Graduate Student Journal of Psychology 2014, Vol. 15 Copyright 2014 by the Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology Teachers College, Columbia University 47 Short-Term Longitudinal Peer Influence Processes Associated with Binge Drinking Among First Year College Students Adam Bryant Miller George Mason University Mitchell J. Prinstein University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Christianne Esposito-Smythers George Mason University This study examined the influence of peer selection and socialization effects on binge drinking (BD) behaviors during the transition to college. Participants included 196 first-year college students (72.9% female) from a large Southeast- ern public university who reported BD pre-college (Time 1) and three months post-matriculation (Time 2). At Time 2, participants identified their closest new college friend whose data was linked to the participant. We hypothesized that matriculating college students would select peers with similar pre-college BD and that peers’ pre-college BD would predict post-matriculation BD. Results from regression analyses suggested that first-year students chose friends with similar pre-college BD and maintain their BD commensurately with their new best friend’s prior BD. Given support for peer influence, implications regarding prevention strategies and future research are discussed. A Prospective Study of Peer Influence Processes Associated with Binge Drinking Among First- Year College Students Emerging adulthood is a distinct developmental period between adolescence and young adulthood (ages 18-25; Arnett, 2000) that has been associated with increases in and maintenance of health risk be- haviors (White et al., 2006; White, Fleming, Kim, Cat- alano, & McMorris, 2008). Binge drinking, defined as consumption of five or more drinks over a short pe- riod of time (two hours), has been the focus of much attention in this area. Up to 25.5% of high school seniors reported engaging in binge drinking within a 30-day period (Eaton et al., 2010). Further, approxi- mately two out of five (44.4%) college students can be categorized as binge drinkers (Johnston, O’Mal- ley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2011). Binge drinking during early emerging adulthood is associated with lat- er alcohol dependency and other mental health prob- lems (Chassin, Pitts, & Prost, 2002; Viner & Taylor, 2007). The purpose of the present study is to exam- ine potential mechanisms through which college stu- dents develop relationships with binge drinking peers. Many emerging adults transition into college during this developmental period. This transition is associated with increases in binge drinking be- haviors as well as the formation of new social net- works (Schulenberg & Maggs, 2002). As such, peer influence is particularly salient when considering the rise in binge drinking rates among first year col- lege students. While research on peer influence and alcohol use behaviors among emerging adults has been growing (Pandina, Johnson, & White, 2010), research on the effects of the college transition on alcohol-related behaviors has been relatively limited. Researchers have investigated peer influence mecha- nisms from multiple theoretical perspectives to help explain the increase in binge drinking rates during the college transition. Two well-studied areas include al- cohol expectancies and perceptions of social norms. Alcohol expectancies, or the belief that alcohol use will lead to positive or negative outcomes (e.g., in- creased comfort in social situations) have been shown to predict levels of drinking (Chen, Grube, & Madden, 1994), mediate patterns of drinking (Darkes, Green- This research was supported in part by a grant from the Office of Undergraduate Research, the Kimball King Undergraduate Re- search Award, and a donation from the Office of the Dean of Stu- dents, all from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Adam B. Miller, Department of Psychology, MS 3F5, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030. Email: amillec@gmu.edu. 48 baum, & Goldman, 2004), and alter binge drinking rates (Labbe & Maisto, 2011). Relatedly, Neighbors et al. (2007) found that among first-year-undergradu- ate college students, perceived social norms of alco- hol use predicted higher alcohol consumption, even above alcohol expectancies. Another study found that perceived social norms also predict severity of drinking behaviors (Lewis & Neighbors, 2004). As is evident, college students’ perceptions of the social facilitative effects of drinking and general peer use patterns influence drinking behavior. How- ever, the manner in which college students’ percep- tions of peer alcohol use and associated behaviors af- fect the development of binge drinking peer groups has received less attention in the research literature. One potential way to categorize friendship formation is to examine the role of selection and socialization effects. Selection effects refer to individuals’ choice of friends whom they perceive to be similar to them- selves in attitudes and beliefs (Kandel, 1978). Social- ization effects refer to the processes wherein individ- uals implicitly and explicitly influence each other to engage in similar behaviors (Kandel, 1978; Prinstein & Dodge, 2008). This influence may serve to increase or maintain a maladaptive behavior, such as binge drinking. These processes, examined together, may help explain how first year college students befriend individuals whom they perceive to have similar binge drinking behaviors, and how these new friendships are associated with the maintenance or increase in each individual’s binge drinking (White et al., 2008). Previous studies yield support for peer influence on alcohol use behaviors during the college transition. Leibsohn (1994) found that first year students reported befriending college peers with similar drinking habits as themselves. Read, Wood, and Capone (2005) sug- gested that adolescents’ perceptions of their friends’ drinking behaviors and attitudes were associated with increases in their own drinking during the first year of college. White et al. (2008) found that adolescents who drank heavily in high school were more likely to perceive that their new (post-high school) friends possessed pro-alcohol values which predicted in- creases in adolescents’ own drinking behavior. Thus, some studies have suggested that both selection and socialization effects may be relevant for understand- ing alcohol use among first year college students. Despite significant advances in this area, much of the research on peer socialization and selection effects is hampered by a number of methodolog- ical limitations. First, most prior studies examine selection effects by measuring newly formed friend- ships within a context of familiar peers (i.e., among already-acquainted grademates; White et al., 2008). Such examinations of selection effects are confound- ed by adolescents’ prior knowledge of their peers’ reputations. A more rigorous examination of selec- tion effects involves assessing newly formed dyadic friendships among unfamiliar peers (e.g., during col- lege transition). Second, past work has suggested that college students provide poor estimates of their peers’ drinking behavior (Borsari & Carey, 2006; Neighbors et al., 2007; Prinstein & Wang, 2005), thereby lim- iting conclusions that can be reached. Finally, past studies have often been cross sectional and thus causal inferences cannot be drawn (Leibsohn, 1994). To address limitations of prior research, the cur- rent study examined peer socialization and selection effects using first-year college students’ peer nomina- tions of new college friends and these friends’ own reported behaviors of prior drinking experiences. Thus, actual drinking behaviors, rather than estima- tions, of each person in a dyadic friendship were compared. This study also employed a prospective design to more accurately characterize friendship for- mation and binge drinking over a short, ecologically valid time frame. We hypothesized that: 1) matricu- lating college students would choose friends with similar levels of pre-college binge drinking (selection effects); and 2) students’ binge drinking post-matric- ulation at Time 2 (T2) would be predicted by their new best friends’ Time 1 (T1) binge drinking behav- ior over and above prior binge drinking experiences (socialization effects). Finally, given that males have been shown to binge drink more frequently than fe- males (Borsari & Carey, 2001), we hypothesized that gender would moderate both selection and social- ization effects. Specifically, males will be more likely than females to choose peers with similar rates of pri- or binge drinking experience, and males will be more likely than females to be influenced by their new best friends’ binge drinking behaviors post-matriculation. MILLER, PRINSTEIN, ESPOSITO-SMYTHERS 49 PEER INFLUENCE AND COLLEGE BINGE DRINKING Method Participants Participants included 196 first-year students (72.9% female) at a large Southeastern universi- ty in the United States. The ethnic distribution of this sample was 80.6% White, 6.8% Black, 5.2% Asian, 4.7% Latino/a, and 2.6% other/ mixed race and matched that of the university population. Females were overrepresented in this sample compared to the overall gender distribu- tion from the university population (see below). Measures Binge drinking. Questions regarding binge drinking were created for the present study and mir- rored well-established alcohol use measures included in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health; Harris et al., 2009). At T1 before starting college in the fall, students were asked, “In the last six months, how often did you have five or more alcohol drinks on a single occasion (within a few hours)?” Responses were recorded using a Likert-type scale (i.e., 1 = 0 times, 2 = 1-2 times, 3 = 3-9 times, 4 = 10-19 times, and 5 = 20 or more times). At T2, par- ticipants reported the frequency of their binge drink- ing in the past three months using the same scale. Best friend’s alcohol use. At T2, participants were asked to rank order an unlimited number of friends in college (using first and last names) and indi- cate whether each listed friend was a “new” friend (also a first-year student) since starting college. The name and data of the new best friend (highest-ranked new friend) who was also a part of this research study was linked to the participant via each person’s university identification number. Names of the participants and new best friends were matched (twice for accuracy) using official university records of first year students’ names and identification numbers. Friends’ responses to the same T1 question served as an independent report of college friends’ pre-college binge drinking. Procedure Incoming first-year students were told that they could voluntarily participate in a research study de- signed to understand the health behaviors of incom- ing first year students. They were assured that all of their information would be kept strictly confidential. Trained research assistants distributed a survey to incoming first-year students during the first day of summer orientation sessions (T1). Students provid- ed only their unique university identification number rather than their name, and returned their form in a sealed, confidential folder to facilitate honest re- sponding. The paper and pencil survey took 10-15 minutes to complete, and students were allowed to complete these forms in the privacy of their dorms overnight. Additional measures were administered three months after the start of the school year (T2) using a secure online survey. Three months was cho- sen in order to provide adequate time for students to select new peers and establish drinking behaviors. All who completed the T1 assessment were eligible to participate in the T2 measurement. Of the 4,000 incoming first year students, 25% (n= 1,000) were un- der 18 and ineligible to participate in the study. Of the remaining 3,000 eligible students, 52% (n = 1,574 [65% female]) returned their T1 surveys. The gender, ethnic distribution, and geographic origin of this T1 sample did not differ significantly from the total population of the full first year class. Of all T1 par- ticipants, 53.2% (n = 837) completed the T2 survey. Students with data at T1 and T2 had to meet two criteria to be included in final analyses. First, only students who selected a new best friend with T1 data (i.e., also a study participant with T1 data) were included to ensure actual reported behavior of the friend. In other words, participants had to be in a newly formed dyad, and both mem- bers of this dyad had to have T1 data. Second, to eliminate concerns of data duplication and resulting inflated associations, each participant was included as a best friend only once within the data set. In the T2 sample, 9.26% (n = 20) of the participants were doubly nominated as best friends. In such cases, one participant who had nominated the same best friend as another participant was excluded at random from study analyses. In total, 196 participants met all cri- teria necessary for inclusion. This procedure for ex- amining newly formed friendships (e.g., including un- limited friend nominations, linking dyadic data, and ensuring that participants are only included once in 50 analyses) is consistent with that employed in previous research examining best friend relationships (Prin- stein & Dodge, 2008). Affiliated University Institu- tional Review Board provided approval for this study. Data Analysis Descriptive analyses, including frequencies and bivariate correlations, were conducted first. Two sep- arate hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to examine primary hypotheses. In the first mod- el testing selection effects, college friend’s pre-college (T1) binge drinking was entered as the dependent variable. Participants’ pre-college (T1) binge drinking and gender were entered as predictors on the initial step of the regression, with their interaction entered on the second step. To examine socialization effects, participants’ post-matriculation (T2) binge drinking frequency was entered as the dependent variable. In order to show the unique effects of socialization, pre-college (T1) binge drinking was controlled in an initial step. The new friends’ pre-college (T1) binge drinking and gender of the participant were entered in the next step. Finally, the interaction between new friends’ pre-college (T1) binge drinking and gen- der of the participant were entered in the final step. Results Preliminary Results Participants with T1 data only (n = 701) report- ed higher levels of binge drinking than participants who provided data at both T1 and T2 (t (1548) = 2.93, p < .05. More females than males completed the T2 follow-up (x2(1, 1558) = 7.83, p < .05). At the T2 fol- low-up, students who did not list a best friend at all (n = 109) and students who did not list a best friend that also was in the study (n = 512) were ineligible for final analysis, but did not differ significantly from the overall T2 sample. However, participants who picked a best friend that was also in the original sample at T1 (n = 216) engaged in binge drinking less frequent- ly than those who did not list a best friend in the original sample (t (1,553) = 1.91, p < .05). Females (72.9%) were more likely than males to list a best friend who also was in the study (x2(1,789) = 6.32, p< .05) and were overrepresented in the follow-up study. Bivariate Analyses Bivariate correlations and descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations, of all vari- ables are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Figure 1 rep- resents the frequency of binge drinking in the prior six months of the final sample. Males engaged in binge drinking more frequently than females at both T1 and T2. Previous binge drinking (T1) was posi- tively associated with binge drinking behaviors at T2. Selection Effects Results from regression analyses showed a main effect of friends’ binge drinking at T1 on the par- ticipants’ pre-college binge drinking (T1). Consis- tent with selection effects, results suggested that higher levels of participants’ pre-college binge drinking was significantly associated with high- er levels of pre-college binge drinking (T1) of the participants’ new best friend (see Table 3). There was no main effect of gender for participants’ T1 pre-college binge drinking. Despite males report- ing higher binge drinking rates than females (Table 1), gender did not moderate the relationship be- tween participants’ pre-college binge drinking and their new best friends’ pre-college binge drinking. Socialization Effects Results from regression analyses suggested that pre-college binge drinking behaviors explained ap- proximately half of the variance in binge drinking during the fall semester of college (see Table 3). Consistent with socialization effects, pre-college (T1) binge drinking of participants’ new best friend predicted the participants’ current binge drinking. Specifically, higher levels of binge drinking report- ed by the new best friend at T1 predicted higher levels of binge drinking of the participant at T2 over and above prior binge drinking behaviors of the participant. There was no main effect of gen- der, and gender did not moderate this association. Discussion A primary goal of this study was to examine the influence of peer selection and socialization effects on binge drinking among college students. To ad- dress limitations of prior research, this study assessed MILLER, PRINSTEIN, ESPOSITO-SMYTHERS 51     Peer influence and college binge drinking 22 Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations for Primary Variables (N = 196)       Males   Females   t (df)   Time 1         Binge Drinking   2.22 (1.33)   1.51 (.85)   -4.22** (178)   Friend’s Binge Drinking   1.96 (1.23)   1.61 (.95)   -2.06* (179)   Time 2         Binge Drinking   2.10 (1.20)   1.51 (.87)   -3.69** (186)           Note. * p< .05; ** p< .001       Peer influence and college binge drinking 23 Table 2. Bivariate Associations Among Primary Variables (N = 196)     T1 Binge Drinking   T1 Friend’s Binge Drinking   T2 Binge Drinking   T1 Binge Drinking   --   .28**   .70**   T1 Friend’s Binge Drinking   .25   --   .34**   T2 Binge Drinking   .65**   .30*   --           Note. Correlations below the diagonal represent males, and values above the diagonal represent females. * p< .05; ** p< .001   PEER INFLUENCE AND COLLEGE BINGE DRINKING 52     Peer influence and college binge drinking 21 Figure 1. 61% 19% 11% 7% 2% Binge Drinking at Time 1, N = 196 0 times 1-2 times 3-9 times 10-19 times 20 or more times First Year Students’ Binge Drinking 24 Table 3. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Testing Selection Effects (1) and Socialization Effects (2) (N = 196) Predictor   B   SE B   ß   p   Δ R2   1. Friend’s Time 1 (T1) Behavior           Step 1 Gender   -.16   .18   -.07   .377   .09**   Participant Binge Drinking T1   .27   .07   .27**   .001     Step 2 Participant Binge Drinking T1 x Gender   .09   .16   .14   .567   .09   2. Participant Binge Drinking at Time 2 (T2)           Step 1 Participant Binge Drinking T1   .68   .05   .70**   <.000   .50**   Step 2 Gender   -.10   .13   -.05   .417   .02*   Friend’s Binge Drinking at T1   .15   .05   .15*   .007     Step 3 Friend’s Binge Drinking T1 x Gender   .04   .11   .07   .735   .00   MILLER, PRINSTEIN, ESPOSITO-SMYTHERS 53 college students’ binge drinking behaviors pre- and post-college matriculation and compared it to their new best friends’ actual reports of binge drinking. It also employed a prospective, 3-month design. Similar to past work, results suggested that prior binge drink- ing was a strong predictor of future binge drinking behavior (White et al., 2008). Importantly, results are consistent with prior research (Leibsohn, 1994; Read et al., 2005; White et al., 2008) and provide evidence that both peer selection and socialization effects may account for some of the binge drinking behaviors reported by students during their college transition. The college transition is typically characterized by numerous opportunities for substance use (Pandina et al., 2010). One pathway to college students’ binge drinking may be through the selection of friends who have similar past binge drinking experiences as them- selves. Our results also yield preliminary evidence to suggest that new college friends may influence the maintenance of binge drinking behavior. This finding is consistent with prior studies that have found that emerging adults are influenced by the behaviors of their friends (Allen, Porter, & McFarland, 2006; Co- hen & Prinstein, 2006). While experimental alcohol use is considered to be normative during the first year of college, friendships that form around and facilitate binge drinking are concerning and deserve attention. Study results can be further interpreted through the lens of social learning theory (SLT). Ac- cording to the SLT of alcohol, social reinforce- ment and modeling are central concepts for un- derstanding binge drinking during the college transition (Borsari & Carey, 2006). The college tran- sition provides an ideal social environment to facili- tate alcohol use. In the context of SLT, peers serve as models for binge drinking and simultaneously provide social re- inforcement. Binge drinking facilitates contact and acceptance among peers, provides pleasant shared experiences, and increases intimacy, closeness, and support among newly forming friendships (Borsa- ri & Carey, 2006). Thus, individuals transitioning to college who have already experienced the positive social aspects associated with binge drinking may select peers with similar past experiences and mu- tually engage in binge drinking as a means to de- velop a close friendship. Indeed, previous studies have shown that incoming college students appear to binge drink to make friends rather than to cope with negative affect (Reifman & Watson, 2003). As a friendship continues to develop, peers may main- tain binge drinking behaviors as both members of the dyadic relationship experience similar posi- tive reinforcement for binge drinking and drink as a means to maintain shared behaviors and beliefs. Implications for Prevention Results suggest that a tiered approach to alcohol prevention may be effective. Given that past drinking behaviors were associated with future binge drinking, interventions designed to address the health risks associated with binge drinking among incoming col- lege students are indicated. Recent research suggests that psychoeducational alcohol prevention programs on college campuses hold promise in the short- term. In a randomized clinical trial that included 30 universities, the use of an online, internet-based alcohol misuse prevention program, referred to as “AlcoholEdu for College”, was associated with a significant reduction in the frequency of past-30 day binge drinking in the fall semester upon course completion (Paschall, Antin, Ringwalt, & Saltz, 2011). However, these results did not persist into the spring semester, highlighting the potential need for booster sessions or other prevention approaches. The results of the present study suggest that incorporating peer related factors into alcohol pre- vention programming may prove to be fruitful. Peers’ drinking prior to college matriculation was found to predict binge-drinking behaviors during the first few months of college, above and beyond past drinking history. Thus, programs that promote physical health but also teach peer alcohol resistance skills during the first few weeks of college may help combat binge drinking on college campuses. Peer- led prevention programs or the use of well-respect- ed peer actors in online materials may also help in- crease the salience of prevention programming. For those students who do not respond to univer- sal (or broad) prevention efforts, and form mutually supportive social relationships around binge drink- ing, selective or indicated prevention programming PEER INFLUENCE AND COLLEGE BINGE DRINKING 54 may be warranted. A number of studies have found that peer-led interventions utilizing motivational in- terviewing techniques with college students have been successful in reducing alcohol use (Larimer, Cronce, Lee, & Kilmer, 2004; Tevyaw, Borsari, Colby, & Monti, 2007). Future development and work in the area of peer-led interventions appears warranted. Limitations and Future Directions Though the present study uniquely builds upon existing literature in the area of peer influences on college student drinking behavior, it also has a num- ber of limitations. Data at both time points were collected from a small subset of incoming first year students, limiting generalizability. Efforts to enroll all incoming first year students for participation in fu- ture research in this area would be beneficial. De- spite assurances of confidentiality, it is also possi- ble that students under-reported their alcohol use given that they were under the legal drinking age. Alternative explanations for the binge drinking behaviors in the current sample should also be con- sidered. Drinking behavior was only measured be- tween two friends in this sample. The influence of other peers, or non-interpersonal factors, was not assessed in this study. For example, students’ Greek affiliation, a known influence on binge drinking (Mc- Cabe et al., 2005) was not assessed. Although the majority of students (> 75%) at the university where this study was conducted live on campus their first year, it is possible that students living on campus may drink more than students that live off campus or vice versa. Further, some studies have shown that for males, having a roommate who was a binge drinker in high school is related to increases in drink- ing behaviors in college (Duncan, Boisjoly, Kremer, Levy, & Eccles, 2005). Future research would ben- efit from examining these alternative explanations and other potential reasons that friendships may form other than around binge drinking behaviors. Another important issue in this study was the attrition rate from T1 to T2. Students with the high- est binge drinking rates at T1 were the least likely to complete the follow-up survey at T2. The final sample for analysis included mostly females and less frequent binge drinkers compared to the T1 sample. Importantly, even among this small sample, peer in- fluence mechanisms still accounted for a significant portion of the variance in binge drinking behaviors. Future research with more frequent binge drinkers might find stronger peer influence effects. Specif- ically, it would be useful to examine whether fre- quent binge drinkers are more strongly affected by peer influence than individuals without a history of binge drinking. It would also be important to study individuals who are abstainers to understand conti- nuities and discontinuities in their college drinking behaviors (Hersh & Hussong, 2006). It is also im- portant to note that the current study only included participants who made new best friendships over the course of the first three months of college. Thus, study participants may be higher in various types of socially facilitative personality traits, such as extrover- sion, compared to excluded individuals. Finally, this study used a single item to measure binge-drinking behaviors at both Time 1 and 2, which temper con- clusions. Future research would benefit from using validated measures of binge drinking behaviors. Conclusion This study offers further evidence to suggest that peer influence processes are relevant for under- standing binge drinking on college campuses. The current study improves upon prior research meth- odology by examining actual peer reports of sub- stance use behaviors rather than estimations by the study participant. Results highlight the potential benefit of using developmental theories, methods, and ecologically valid time points to understand peer influence effects on college binge drinking. References Allen, J. P., Porter, M. R., & McFarland, F. C. (2006). Leaders and followers in adolescent close friend- ships: Susceptibility to peer influence as a predic- tor of risky behavior, friendship instability, and depression. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 155–172. doi:10.1017/S0954579406060093 Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory MILLER, PRINSTEIN, ESPOSITO-SMYTHERS 55 of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469 Borsari, B., & Carey, K. (2006). How the quality of peer relationships influences college alcohol use. Drug and Alcohol Review, 25, 361–370. doi:10.1080/09595230600741339 Borsari, B., & Carey, K. B. (2001). Peer influences on college drinking: A review of the research. Journal of Substance Abuse, 13, 391–424. doi:10.1016/ S0899-3289(01)00098-0 Chassin, L., Pitts, S. C., & Prost, J. (2002). Binge drinking trajectories from adolescence to emerg- ing adulthood in a high-risk sample: Predic- tors and substance abuse outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 67–78. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.70.1.67 Chen, M.-J., Grube, J. W., & Madden, P. A. (1994). Al- cohol expectancies and adolescent drinking: Dif- ferential prediction of frequency, quantity, and intoxication. Addictive Behaviors, 19, 521–529. doi:10.1016/0306-4603(94)90007-8 Cohen, G. L., & Prinstein, M. J. (2006). Peer con- tagion of aggression and health risk behavior among adolescent males: An experimental in- vestigation of effects on public conduct and pri- vate attitudes. Child Development, 77, 967–983. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00913.x Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd edition). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Darkes, J., Greenbaum, P. E., & Goldman, M. S. (2004). Alcohol expectancy mediation of biopsy- chosocial risk: Complex patterns of mediation. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 12, 27–38. doi:10.1037/1064-1297.12.1.27 Duncan, G. J., Boisjoly, J., Kremer, M., Levy, D. M., & Eccles, J. (2005). Peer effects in drug use and sex among college students. Journal of Abnor- mal Child Psychology, 33, 375–385. doi:10.1007/ s10802-005-3576-2 Eaton, D. K., Kann., L., Kinchen, S., Shanklin, S., Ross, J., Hawkins, J., et al. (2010). Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 2009. MMWR Surveillance Summary, 59,1-142. Harris, K. M., Halpern, C. T., Whitsel, E., Hussey, J., Tabor, J., Entzel, P., & Udry, J. R. (2009). The Na- tional Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health: Research Design. Retrieved from http://www. cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design. Hersh, M. A., & Hussong, A. M. (2006). High school drinker typologies predict alcohol involvement and psychosocial adjustment during acclimation to college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 738–751. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9067-0 Johnston, L.D., O’Malley, P.M., Bachman, J.G., & Schulenberg, J.E. (2009). Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2008: Volume I. Secondary school students (NIH Pub- lication No. 09–7402) Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. Kandel, D. B. (1978). Homophily, selection, and so- cialization in adolescent friendships. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 427–436. Labbe, A. K., & Maisto, S. A. (2011). Alcohol expec- tancy challenges for college students: A narrative review. Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 673–683. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.02.007 Larimer, M. E., Cronce, J. M., Lee, C. M., & Kilmer, J. R. (2004). Brief intervention in college settings. Alcohol Research & Health, 28, 94–104. Leibsohn, J. (1994). The relationship between drug and alcohol use and peer group associations of college freshmen as they transition from high school. Journal of Drug Education, 24, 177–192. Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. (2004). Gender-spe- cific misperceptions of college student drinking norms. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18, 334–339. doi:10.1037/0893-164X.18.4.334 McCabe, S. E., Schulenberg, J. E., Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Kloska, D. D. (2005). Selection and socialization effects of fraternities and sororities on US college student substance use: A multi-cohort national longitudi- nal study. Addiction, 100, 512–524. Neighbors, C., Lee, C. M., Lewis, M. A., Fossos, N., & Larimer, M. E. (2007). Are social norms the best predictor of outcomes among heavy-drinking college students? Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 68, 556–565. Pandina, R. J., Johnson, V. L., & White, H. R. (2010). PEER INFLUENCE AND COLLEGE BINGE DRINKING 56 Peer influences on substance use during adoles- cence and emerging adulthood. In Handbook of drug use etiology: Theory, methods, and empir- ical findings. (pp. 383–401). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Paschall, M. J., Antin, T., Ringwalt, C. L., & Saltz, R. F. (2011). Evaluation of an internet-based alcohol misuse prevention course for college freshmen: Findings of a randomized multi-campus trial. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41, 300–308. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2011.03.021 Prinstein, M. J., & Dodge, K. A. (Eds.). (2008). Un- derstanding peer influence in children and ado- lescents. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Prinstein, M. J., & Wang, S. S. (2005). False consen- sus and adolescent peer contagion: Examining discrepancies between perceptions and actual re- ported levels of friends’ deviant and health risk behaviors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psycholo- gy, 33, 293–306. doi:10.1007/s10802-005-3566-4 Read, J. P., Wood, M. D., & Capone, C. (2005). A pro- spective investigation of relations between social influences and alcohol involvement during the transition into college. Journal of Studies on Al- cohol, 66, 23–34. Reifman, A., & Watson, W. K. (2003). Binge drink- ing during the first semester of college: Contin- uation and desistance from high school patterns. Journal of American College Health, 52, 73–81. doi:10.1080/07448480309595727 Schulenberg, J. E., & Maggs, J. L. (2002). A devel- opmental perspective on alcohol use and heavy drinking during adolescence and the transition to young adulthood. Journal of studies on alcohol. Supplement, 54–70. Tevyaw, T. O., Borsari, B., Colby, S. M., & Monti, P. M. (2007). Peer enhancement of a brief motivation- al intervention with mandated college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 21, 114–119. doi:10.1037/0893-164X.21.1.114 Viner, R. M., & Taylor, B. (2007). Adult outcomes of binge drinking in adolescence: findings from a UK national birth cohort. Journal of Epide- miology & Community Health, 61, 902–907. doi:10.1136/jech.2005.038117 White, H. R., Fleming, C. B., Kim, M. J., Catalano, R. F., & McMorris, B. J. (2008). Identifying two potential mechanisms for changes in alcohol use among college-attending and non-college-attend- ing emerging adults. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1625–1639. doi:10.1037/a0013855 White, H. R., McMorris, B. J., Catalano, R. F., Flem- ing, C. B., Haggerty, K. P., & Abbott, R. D. (2006). Increases in alcohol and marijuana use during the transition out of high school into emerging adulthood: the effects of leaving home, going to college, and high school protective factors. Jour- nal of Studies on Alcohol, 67, 810–822. MILLER, PRINSTEIN, ESPOSITO-SMYTHERS