A self-administered 16-page questionnaire eliciting opinions about cut-off points for alcohol misuse was mailed to ten experts (seven men, three women) in alcohol research and treatment. These experts were selected to be representative of alcohol investigators from universities and research institutions from across the United States of America. Experts were asked to provide input with respect to frequency-quantity of alcohol use, high-risk drinking, and negative consequences items. Results revealed considerable variability in opinion about the different indicators of alcohol misuse. Exact agreement between different alcohol-use experts was rare. Reliability estimates revealed highest agreement for indicators of high-risk drinking, followed by negative consequences, and then frequency-quantity. Comments from the experts indicated that most felt that frequency and quantity should be considered together rather than separately. As expected, recommended cut-off points for alcohol misuse varied by age of the drinker, with more leeway given to older than younger adolescents.
Originally published in: Alcohol and Alcoholism, v. 31, no. 3, 1996, pp. 297-303.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.
Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.