70% reported engaging in heavy consumption within the past 4 weeks (Connor, Psutka, Cousins, Gray, & Kypri, 2013). Similarly, in Sweden, 77% of a student sample reported engaging in binge drinking at least once a month (Andersson, Wiréhn, Ölvander, Ekman, & Bendtsen, 2009). University students’ hazardous alcohol consumption is a serious concern in New Zealand (Kypri et al., 2009), and is similar to that in other western countries, for instance, North and South America and Europe (Karam, Kypri, & Salamoun, 2007). Thus, New Zealand provides a reasonable context from which to draw conclusions regarding alcohol-related aggression. Gathering such information is necessary for effective research-informed interventions (Gerbaud et al., 2015).

Present Study

The present study drew on the proximal-effects model and chronic-effects model to extend past research by examining the association between alcohol and different forms of overt aggression separately (e.g., physical, verbal, anger) as a function of global alcohol consumption and drinking at the time. Anger was included as a separate form of aggression in the current study to extend and tease apart past research findings, which have examined aggression as an overarching behavior encompassing anger and other types of aggression together. Moreover, although anger is a precursor to other forms of aggression and has been argued to be the “accelerator pedal” for aggression (Cross & Campbell, 2014), anger differs to verbal and physical aggression in that it is not necessarily discharged (Campbell & Muncer, 2008).

In addition, this is one of the first studies to conduct an event-level analysis between alcohol and relational aggression (face to face and electronic). To serve as a control, students were asked to report their drinking and aggression independently of each other, regardless of whether the two coexisted, addressing limitations noted in previous research (Wells et al., 2008). Identifying specific forms of alcohol-related aggression may provide important information for future interventions; according to temporal construal theory (Hall & Fong, 2007), more immediate and salient risks are more likely to deter behavior. Thus, we asked,

Research Question 1: What is the relationship between alcohol consumption and anger, verbal aggression, physical aggression, and relational aggression for male and female university students?

Method

Sample

A total of 239 university of Otago first-year students took part in the study. Participants were recruited through verbal announcements made in five residential colleges, asking for volunteers to take part in a study looking at behavior and alcohol. First-year students entering university in New Zealand predominantly reside in residential colleges; thus, the sample was not limited by sex, socioeconomic, or ethnic differences, and was representative of first-year students in terms of the range of study areas. The study involved completing a 7-day web-based diary at four time points. Twenty-five participants’ responses were incomplete and removed from analysis. Of the remaining 214 participants, the majority completed at least three of the four surveys. Demographic data revealed the sample were predominantly New Zealand European (80.7%), the average age of participants was 18 years, and 60.3% of participants were female. In total, 4,256 observations (days) were obtained. Participants were incentivized by a prize draw to win vouchers or small confectionary items. This study was reviewed and approved by the ethical review committee at the university of Otago. All participants provided written consent after reviewing an information sheet about the study.

Procedures and Measures

A link to an anonymous web-based weekly diary, measuring alcohol consumption and aggressive behavior was emailed to participants every fortnight for a period of 2 months. Data were collected using a 1-week retrospective diary, in which students were required to report their drinking and behavior for each day of the past week. Retrospective reports of up to a week have been used successfully by other researchers in the field (Neal & Fromme, 2007). Participants were sent two reminder emails if they failed to complete the questionnaire.

Alcohol consumption

Participants reporting consuming alcohol were asked to state the brand/type, volume, and alcohol percentage of the alcohol they consumed. A researcher calculated standard drinks from participants’ self-reports using the Food Standards Authority NZ (2004) formula (volume of container in liters × % alcohol by volume [mL/100 mL] × 0.789). This method for estimating standard drinks aligns with recommendations from past researchers in the area (De Visser & Birch, 2012; Greenfield & Kerr, 2008).

Classification of drinking

To describe the sample and to enable the global analyses, instances of alcohol consumption were classified into two categories based on standard drink consumption: moderate consumption (females ≤ 4, males ≤ 5) and heavy consumption (females > 4, males > 5) using the guidelines of the New Zealand Health Promotion Agency (HPA, 2014) for single occasion consumption.

Global analysis of drinking

Participants’ global drinking behavior was determined by dividing the total standard drinks they consumed by the total days the participants consumed alcohol and then classifying participants as moderate or heavy drinkers using the HPA criteria above. Participants who did not drink during the study were not included in the global drinking classification.

Aggression

Participants were asked to report whether they had engaged in seven aggressive behaviors for each day of the past week. Following reports of aggression, students reported whether or not they were drinking at the time to enable the event-level analysis. For the purpose of interpretation, the seven aggressive acts were also categorized into four main types of aggression, specifically, anger, verbal aggression, physical aggression (physical and severe physical), and relational aggression (rumors, exclusion, and electronic aggression). Verbal, physical, and severe physical aggression were measured using items from the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2; Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996; verbal—“insulted, swore, shouted, or yelled at someone”; physical—“pushed, shoved, slapped, or threw something at someone”; severe physical—“punched, hit, or kicked someone”). To measure face-to-face relational aggression, two items from the Indirect Aggression Scale were used (Forrest, Eatough, & Shevlin, 2005; social exclusion—“intentionally ignored or excluded somebody”; rumors—“gossiped, spread rumors, or made fun of someone”) and one item developed for this study was used to measure electronic relational aggression (sending someone a nasty message). Anger was examined using one item developed for this study measuring becoming angry around someone.

Analysis

To explore the nature of aggression, the percentage of participants perpetrating aggression at least once during the measurement period was calculated and examined as a function of sex. Cross-tabulation and chi-square tests were performed to examine whether aggression varied between men and women or as a function of global alcohol consumption. For the purposes of event-level analysis, panel data were used and cross-tabulation chi-square analysis completed. When cell sizes were less than five, the Fisher’s exact test was used.

Results

Sample Analysis

Alcohol consumption

Of the 214 participants, 87.4% (n = 187) were recorded as having consumed alcohol during the data collection period. Using the HPA classification, 77.6% (n = 166) engaged in heavy and 52.3% (n = 112) engaged in moderate drinking at least once during the four measurement weeks. The extent of heavy consumption is similar to that found in other western countries (Karam et al., 2007). Because participants could report up to 28 days of drinking behavior, it was possible for participants to be classified as being a heavier or a moderate drinker at different time points.

Nature of aggression over the 28-day measurement period (independent of alcohol consumption)

Anger was common (40.2%), while the least common form was severe physical aggression (2.8%). A cross-tabulation and chi-square test revealed more females reported anger (χ² = 4.161, df = 1, p = .041) and electronic aggression (χ² = 9.418, df = 1, p = .002) than males. No other significant sex differences were found. Refer to Table 1 for percentages.

Table 1.

Extent of Aggression by Sex.

Type of Aggression	% (n)	Male (n = 85)	Female (n = 129)	p
Anger	40.2% (86)	31.8% (27)	45.7% (59)	.041
Verbal	19.6% (42)	25.9% (22)	15.5% (20)	.061
Physical
Physical	7.5% (16)	4.7% (4)	9.3% (12)	.211
Severe physical	2.8% (6)	2.4% (2)	3.1% (4)	1.000
Relational
Rumors	19.2% (41)	21.2% (18)	17.8% (23)	.543
Exclusion	15.9% (34)	12.9% (11)	17.8% (23)	.338
Electronic	13.6% (29)	4.7% (4)	19.4% (25)	.002

Average alcohol consumption and aggression

As shown in Table 2, participants classified as heavy drinkers were significantly more likely than moderate drinkers to self-report all types of aggression.

Table 2.

Percentage of Participants Engaging in Aggression as a Function of Their Global Drinking Status.

Types of Aggression	Drinking Status		p
Aggression	Moderate	Heavy	p
Anger	19.2% (105)	25.0% (628)	.004
Verbal	19.6% (107)	25.4% (639)	.004
Physical
Physical	20.1% (110)	25.9% (651)	.005
Severe physical	20.1% (110)	25.9% (650)	.005
Relational
Rumors	19.2% (105)	25.5% (640)	.002
Exclusion	20.1% (110)	25.6% (643)	.007
Electronic	20.1% (110)	25.7% (646)	.006

Event-level alcohol analysis

Among the 4,256 observations, 17.9% (n = 763) involved a report of alcohol consumption. Table 3 shows by sex, the frequency distributions for each type of aggression as a function of drinking behavior (drinking or not drinking at the time). Males and females were more likely to report verbal and physical aggression when they were drinking compared with not drinking. Females were also significantly more likely to report anger, and relational aggression (electronic and rumors) when drinking compared with not drinking at the time. No significant differences were found among males for anger or electronic aggression. Males were more likely to report severe physical when drinking compared with not drinking, although the overall instance of severe physical aggression among the sample was low (n = 6). No significant differences were found among females for severe physical and drinking. Males were significantly less likely to report rumors when drinking compared with not drinking. There were no significant differences for exclusion as a function of drinking behavior for males or females.

Table 3.

Instances of Aggression by Sex as a Function of Whether Participants Were Drinking at the Time.

	Sex*	Not Drinking	Drinking	p	χ²
	Sex*	% (n)	% (n)	p	χ²
Anger	Female***	3.1% (71)	9.8% (46)	.000	42.063
Anger	Male	2.8% (36)	4.9% (13)	.085	2.974
Verbal	Female***	0.7% (15)	3.7% (18)	.000	31.242
Verbal	Male***	2.5% (32)	7.5% (20)	.000	16.726
Physical
Physical	Female***	0.1% (3)	2.0% (10)	.000	30.914
Physical	Male***	0.0% (0)	2.2% (6)	.000	27.678
Severe physical	Female	0.2% (5)	0.6% (3)	.158	2.102
Severe physical	Male**	0.0% (0)	1.1% (3)	.006	13.812
Relational
Rumors	Female*	1.5% (33)	3.1% (15)	.013	6.201
Rumors	Male*	6.2% (78)	2.3% (6)	.011	6.395
Exclusion	Female	1.2% (27)	1.7% (8)	.429	0.647
Exclusion	Male	1.8% (23)	1.5% (4)	.805	0.148
Electronic	Female***	0.9% (21)	3.3% (16)	.000	16.723
Electronic	Male	0.3% (4)	0.7% (2)	.599	0.981

Note. df = 1; *** = p <.001, ** = p <.001, * = p <.01.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to provide unique insights into the nature of alcohol-related aggression during emerging adulthood and, in particular, to address diversity in aggression by expanding knowledge on the similarities and differences in males’ and females’ use of alcohol-related aggression. The findings revealed aggression is pervasive among college students. Anger, and verbal, physical, and relational aggression were endemic within the college sample: 40.2% reported becoming angry around someone, approximately 20% reported engaging in verbal aggression and rumor spreading, and 7.5% reported perpetrating physical violence at least once over the 28-day period, exemplifying the need for research and interventions to target aggression among these emerging adults. Despite often being overlooked in research on aggression during emerging adulthood, relational aggression was prevalent. In fact, the prevalence of rumor spreading was similar to that of verbal aggression, and electronic relational aggression was more prevalent than physical aggression. Thus, to capture the true extent of aggression among emerging adults, it is essential to consider relational aggression, in addition to the more traditionally examined forms of aggression that are typically examined among this population (e.g., verbal and physical aggression).

In the absence of alcohol, there were few sex differences in the perpetration of aggression, similar to findings from the field of intimate partner violence (Robertson & Murachver, 2011; Straus & Gozjolko, 2014). Contrary to popular beliefs on sex and aggression, females were as likely as males to report perpetrating physical aggression, and males were as likely as females to report perpetrating two types of relational aggression (exclusion, rumors), contributing to the debate on sex and aggression. Of note, females were more likely than males to report using electronic relational aggression and to become angry. In fact, electronic aggression was the most commonly reported type of relational aggression reported by females. This finding emphasizes the necessity to include electronic relational aggression in future measures of relational aggression. Females’ greater experience of anger in the absence of increased verbal and physical aggression provides support to the notion that anger does not necessarily result in verbal and physical aggression (Campbell & Muncer, 2008) and should be considered as a separate item in measures of aggression.

Global and Event-Level Relationship Between Alcohol and Aggression

The examination of Research Question 1 revealed alcohol to be related to all forms of aggression examined and provided support for both the chronic- and proximal-effects models, similar to past research (Neal & Carey, 2007; Neal & Fromme, 2007). Students who are heavy drinkers are more likely to perpetrate aggression. However, global associations between alcohol and aggression could be due to common risk factors. Indeed, Nelson and Padilla-Walker (2013) identified heavy drinking as a pattern of floundering behavior associated with other externalizing and internalizing behaviors. Speculation that factors other than alcohol might explain the relationship between alcohol and aggression is further exemplified by the findings of the event-level analysis, which revealed that although specific forms of aggression are associated with drinking at the time, other forms were not linked to drinking occasions. Furthermore, the event-level analysis revealed that drinking influences men’s and women’s aggressive behavior differently. The present findings reveal the strength of event-level analyses over global analyses. Based on our findings, and supported by past research (Margolin et al., 2013; Neal & Fromme, 2007; Wells et al., 2005; Wells et al., 2008), we recommend that, where possible, future research examining alcohol-related aggression should employ event-level analyses.

The event-level analysis examining the relationship between specific forms of aggression for men and women provided unique insights into the forms of aggression more likely to be exacerbated by alcohol. Specifically, drinking at the time increased males’ and females’ likelihood of engaging in verbal and physical aggression. Although there was also an increased likelihood of severe physical aggression for males, the overall incidence of severe physical aggression was low. For females, alcohol exacerbated the forms of aggression that were found to be more characteristic of females in the absence of alcohol, specifically, anger and electronic relational aggression. It also led to an increase in rumor spreading. Thus, the change in females’ drinking behavior becoming more similar to the drinking behavior of males (White & Hingson, 2014) might partially help to explain why female aggression is increasingly coming to the forefront of public attention. Males, however, were less likely to spread rumors when drinking than not drinking. Interestingly, excluding someone showed no relationship with alcohol for either sex and highlights the differences in the relationship between alcohol and different types of relational aggression. The lack of a relationship between drinking and intentionally excluding someone is possibly due to the context in which people consume alcohol: It may be difficult to exclude someone when socializing in a confined area, for example, a licensed venue or private residence.

The finding that males and females were similarly likely to use physical aggression, both in the presence and absence of alcohol, contrasts to dominant theories on sex and aggression (SRT, SLT, SRT), which predict that males would be more likely to use physical aggression. Although males were more likely than females to use severe physical violence when drinking, we are tentative about offering conclusions based on this finding due to the low prevalence of severe physical aggression overall. The findings did show females to be more likely than males to use relational aggression, as would be expected from SLT (Galen & Underwood, 1997) and SST (Campbell, 1999). Of importance, this greater use of relational aggression was amplified in the context of drinking alcohol, a context in which students are most likely to “hookup” (Grello et al.,2006; Paul & Hayes, 2002), and thus, sexual competition would be greatest. Thus, although not conclusive, our findings align most closely with SST in which indirect aggression has been speculated to be used as a sexual competition strategy (Vaillancourt, 2013). Future qualitative research is recommended to delve into this finding in more detail, specifically exploring females’ self-reports for their use of relational aggression when drinking.

Limitations, Future Research, and Conclusion

We acknowledge limitations and sources of potential bias of this study. The reliance on students’ self-reports of their drinking and behavior carries the usual vulnerability associated with self-report data, with the possibility that certain behaviors were under- or overreported. However, the anonymity assured by the Internet-based questionnaire would have facilitated honest responses. Indeed, online surveys have strengths over more traditional methods, especially when collecting data on alcohol and drugs (McCabe, Boyd, Couper, Crawford, & D’Arcy, 2002). Furthermore, the extent of consumption reported in the current study was similar to that reported in previous New Zealand–based research (Connor et al., 2013), providing support for the validity of the findings. However, ascertaining the accuracy of self-reported aggression is difficult. The findings might not reflect the true extent of aggression because perpetration rates tend to be lower than victimization rates (Bell & Naugle, 2007) and perpetrators, in particular men, tend to underreport their aggression (Chan, 2011). Future research could extend the current findings by examining both the perpetration and victimization of alcohol-related aggression or by employing peer reports of alcohol-related aggression. Future research could also employ a larger sample and over a longer period to capture a higher incidence of severe physical aggression and enable inferences to be made. Although we collected a large number of behavioral observations over a 4-week period, the prevalence of severe physical violence was low and, therefore, limited our conclusions.

Furthermore, it was outside the scope of this study to analyze the relationship between perpetrators and victims (e.g., partner, acquaintance, friend, stranger); however, we acknowledge that sex differences in the types of aggression perpetrated are likely to vary based on the relationship between the two parties and, thus, we recommend this as an area for future research. Moreover, students were able to opt in and out of completing each week’s survey, which could have limited the strength of the global drinking analyses, however the majority of the students completed at least three of the four measurement weeks and, thus, we feel that this was unlikely. Our measure of electronic aggression included “angry and mean messages,” therefore, further research should look at electronic aggression in more detail and, in particular, separate angry from mean messages. Finally, the study focused on first-year students because this is a transition period where behaviors form and difficulties arise; however, this limits the extent to which the findings may be generalized to the wider emerging adult body.

The extent of heavy consumption, coupled with the increase in aggression when drinking, strongly supports the need for policies for greater control around access to alcohol for young people. In addition we recommend interventions directly targeting alcohol-related aggression. According to the temporal construal theory (Hall & Fong, 2007), an individual’s perception of the risks of a behavior is influenced by the perceived time frame in which they will occur, with more immediate and salient risks being more likely to deter behavior. Thus, the nature of aggression temporally associated with alcohol consumption identified in the current study will help to optimize future public health initiatives. For instance, although interventions aimed at men and women could focus on the increased risks of perpetrating verbal and physical aggression when drinking, interventions aimed at women could also focus on the increased risk of anger and relational aggression.

Overall, our findings extend past research by illuminating the types of aggression most likely to co-occur with alcohol consumption and begin to build a typology of sex-typed alcohol-related aggression during emerging adulthood. Of importance, females’ increased use of anger and relational aggression when drinking, and in particular electronic relational aggression, has furthered our understanding of females’ alcohol-related aggression. Our findings exemplify the need for future research to include these forms of aggression to capture the true extent of female-perpetrated aggression. Teasing out the similarities and differences between the sexes, particularly in light of the individual forms of aggression, provides further insight to assist with public health initiatives and to inform future research.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This grant was supported by a University of Otago Research Grant.

Author Biographies

Kirsten Robertson is a senior lecturer in marketing and a researcher on the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit at the University of Otago. Her research interests include interpersonal partner violence (IPV), alcohol-related aggression, students’ drinking behavior, illegal music piracy, and communication styles and language use.

Sarah Forbes is a lecturer in marketing at the University of Birmingham. Her research interests focus on social marketing and efforts related to physical activity and alcohol consumption.

Maree Thyne is an associate professor in marketing at the University of Otago. Her research interests include consumer behavior, students’ drinking behavior, children and consumption, adultification and children, authenticity, tourist behavior, and museum visitation.

References

Andersson

Wiréhn

A. B.

Ölvander

Ekman

D. S.

Bendtsen

(2009). Alcohol use among university students in Sweden measured by an electronic screening instrument. BMC Public Health, 9, 1-10.

Archer

(2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8, 291-322.

Archer

Coyne

S. M.

(2005). An integrated review of indirect, relational, and social aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 212-230.

Arnett

J. J.

(2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469-480.

Arnett

J. J.

(2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Bandura

(1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Barnett

N. P.

Clerkin

E. M.

Wood

Monti

P. M.

Tevyaw

T. O. L.

Corriveau

. . . Kahler

C. W.

(2014). Description and predictors of positive and negative alcohol-related consequences in the first year of college. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 75, 103-114.

Barnwell

S. S.

Borders

Earleywine

(2006). Alcohol-aggression expectancies and dispositional aggression moderate the relationship between alcohol consumption and alcohol-related violence. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 517-527.

Basow

S. A.

Cahill

K. F.

Phelan

J. E.

Longshore

McGillicuddy-DeLisi

(2007). Perceptions of relational and physical aggression among college students: Effects of gender of perpetrator, target, and perceiver. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 85-95.

10.

Bava

Tapert

S. F.

(2010). Adolescent brain development and the risk for alcohol and other drug problems. Neuropsychology Review, 20, 398-413.

11.

Bell

K. M.

Naugle

A. E.

(2007). Effects of social desirability on students’ self-reporting of partner abuse perpetration and victimization. Violence and Victims, 22, 243-256.

12.

Bennett

D. C.

Guran

E. L.

Ramos

M. C.

Margolin

(2011). College students’ electronic victimization in friendships and dating relationships: Anticipated distress and associations with risky behaviors. Violence and Victims, 26, 410-429.

13.

Bettencourt

Kernahan

. (1997). A meta-analysis of aggression in the presence of violent cues: Effects of gender differences and aversive provocation. Aggressive Behavior, 23, 447-456.

14.

Campbell

(1999). Staying alive: Evolution, culture, and women’s intrasexual aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 203-252.

15.

Campbell

Muncer

(2008). Intent to harm or injure? Gender and the expression of anger. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 282-293.

16.

Card

N. A.

Stucky

B. D.

Sawalani

G. M.

Little

T. D.

(2008). Direct and indirect aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of gender differences, intercorrelations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development, 79, 1185-1229.

17.

Carter

A. C.

Brandon

K. O.

Goldman

M. S.

(2010). The college and noncollege experience: A review of the factors that influence drinking behavior in young adulthood. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 71, 742-750.

18.

Chan

K. L.

(2011). Gender differences in self-reports of intimate partner violence: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 167-175.

19.

Coie

J. D.

Watt

N. F.

West

S. G.

Hawkins

J. D.

Asarnow

J. R.

Markman

H. J.

. . . Long

(1993). The science of prevention: A conceptual framework and some directions for a national research program. American Psychologist, 48, 1013-1022.

20.

Connor

Psutka

Cousins

Gray

Kypri

(2013). Risky drinking, risky sex: A national study of New Zealand University students. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 37, 1971-1978.

21.

Côté

S. M.

(2007). Sex differences in physical and indirect aggression: A developmental perspective. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 13, 183-200.

22.

Crick

N. R.

Grotpeter

J. K.

(1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722.

23.

Cross

C. P.

Campbell

A. C.

(2014). Violence and aggression in women. In Shackelford

T.K.

Hansen

R. D.

(Eds.), The evolution of violence (pp. 211-232). New York, NY: Springer.

24.

Dahlen

E. R.

Czar

K. A.

Prather

Dyess

(2013). Relational aggression & victimization in college students. Journal of College Student Development, 54, 140-154.

25.

De Visser

R. O.

Birch

J. D

. (2012). My cup runneth over: Young people’s lack of knowledge of low-risk drinking guidelines. Drug and Alcohol Review, 31, 206-212.

26.

Dumas

T. M.

Wells

Tremblay

P. F.

Graham

(2013). Teasing apart the roles of gender and alcohol in drinking consequences using an event-level analysis. Contemporary Drug Problems, 40, 321-349.

27.

Eagly

A. H.

(1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

28.

Eagly

A. H.

Steffen

V. J.

(1986). Gender and aggressive behavior: A meta-analytic review of the social psychological literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 309-330.

29.

Eckhardt

C. I.

Crane

(2008). Effects of alcohol intoxication and aggressivity on aggressive verbalizations during anger arousal. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 428-436.

30.

Forrest

Eatough

Shevlin

(2005). Measuring adult indirect aggression: The development and psychometric assessment of the indirect aggression scales. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 84-97.

31.

Galen

B. R.

Underwood

M. K.

(1997). A developmental investigation of social aggression among children. Developmental Psychology, 33, 589-600.

32.

Gerbaud

Hazart

Blanquet

Debost-Legrand

Perrève

Léger

. . . ADSSU Working Group. (2015). Are all types of violence the same among French students? The European Journal of Public Health, 25(Suppl. 3), 312-313.

33.

Giancola

P. R.

(2006). Influence of subjective intoxication, breath alcohol concentration, and expectancies on the alcohol-aggression relation. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 30, 844-850.

34.

Greenfield

T. K.

Kerr

W. C.

(2008). Alcohol measurement methodology in epidemiology: Recent advances and opportunities. Addiction, 103, 1082-1099.

35.

Grello

C. M.

Welsh

D. P.

Harper

M. S.

(2006). No strings attached: The nature of casual sex in college students. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 255-267.

36.

Grych

Swan

(2012). Toward a more comprehensive understanding of interpersonal violence: Introduction to the special issue on interconnections among different types of violence. Psychology of Violence, 2, 105-110.

37.

Hall

P. A.

Fong

G. T.

(2007). Temporal self-regulation theory: A model for individual health behaviour. Health Psychology Review, 1, 6-52.

38.

Ham

L. S.

Hope

D. A.

(2003). College students and problematic drinking: A review of the literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 719-759.

39.

Health Promotion Agency. (2014). Low-risk alcohol drinking advice. Retrieved from http://www.alcohol.org.nz/help-advice/advice-on-alcohol

40.

Herrenkohl

T. I.

McMorris

B. J.

Catalano

R. F.

Abbott

R. D.

Hemphill

S. A.

Toumbourou

J. W.

(2007). Risk factors for violence and relational aggression in adolescence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 386-405.

41.

Hess

N. H.

Hagen

E. H.

(2006). Sex differences in indirect aggression: Psychological evidence from young adults. Evolution & Human Behavior, 27, 231-245.

42.

Hingson

R. W.

Zha

Weitzman

E. R.

(2009). Magnitude of and trends in alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among US college students ages 18-24, 1998-2005. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, (Suppl. 16), 12-20.

43.

Karam

Kypri

Salamoun

(2007). Alcohol use among college students: An international perspective. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 20, 213-221.

44.

Kellerman

Margolin

Borofsky

L. A.

Baucom

B. R.

Iturralde

(2013). Electronic aggression among emerging adults motivations and contextual factors. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 293-304.

45.

Kowalski

R. M.

Giumetti

G. W.

Schroeder

A. N.

Lattanner

M. R.

(2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1073-1137.

46.

Kypri

Langley

Stephenson

(2005). Episode-centred analysis of drinking to intoxication in university students. Alcohol & Alcoholism, 40, 447-452.

47.

Kypri

Paschall

M. J.

Langley

Baxter

Cashell-Smith

Bourdeau

(2009). Drinking and alcohol-related harm among New Zealand University Students: Findings from a National Web-Based Survey. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 33, 307-314.

48.

Leonard

K. E.

(1984). Alcohol consumption and escalatory aggression in intoxicated and sober dyads. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 45, 75-80.

49.

Lipsey

M. W.

Wilson

D. B.

Cohen

M. A.

Derzon

J. H.

(1997). Is there a causal relationship between alcohol use and violence? A synthesis of evidence. In Galanter

(Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism (Vol. 13, pp. 245-282). New York, NY: Springer.

50.

Loudin

J. L.

Loukas

Robinson

(2003). Relational aggression in college students: Examining the roles of social anxiety and empathy. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 430-439.

51.

Maccoby

E. E.

(1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together (Vol. 4). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

52.

Mallett

K. A.

Varvil-Weld

Borsari

Read

J. P.

Neighbors

White

H. R.

(2013). An update of research examining college student alcohol-related consequences: New perspectives and implications for interventions. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 37, 709-716.

53.

Margolin

Ramos

M. C.

Baucom

B. R.

Bennett

D. C.

Guran

E. L.

(2013). Substance use, aggression perpetration, and victimization: Temporal co-occurrence in college males and females. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 2849-2872.

54.

McAndrew

F. T.

(2014). The “sword of a woman”: Gossip and female aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19, 196-199.

55.

McCabe

S. E.

Boyd

C. J.

Couper

M. P.

Crawford

D’Arcy

(2002). Mode effects for collecting alcohol and other drug use data: Web and U.S. mail. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 755-761.

56.

Naimi

T. S.

Brewer

R. D.

Mokdad

Denny

Serdula

M. K.

Marks

J. S.

(2003). Binge drinking among US adults. Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 70-75.

57.

National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence. (2011). Alcohol, drugs and crime. Retrieved from https://ncadd.org/about-addiction/alcohol-drugs-and-crime

58.

Neal

Carey

K. B.

(2007). Association between alcohol intoxication and alcohol-related problems: An event-level analysis. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 21, 194-204.

59.

Neal

D. J.

Fromme

(2007). Event-level covariation of alcohol intoxication and behavioural risks during the first year of college. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75, 294-306.

60.

Nelson

D. A.

Springer

M. M.

Nelson

L. J.

Bean

N. H.

(2008). Normative beliefs regarding aggression in emerging adulthood. Social Development, 17, 638-660.

61.

Nelson

L. J.

Padilla-Walker

L. M.

(2013). Flourishing and floundering in emerging adult college students. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 67-78.

62.

Paul

E. L.

Hayes

K. A.

(2002). The casualties of casual’ sex: A qualitative exploration of the phenomenology of college students’ hookups. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 639-661.

63.

Perkins

H. W.

(2002). Surveying the damage: A review of research on consequences of alcohol misuse in college populations. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, (Suppl. 14), 91-100.

64.

Putallaz

Grimes

C. L.

Foster

K. J.

Kupersmidt

J. B.

Coie

J. D.

Dearing

(2007). Overt and relational aggression and victimization: Multiple perspectives within the school setting. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 523-547.

65.

Robertson

Murachver

(2011). Women and men’s use of coercive control in intimate partner violence. Violence and Victims, 26, 208-217.

66.

Selkie

E. M.

Kota

Chan

Y. F.

Moreno

(2015). Cyberbullying, depression, and problem alcohol use in female college students: A multisite study. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 79-86.

67.

Sheehan

B. E.

Linden-Carmichael

A. N.

Lau-Barraco

(2016). Caffeinated and non-caffeinated alcohol use and indirect aggression: The impact of self-regulation. Addictive Behaviors, 58, 53-59.

68.

Steele

C. M.

Josephs

R. A.

(1990). Alcohol myopia: Its prized and dangerous effects. American Psychologist, 45, 921-933.

69.

Stone

A. L.

Becker

L. G.

Huber

A. M.

Catalano

R. F.

(2012). Review of risk and protective factors of substance use and problem use in emerging adulthood. Addictive Behaviors, 37, 747-775.

70.

Storch

E. A.

Bagner

D. M.

Geffken

G. R.

Baumeister

A. L.

(2004). Association between overt and relational aggression and psychosocial adjustment in undergraduate college students. Violence and Victims, 19, 689-700.

71.

Straus

M. A.

Gozjolko

K. L.

(2014). “Intimate terrorism” and gender differences in injury of dating partners by male and female university students. Journal of Family Violence, 29, 51-65.

72.

Straus

M. A.

Hamby

S. L.

Boney-McCoy

Sugarman

D. B.

(1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.

73.

Sugarman

D. E.

DeMartini

K. S.

Carey

K. B.

(2009). Are women at greater risk? An examination of alcohol-related consequences and gender. American Journal on Addictions, 18, 194-197.

74.

Swahn

M. H.

Donovan

J. E.

(2006). Alcohol and violence: Comparison of the psychosocial correlates of adolescent involvement in alcohol-related physical fighting versus other physical fighting. Addictive Behaviors, 31, 2014-2029.

75.

Tomlinson

M. F.

Brown

Hoaken

P. N.

(2016). Recreational drug use and human aggressive behavior: A comprehensive review since 2003. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 27, 9-29.

76.

Trivers

(1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell

(Ed.), Sexual selection & the descent of man (pp. 136-179). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

77.

Vaillancourt

. (2013). Do human females use indirect aggression as an intrasexual competition strategy? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368, 20130080.

78.

Vieno

Gini

Lenzi

Pozzoli

Canale

Santinello

(2014). Cybervictimization and somatic and psychological symptoms among Italian middle school students. The European Journal of Public Health, 25, 435-437.

79.

Wells

Graham

Speechley

Koval

(2005). Drinking patterns, drinking contexts and alcohol-related aggression among late adolescent and young adult drinkers. Addiction, 100, 933-944.

80.

Wells

Mihic

Tremblay

P. F.

Graham

Demers

(2008). Where, with whom, and how much alcohol is consumed on drinking events involving aggression? Event-level associations in a Canadian National Survey of University students. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 32, 522-533.

81.

Werner

N. E.

Crick

N. R.

(1999). Relational aggression and social-psychological adjustment in a college sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 615-623.

82.

White

Hingson

(2014). The burden of alcohol use: Excessive alcohol consumption and related consequences among college students. Alcohol Research: Current Reviews, 35, 201-218.

83.

White

H. R.

Jackson

K. M.

Loeber

(2009). Developmental sequences and comorbidity of substance use and violence. In Krohn

Lizotte

Hall

(Eds.), Handbook on crime and deviance (pp. 433-468). New York, NY: Springer.

84.

Williams

Richardson

D. S.

Hammock

G. S.

Janit

A. S.

(2012). Perceptions of physical and psychological aggression in close relationships: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 489-494.