Keeping it Between the Buoys: Assessing Self-Reported Boating Under the Influence (BUI) in a Young Adult Population

Abstract

Boating Under the Influence (BUI) has recently become a topic of significant concern. Employing a sample of 1,082 young adult boaters, we explore demographic characteristics of those who seek various levels of intoxication while boating and apply several of the leading criminological theories to the study of BUI. We evaluate self-report measures of intoxicated boating, buzzed boating, and BUI. Results indicate that social learning theory and low self-control are leading predictors of BUI. We conclude that given the social nature and cultural acceptance of drinking while boating, simply lowering the blood alcohol content legal limit may not solve the BUI problem.

Notes

¹ The U.S. Coast Guard compiles statistics on recreational boating accidents in the United States. The fifty states, five U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia submit data derived from accident reports involving recreational vessels to the Coast Guard (see USCG 2013).

² The survey instrument did not separately assess race and ethnicity. Thus, Hispanic is treated as a separate category with white and black representing “white, non-Hispanic” and “black, non-Hispanic,” respectively.

³ It is not possible in our data to give an exact measures of how a standard drink per occasion measure of five drinks would translate into a BAC since it varies substantially with weight, duration and intensity of consumption, and other metabolic factors. For an average adult weight for men (about 195 pounds) he would have an estimated 0.10 BAC and for women (about 165 pounds) she would have an estimated 0.14 BAC after 5 drinks. Furthermore, ever 40 minutes after consumption, there will be an approximate 0.01 reduction in BAC. However, males are more efficient in “first-pass” metabolism which breaks down alcohol before it can get into the bloodstream. Thus, females typically have a higher BAC with given the same amount of consumption holding all other factors constant.

⁴ Odds ratios are presented in text as opposed to regression coefficients for ease of interpretation. Whereas the coefficient represents the change in the log of the odds of an outcome associated with a one unit change in the independent variable, the odds ratio represents the multiplicative change in odds associated with that same change. Odds ratio values greater than one indicate that higher scores for the independent variable are associated with increased odds while scores less than one indicate the opposite relationship. The odds ratio for a variable is calculated by raising e to the power of the coefficient (i.e., if b = .293, then the odds ratio equals e^.293, which equals 1.34).

⁵ To determine whether perceived stress had a significant relationship with the outcomes in the expected direction when evaluated independent of self-control and social learning measures, and to illuminate each theoretical perspectives contribution to the explanation of the behaviors, we estimated nine additional models that do not appear in the tables. Each theory’s measure(s) were included in a model including only the demographic controls for each outcome. Still, no support was found for general strain. Even when not accounting for self-control and social learning, perceived stress fails to increase the likelihood of boating while impaired at any level. These additional analyses also reveal that while significant in each final model, the importance of self-control is dwarfed by social learning constructs. Each statistically contributes to model fit, but the inclusion of the low self-control term to a model with demographic controls and social learning measures does not appear to improve the model’s predictive utility at a substantive level.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Bryan Lee Miller

BRYAN LEE MILLER, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology at Georgia Southern University. His research interests are in drug use and policy, criminological theory, and offender reentry and reintegration. His recent research has focused on novel drug use, perceptions of drug use, and the relationship between deviant peers and drug use. Recent publications have appeared in scholarly journals such as the Journal of Crime & Justice, Punishment and Society, and the Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency.

John M. Stogner

JOHN M. STOGNER, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. His research primarily focuses on novel and synthetic drug use, abuse, and policy. His research and teaching also explores criminological theory, peer influences on behavior, substance use, and the interplay between issues of health and deviance. His recent works have appeared in Justice Quarterly, the Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency, Addictive Behaviors, and the Journal of Substance Use.