Constructing and negotiating boundaries of morally acceptable alcohol use: A discursive psychology of justifying alcohol consumption

Melia, Claire; Kent, Alexandra; Meredith, Joanne; Lamont, Alexandra

doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.107057

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This can be demonstrated in the use of terms such as ‘normal alcohol’ and references to ‘people who have drink problems’. Such moral comparisons have been demonstrated in other qualitative research; Melia et al's (2021) participants constructed themselves as responsible drinkers by positioning themselves as on the right side of a socially acceptable boundary between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. An important way for our participants to validate that they were on the right side of the line between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ drinkers was to (attempt to) demonstrate their prior health awareness and to distance oneself from problem drinkers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…People interpret ‘responsible drinking’ to mean drinking without unwanted consequences (Stautz & Marteau, 2016), and being in control (Roznowski & Eckert, 2006). If an individual feels they consume alcohol without negative effects, this may signal they have no need to reduce their intake because they are a ‘responsible drinker’ (Melia et al, 2021). However, alcohol causes harm even when people do not feel intoxicated (GBD 2016 Alcohol Collaborators, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Calling time on responsible drinking: A qualitative study of perceptions of information on alcohol product labels

Davies

Cooke

Visser

et al. 2022

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to explore (a) how people interpret responsible drinking messages on alcohol product labels, and (b) the acceptability of including health information on labels. Design: Qualitative interviews. Methods: Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 people aged 21-63; 18 were classified risky drinkers using AUDIT-C. They were shown three sets of alcohol product labels: one including three responsible drinking messages (drink responsibly), one with three positively worded health messages (drinking less reduces risks) and one with three negatively worded health messages (drinking more increases risks). Health messages included information about cancer, liver and heart disease. Results: Thematic analysis identified three themes: ambiguity about alcohol labelling; identifying oneself as responsible; and acceptability of enhanced product labelling. Participants were critical of responsible drinking messages and wary of conflicting health information in the media. They positioned themselves as responsible, knowledgeable drinkers and distanced themselves from problem drinkers. They did not appear to support the inclusion of health information on labels; however, novel information was considered more impactful. Conclusions: Responsible drinking messages were seen by our sample as an alcohol industry ploy. Although health messages about cancer were seen as potentially impactful, the ability of consumers to position themselves as unproblematic drinkers means that they may not see the information

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Calling time on responsible drinking: A qualitative study of perceptions of information on alcohol product labels

Davies

Cooke

Visser

et al. 2022

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since our aim was to analyse the participants' perspectives of reflection, we used discursive psychology (DP) 40,[44][45][46] to analyse the data. 37,45,47,48 DP focuses on how psychological concepts (in our case, reflection) are used and constructed in interaction, while taking into account their social context, form and content. DP examines how participants use discursive devices (rudimentary building blocks of interaction, such as asking questions, using metaphors, providing disclaimers) to perform social actions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since our aim was to analyse the participants' perspectives of reflection, we used discursive psychology (DP) 40,44–46 to analyse the data 37,45,47,48 . DP focuses on how psychological concepts (in our case, reflection) are used and constructed in interaction, while taking into account their social context, form and content.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Oh yes, that is also reflection’—Using discursive psychology to describe how GP registrars construct reflection

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLearners in medical education generally perceive that reflection is important, but they also find that reflection is not always valuable or practically applicable. We address the gap between the potential benefits of reflection and its practical implementation in medical education. We examined the perspective of Dutch GP registrars who (must) reflect for their GP specialty training to understand their participant perspective on reflection. Our aim is stimulating alignment between reflective activities that occur in a medical curriculum and the ideals of reflection as a valuable educational activity.MethodsWe conducted, video‐recorded and transcribed seven focus group sessions with GP registrars in 2021 across two Dutch GP educational programmes. We used discursive psychology to analyse the focus group data by focusing on ‘assessments of reflection’. We analysed their discursive features (how something was said) and content features (what was said) and related these to each other to understand how GP registrars construct reflection.ResultsParticipants constructed reflection with nuance; they combined negative and positive assessments that displayed varied orientations to reflection. First, their combined assessments showed complex orientations to norms and experiences with reflecting in practice and that these are not simply negative or positive. Second, GP registrars constructed reflection as a negotiable topic and showed how reflection and its value can be variably understood. Third, through combined assessments, they displayed an orientation to the integration of reflection with other educational tasks, which impacts its value.ConclusionsGenerally, GP registrars speak positively about reflection, but the value of reflection partly depends on its proper integration with other educational tasks. When meaningful integration fails, activities to stimulate reflection can overshoot their own goal and hamper learner motivation to reflect. Developing a healthy ‘reflection culture’ could mitigate some challenges. Therein, reflection is treated as important while learners also have adequate autonomy.

show abstract

“…Morris & Schomerus, 2023). Thus many AUD groups deliberately other problem drinkers by emphasising extreme out-group stereotypes, to contrast against their own 'responsible' drinking (Melia et al, 2021;Wallhed Finn et al, 2014). In this way, many drinkers inadvertently reinforce and perpetrate disapproval of a deviant out group, undermining public health opportunities to reduce alcohol harms (J.…”

Section: The Role Of 'Disapproval' Within Contemporary Stigma Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Can ‘justified disapproval’ be separated from addiction stigma? An empirical focus is required.

Morris,

Kummetat,

Schomerus

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stigma is largely recognized as a harmful practice of social devaluation and discrimination, yet some scholars still advance arguments that stigma also serves an important disincentivizing force towards addictive behaviours. Whilst others counter that stigma is fundamentally harmful process, a more nuanced call has been made for “justified disapproval” as a beneficial normative force to be separated from addiction stigma. The legitimacy of such a claim requires empirical support which has been lacking thus far. We review evidence in the domains of social norms, stigma, addiction and behavioural sciences as a starting point for an empirically focused evaluation of the possibility of “justified disapproval” as a legitimate positive force. We note that whilst normative influences, emotions and addiction-relevant appraisals affect such behaviours under certain conditions, there are important questions regarding whether these can be harnessed without invoking the known and pervasive effects of stigma. Rather, we propose that efforts to curb addiction-related behaviours via normative influences are likely to fail or backfire. In the absence of empirical evidence to support the use of normative ‘disapproval’ strategies, alternative approaches should be pursued, particularly those which address the broader socio-cultural and structural drivers of addiction problems.

show abstract

Constructing and negotiating boundaries of morally acceptable alcohol use: A discursive psychology of justifying alcohol consumption

Cited by 15 publications

References 61 publications

Calling time on responsible drinking: A qualitative study of perceptions of information on alcohol product labels

Calling time on responsible drinking: A qualitative study of perceptions of information on alcohol product labels

‘Oh yes, that is also reflection’—Using discursive psychology to describe how GP registrars construct reflection

Can ‘justified disapproval’ be separated from addiction stigma? An empirical focus is required.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About