Citation

Mäkelä K. Addiction 1997; 92(6): 729-736.

Affiliation

Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies, Helsinki, Finland.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1997, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

9246800

Abstract

In drinking and drug surveys, peers are perceived as drinking more and using more drugs than the respondent. Particularly in youth studies, this majority fallacy is often interpreted as an indication of peer pressure toward drinking and drug use. However, exaggerating the alcohol and drug behaviours of significant others may be a way of reducing cognitive dissonance. The behaviour of most people deviates from their ideal norms. The ensuing dissonance can be alleviated by introducing the behaviour of others as a third element in the cognitive field. Data from three Scandinavian surveys support the following two predictions based on the theory of cognitive dissonance: (1) The tendency to report that other people drink more than oneself is more marked in restrictive than in permissive communities. (2) On each level of alcohol intake, the tendency to report that other people drink more than oneself is stronger among respondents having negative alcohol attitudes than among respondents with positive attitudes to alcohol. The need to alleviate the cognitive dissonance caused by a discrepancy between actual behaviour and normative standards is thus one of the mechanisms generating the majority fallacy: "I may not be perfect, but other people are still worse". Feeling better than others does not necessarily amount to a pressure to turn bad.

Language: en