Differences in alcohol brand consumption among underage youth by age, gender, and race/ethnicity – United States, 2012

Abstract

Aim

No previous national study has reported the prevalence of alcohol brand consumption among underage youth by demographic characteristics. The aim of this study was to determine the alcohol brand preferences among underage drinkers in different demographic categories.

Method

We administered an online survey to a national sample of 1,031 underage youth, ages 13–20, who had consumed at least one drink of alcohol in the past 30 days. The sample was recruited from a previously established internet survey panel. The main outcome measure was the estimated 30-day consumption prevalence for each of 898 brands by age, gender, and race/ethnicity.

Results

Two beer brands—Bud Light and Budweiser—are uniformly popular among underage drinkers, regardless of age, gender, or race/ethnicity. There are several hard liquor brands whose use increases markedly with age. Two flavored alcoholic beverages sharing the names of hard liquor brands—Smirnoff and Bacardi—are more popular with older youth. Some flavored alcoholic beverages are about twice as popular among female underage drinkers. There are 12 alcohol brands that are uniquely popular among Black underage drinkers, and these brands are heavily promoted in urban music.

Conclusion

There are differential patterns of brand-specific alcohol use among underage drinkers.

Introduction

Surveillance of alcohol use is critical to understanding youth drinking behavior, but most existing surveillance has measured alcohol use at the level of alcoholic beverage type, not specific brand (Siegel et al., 2013a). Identifying the drinking patterns and negative consequences associated with different alcohol brands can help elucidate additional risk factors for youth alcohol use, and thereby bring a sharper focus to educational and policy efforts designed to reduce this problem behavior

Previous studies that examined demographic differences in youth alcohol use have focused on types of alcohol rather than specific brands. In a study of ninth graders, Werch et al. (2006) found that females drank more flavored coolers than did males and more often consumed wine when drinking heavily. Males consumed greater quantities of beer. Moore and Werch (2007) found significant differences in alcoholic beverage choice by gender and ethnicity. Moreover, as the students aged, they reported consuming more liquor and beer, while also engaging in heavier drinking and chugging.

Roeber at al. (2007) looked at types of alcoholic beverages consumed by high school students in four U.S. states. Liquor was the most commonly used type of alcohol in each state, and there were few demographic differences due to race, ethnicity, grade, or gender. Similarly, Cremeens et al. (2009) found that hard liquor was the most commonly used alcoholic beverages among the high school students they studied, followed by beer and flavored alcoholic beverages. Siegel et al. (2011c) found that girls in grades 9–12 were more likely to drink flavored alcoholic beverages, wine coolers, and wine, while boys were more likely to drink liquor and beer,

These studies provide useful knowledge about the types of alcohol that youth drinkers prefer, but to date there are no available data on demographic differences in brand preferences, with the exception of a study by Tanski et al. (2011) that asked adolescents to identify their favorite alcohol brand. In an earlier paper, Siegel et al. (2013a) reported the alcohol brand preferences of U.S. underage drinkers overall, based on a national internet survey, but did not examine demographic differences in brand preferences. The purpose of this current study is to examine demographic differences in the alcohol brand preferences of underage drinkers in the United States by age, gender, and race/ethnicity.

Methods

Design Overview

The details of the survey methodology appear elsewhere (Siegel et al., 2013a). Briefly, we obtained a sample of 1,031 underage youths, ages 13–20, who had consumed at least one drink of alcohol in the past month. The respondents were recruited from a pre-established internet survey panel constructed by Knowledge Networks (2012). We used an online, self-administered survey, to determine all brands of alcohol consumed by the respondents during the past 30 days. For each brand, we inquired about the number of days on which it was consumed and the typical number of drinks of that brand on those days. The primary outcome variable was the prevalence of 30-day consumption of each brand.

Sample

Knowledge Networks maintains a pre-recruited panel of approximately 50,000 adults (including young adults ages 18–20) who have agreed to join the panel and be invited to participate in periodic internet-based surveys (the Knowledge Panel®) (DiSogra, 2009). The company recruits households to its Knowledge Panel® sample through both random digit dialing (RDD) and address-based sampling (ABS). To ensure adequate representation of panelists across race/ethnicity, telephone numbers from phone banks with higher concentrations of Blacks and Hispanics are over-sampled. To ensure adequate participation across socioeconomic levels, subjects who do not have internet access are given WebTV and internet access and training for free.

Using its established internet panel, Knowledge Networks recruited youth ages 13–17 and young adults ages 18–20 via email to participate in our internet survey. Panelists ages 18–20 received an email invitation that did not indicate the survey was related to alcohol consumption. Each panelist agreeing to participate was emailed a link to a secure web site to complete a screening questionnaire which asked if the panelist consumed alcohol in the past 30 days and was thus eligible for the survey.

We identified respondents ages 13–17 by asking adult panelists to indicate whether they had any children in this age group and, if so, whether they would grant permission to Knowledge Networks to survey those youth. Only one teen was selected randomly from each household. With parental consent, each identified youth received the emailed invitation sent to the older respondents.

For both age groups, the initial screening questionnaire asked respondents to report how many days out of the past 30 they had consumed at least one drink of alcohol. Respondents who had consumed at least one drink in the past 30 days received an online consent form. Participants who provided informed consent completed the internet-based questionnaire. After completion of the survey, a $25 gift was credited to the panel member’s account.

This protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Boston University Medical Center.

For the older youth sample, the screening completion rate was 46.2% (2,288 invitations, with 1,058 completed screenings). The survey completion rate was 93.8% (705 eligible respondents, with 661 completed surveys). Thus, the overall response rate for the older youth was 43.4% (46.2% multiplied by 93.8%).

For the younger youth sample, the parent completion rate was 49.2% (an estimated 4,757 eligible households with one or more teens, with 2,341 parents giving consent). The screening completion rate was 94.0% (2,341 invitations, with 2,201 teens screened). The survey completion rate was 95.9% (387 eligible respondents, with 371 completed surveys). Thus, the overall response rate for the younger youth was 44.4% (49.2% multiplied by 94.0% multiplied by 95.9%).

One respondent who reported drinking more than 15 drinks per day of more than 20 alcohol brands was deleted from the data set and from all analyses. Thus, our final data set consisted of 1,031 individuals. The sample overrepresented females. It also skewed heavily towards older adolescents and college-age youth, due to the frequency of drinking, and thus survey eligibility, being higher among that group.

Because the sample of 18–20 year-olds drew from existing Knowledge Networks panelists, we were able to compare 18–20 year-old respondents and non-respondents on basic demographic factors to help assess potential non-response bias, using a chi-square test to assess the significance of observed differences. The non-respondents were slightly older (p<0.05), but similar in gender (p=0.41). Non-respondents were more likely to be Black (p<0.0001), to come from lower income households (p<0.01), and not to have internet access (p<0.0001). There were no substantial differences by region (p=0.11). This type of comparative analysis was not possible for the 13–17 year-old non-respondents.

Survey Instrument

The internet-based survey instrument was developed to assess brand-specific alcohol consumption among underage youth. Using several sources, we identified 898 major brands of alcohol within 16 different alcoholic beverage types. The final data set consisted of the following numbers of brands in each of these categories, with a total of 898 alcohol brands: 306 table wines, 132 beers, 86 vodkas, 77 cordials/liqueurs, 62 flavored alcoholic beverages, 54 rums, 33 tequilas, 29 whiskeys, 27 gins, 25 scotches, 23 bourbons, 15 brandies, 10 alcoholic energy drinks, 9 cognacs, 5 low-end fortified wines, and 5 grain alcohols.

Measures

Prevalence of past 30-day consumption

The prevalence of past 30-day consumption of each alcohol brand was defined as the proportion of respondents who reported having consumed that brand in the past 30 days.

Weighting Procedures

Knowledge Networks applied statistical weighting adjustments to account for selection deviations and to render the sample representative of the underlying population (DiSogra, 2009). These weights accounted for the different selection probabilities associated with the RDD- and ABS-based samples, the oversampling of minority communities, non-response to panel recruitment, and panel attrition. Post-stratification weights adjusted for gender, age, race/ethnicity, census region, household income, home ownership status, metropolitan area, and household size, based on information from the Current Population Survey (CPS) conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

Validation of Methodology

Previous research has shown that estimates of current drinking obtained through Knowledge Networks are similar to those from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions, or NESARC (Heeren et al., 2008). We conducted two pilot tests to demonstrate the feasibility this survey methodology (Siegel et al., 2011a, 2011b). For one of those studies, we validated our pilot study results for respondents ages 18–20 against data obtained from the 2007 MRI Survey of the Adult Consumer, which reports preferences by age group for a limited set of brands (Siegel et al., 2011a).

Results

Across demographic groups, Bud Light was overwhelmingly the most popular alcohol brand, with prevalence of past 30-day consumption ranging from a low of 19.3% among Black respondents to a high of 38.2% among Hispanic youth (Tables 1–3). A second brand that was uniformly popular among all demographic groups was Budweiser, with a prevalence ranging from 11.9% among 16–18 year-olds to 17.3% among Black youth. There were some striking differences in the top 25 brands of alcoholic beverages by age (Table 1), gender (Table 2), and race (Table 3).

Table 1.

Top 25 brands of alcoholic beverages among underage drinkers by age.

	13–15			16–18			19–20
Rank	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb
#1	Bud Light	30.7%	6.1%	Bud Light	24.6%	2.9%	Bud Light	29.7%	3.8%
#2	Heineken	17.7%	5.6%	Coors Light	12.5%	2.2%	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	23.5%	3.6%
#3	Budweiser	14.3%	4.2%	Mikes	12.2%	2.3%	Smirnoff Vodkas	16.9%	3.2%
#4	Corona Extra	12.2%	4.9%	Budweiser	11.9%	2.0%	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	16.8%	3.3%
#5	Mikes	10.9%	3.5%	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	10.5%	2.1%	Budweiser	16.7%	3.2%
#6	Captain Morgan Rums	9.1%	3.5%	Corona Extra	9.9%	2.0%	Coors Light	14.7%	3.1%
#7	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	8.5%	3.6%	Smirnoff Vodkas	9.6%	1.8%	Absolut Vodkas	13.9%	3.0%
#8	Baileys Irish Cream	7.9%	4.0%	Captain Morgan Rums	7.5%	1.4%	Bacardi Rums	12.8%	2.7%
#9	Dailys Cocktails	7.9%	3.8%	Heineken	7.4%	1.6%	Captain Morgan Rums	12..8%	2.8%
#10	E&J Gallo Brandy	6.8%	3.7%	Jose Cuervo Tequilas	7.4%	1.6%	Corona Extra	12.1%	2.5%
#11	Blue Moon	6.8%	3.4%	Miller Lite	6.6%	1.7%	Blue Moon	10.4%	2.5%
#12	Tecate	6.3%	3.2%	Absolut Vodkas	6.6%	1.6%	Bacardi Malt Beverages	10.1%	2.6%
#13	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	5.8%	2.3%	Bacardi Rums	6.4%	1.3%	Heineken	9.8%	2.5%
#14	Bud Select	5.8%	3.5%	Bacardi Malt Beverages	6.1%	2.3%	Mikes	9.8%	2.2%
#15	Four Loko	5.3%	2.8%	UV Vodkas	5.8%	1.7%	Jose Cuervo Tequilas	9.3%	2.4%
#16	Bacardi Malt Beverages	5.0%	2.5%	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	5.8%	1.3%	Miller Lite	8.8%	2.2%
#17	Corona Extra Light	4.8%	3.0%	Blue Moon	5.5%	1.7%	Grey Goose Vodkas	8.5%	2.5%
#18	Hennessy Cognacs	4.8%	3.2%	Four Loko	5.5%	1.4%	Malibu Rum	7.8%	2.2%
#19	Yellowtail Wines	4.6%	2.3%	Malibu Rum	5.5%	1.7%	1800 Tequilas	7.7%	2.4%
#20	Icebox Cocktails	4.5%	3.2%	Bartles and Jaymes	5.3%	1.5%	Circoc Vodkas	7.7%	2.5%
#21	Bells Beer	4.5%	3.2%	Patron Tequila	5.1%	1.8%	Keystone Light	7.4%	2.3%
#22	Jack Daniels Cocktails	4.4%	1.8%	Grey Goose Vodkas	5.1%	1.5%	Hennessy Cognacs	7.4%	2.5%
#23	Skyy Vodkas	4.3%	2.5%	Keystone Light	5.0%	1.3%	Patron Tequilas	6.8%	1.9%
#24	Absolut Vodkas	4.2%	2.3%	Captain Morgan Cocktails	5.0%	1.3%	Four Loko	6.7%	1.6%
#25	Bartles and Jaymes	4.2%	2.4%	Corona Extra Light	4.9%	1.6%	Baileys Irish Cream	6.4%	2.1%

^aConsumption prevalence is the proportion of youth drinkers who reported consuming the brand during the past 30 days.

^bStandard error of the consumption prevalence (standard deviation of the sample’s estimate of the prevalence of a brand’s consumption in the population).

Table 3.

Top 25 brands of alcoholic beverages among adolescents by race.

Non-Hispanic White				Black			Hispanic
Rank	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb
#1	Bud Light	26.6%	2.9%	Hennessy Cognacs	30.2%	8.4%	Bud Light	38.2%	5.6%
#2	Coors Light	15.0%	2.6%	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	25.7%	7.4%	Corona Extra	21.2%	4.7%
#3	Budweiser	14.5%	2.4%	Ciroc Vodkas	21.4%	7.8%	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	21.1%	5.0%
#4	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	13.7%	2.3%	Heineken	20.3%	7.0%	Budweiser	14.7%	4.0%
#5	Smirnoff Vodkas	12.4%	2.2%	Bud Light	19.3%	5.8%	Heineken	14.6%	3.9%
#6	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	11.9%	2.4%	1800 Tequilas	18.4%	6.9%	Smirnoff Vodkas	13.6%	3.9%
#7	Captain Morgan Rums	11.7%	2.1%	Budweiser	17.3%	6.8%	Bacardi Malt Beverages	13.2%	4.5%
#8	Mikes	10.3%	1.9%	Seagrams Gins	14.8%	6.5%	Jose Cuervo Tequilas	12.0%	4.5%
#9	Absolut Vodkas	10.2%	2.2%	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	14.7%	6.6%	Bacardi Rums	10.1%	3.6%
#10	Blue Moon	10.0%	2.2%	Mikes	13.5%	5.6%	Coors Light	10.1%	3.4%
#11	Bacardi Rums	8.1%	1.9%	E&J Gallo Brandy	13.2%	6.5%	Absolut Vodkas	10.0%	3.7%
#12	Keystone Light	6.9%	1.6%	Corona Extra	10.6%	4.1%	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	9.9%	3.7%
#13	Corona Extra	6.6%	1.4%	Absolut Vodkas	10.5%	6.4%	Dos Equis	9.8%	3.5%
#14	Jose Cuervo Tequilas	6,6%	1.4%	Smirnoff Vodkas	10.2%	5.4%	Tecate	9.5%	3.4%
#15	Bacardi Malt Beverages	6.3%	1.6%	1800 Margaritas and Cocktails	10.0%	4.1%	Modelo Especial	8.7%	4.1%
#16	UV Vodkas	6.2%	1.5%	Bud Ice	9.3%	6.6%	Ciroc Vodkas	8.7%	3.7%
#17	Heineken	6.0%	1.6%	Andre Champagne	9.3%	6.4%	Four Loko	8.6%	2.3%
#18	Barefoot Wines	5.6%	1.5%	Gallo Wines	9.0%	6.4%	Malibu Rums	8.5%	3.4%
#19	Baileys Irish Cream	5.5%	1.6%	Miller High Life	8.4%	6.4%	Grey Goose Vodkas	8.1%	3.6%
#20	Busch Light	5.3%	1.4%	Captain Morgan Rums	8.3%	6.6%	Crown Royal Whiskeys	7.8%	3.8%
#21	Grey Goose Vodkas	5.3%	1.6%	Bacardi Malt Beverages	8.1%	3.1%	Miller Lite	7.6%	3.4%
#22	Four Loko	5.0%	1.4%	Bacardi Rums	7.7%	3.0%	Patron Tequilas	7.6%	2.5%
#23	Corona Extra Light	4.8%	1.4%	Christian Brothers Brandy	7.6%	6.4%	Mikes	7.4%	2.3%
#24	Malibu Rums	4.6%	1.5%	Grey Goose Vodkas	7.3%	3.4%	1800 Tequilas	7.4%	3.5%
#25	Bartles & Jaymes	4.6%	1.3%	Colt 45 Malt Liquors	7.2%	2.8%	Captain Morgan Rums	7.4%	2.7%

^aConsumption prevalence is the proportion of youth drinkers who reported consuming the brand during the past 30 days.

^bStandard error of the consumption prevalence (standard deviation of the sample’s estimate of the prevalence of a brand’s consumption in the population).

Table 2.

Top 25 brands of alcoholic beverages among underage drinkers by gender.

Male			Female
Rank	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb	Brand	Consumption Prevalencea	Standard Errorb
#1	Bud Light	28.1%	3.4%	Bud Light	27.7%	3.2%
#2	Budweiser	17.0%	2.8%	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	22.7%	3.1%
#3	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	14.2%	3.0%	Mikes	14.4%	2.3%
#4	Coors Light	13.7%	2.7%	Smirnoff Vodkas	13.3%	2.4%
#5	Heineken	13.2%	2.7%	Budweiser	12.2%	2.5%
#6	Captain Morgan Rums	13.1%	2.7%	Coors Light	11.7%	2.5%
#7	Smirnoff Vodkas	12.2%	2.7%	Absolut Vodkas	11.3%	2.5%
#8	Smirnoff Malt Beverages	11.6%	2.7%	Corona Extra	11.2%	2.2%
#9	Corona Extra	11.3%	2.2%	Bacardi Malt Beverages	10.3%	2.1%
#10	Blue Moon	10.2%	2.4%	Jose Cuervo Tequilas	9.5%	2.1%
#11	Grey Goose Vodkas	9.8%	2.6%	Bacardi Rums	9.4%	1.7%
#12	Bacardi Rums	9.2%	2.4%	Jack Daniels Whiskeys	8.6%	2.1%
#13	Absolut Vodkas	8.9%	2.3%	Bartles and Jaymes Wine Cooler and Malt Beverages	8.1%	2.1%
#14	Keystone Light	8.4%	2.3%	Four Loko	7.8%	1.7%
#15	Hennessy Cognacs	8.2%	2.6%	Miller Lite	7.6%	1.6%
#16	Ciroc Vodkas	8.1%	2.6%	Captain Morgan Rums	7.5%	1.7%
#17	Miller Lite	7.3%	2.1%	Malibu Rums	6.8%	2.0%
#18	Mikes	7.3%	7.3%	Heineken	6.0%	1.4%
#19	Patron Tequilas	7.1%	2.0%	UV Vodkas	5.7%	1.6%
#20	Jose Cuervo Tequilas	6.5%	1.9%	Barefoot Wines	5.5%	1.6%
#21	1800 Tequilas	6.2%	2.0%	Corona Extra Light	5.3%	1.4%
#22	Bacardi Malt Beverages	5.8%	5.8%	Baileys Irish Cream Liqueurs	5.3%	1.6%
#23	Malibu Rum	5.8%	1.7%	Seagrams Flavored Malt Beverages	4.9%	1.3%
#24	Busch Light	5.6%	1.6%	Burnetts Vodka	4.6%	1.8%
#25	Crown Royal Whiskey	5.5%	2.0%	1800 Margaritas and Cocktails	4.2%	1.7%

^aConsumption prevalence is the proportion of youth drinkers who reported consuming the brand during the past 30 days.

^bStandard error of the consumption prevalence (standard deviation of the sample’s estimate of the prevalence of a brand’s consumption in the population).

Age

Brands that become increasingly popular with age tended to be liquor brands (Table 1). For example, among 13–15 year olds 7 of the top 25 brands were liquor, but among 19–20 year olds 13 of the top 25 were liquor. By brand, Smirnoff vodka did not appear in the top 25 for 13–15 year-olds, though the prevalence of use jumped to 9.6% among 16–18 year-olds and then continued to increase to 16.9% among 19–20 year-olds. The prevalence of Jack Daniel’s bourbon use increased dramatically from 5.8% among 13- to 15-year-olds and 16- to 18-year-olds to 16.8% among 19- to 20-year-olds. The prevalence of Absolut vodka use increased steadily from 4.2% among 13- to 15-year-olds to 6.6% among 16- to 18-year-olds and 13.9% among 19- to 20-year-olds. Three other brands of hard liquor—Bacardi rum, Jose Cuervo tequila, and Grey Goose vodka—did not appear in the top 25 brands among 13- to15-year-olds, but were preferred brands among the two older age groups.

Overall, flavored alcoholic beverage brands popularity declined somewhat with age; flavored alcoholic beverages accounted for 8 of the 25 most popular brands among 13–15 year olds compared with 4 of the top 25 among 19–20 year olds. However, there was more variability than with liquor and the popularity of some flavored alcoholic beverage brands increased with age, while the popularity of other brands declined. Smirnoff malt beverages and Bacardi malt beverages became increasingly popular with age, especially among the 19- to 20-year-olds. The prevalence of Smirnoff malt beverage use increased from 10.5% among 16- to18-year-olds to 23.5% among 19- to 20-year-olds, while the prevalence of Bacardi malt beverages increased from 6.1% to 10.1%. In contrast, Dailys cocktails were popular among 13- to 15-year-olds, with a prevalence of 7.9%, but disappeared from the top 25 lists for the two older age groups.

Gender

Overall, females preferred flavored alcoholic beverages more than males; flavored alcoholic beverages accounted for 3 of the top 25 brands among men but 7 of the top 25 among women. By brand, the prevalence of Smirnoff malt beverages was 22.7% among females, compared to 11.6% among males. The prevalence of Mike’s was 14.4% among females, compared to 7.3% among males. Bartles & Jaymes wine coolers were consumed by 8.1% of females, but did not make the males’ top 25 list.

Beer was equally preferred among males and females. Bud Light was number one for females at 27.7% prevalence and males at 28.1%. Bud Light, Budweiser, Coors Light, and Corona Extra were also equally as popular among males and females.

Liquor was more popular among men than women. Liquor accounted for 13 of the top 25 brands among men, and 10 of the top 25 brands among women. For example, Grey Goose vodka (9.8%) and Ciroc vodka (8.1%) were popular among males, but neither brand appeared on the top 25 list for females. Jack Daniel’s bourbon was also more popular among males (14.2%) than females (8.6%), as was Captain Morgan rum (13.1% vs. 7.5%). However, some liquor brands were similarly popular among the wrong groups, including Absolut vodka, Smirnoff vodka, and Bacardi rum.

Race/Ethnicity

Twelve alcohol brands among the top 25 preferred brands for Black youth that did not appear at all on the top 25 list for non-Hispanic White youth: Hennessy cognac (30.2%), Ciroc vodka (21.4%), 1800 tequila (18.4%), Seagram’s gin (14.8%), E & J Gallo brandy (13.2%), 1800 margaritas and cocktails (10.0%), Bud Ice (9.3%), Andre champagne (9.3%), Gallo wines (9.0%), Miller High Life (8.4%), Christian Brothers brandy (7.6%), and Colt 45 malt liquor (7.2%).

Also, there were three popular brands among Hispanic youth that were not on the top 25 list for non-Hispanic White youth: Dos Equis (9.8%), Tecate (9.5%), and Modelo Especial (8.7%). The second most popular brand among Hispanic youth was Corona Extra (21.2%), which was only consumed by 6.6% of non-Hispanic White youth. Jose Cuervo tequila was twice as popular among Hispanic youth (12.0%) than non-Hispanic White youth (6.6%).

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper to report demographic differences in the alcohol brand preferences of underage drinkers in the United States. Our major findings were as follows: (1) Two alcohol brands—Bud Light and Budweiser—are uniformly popular among underage drinkers, regardless of age, gender, or race/ethnicity; (2) There are several hard liquor brands whose use increases markedly with age, including Smirnoff vodka, Absolut vodka, and Jack Daniel’s whiskey; (3) Two flavored alcoholic beverages sharing the names of hard liquor brands—Smirnoff and Bacardi—are more popular with older youth; (4) Some flavored alcoholic beverages, especially Smirnoff, Mike’s, and Bartles & Jaymes, are about twice as popular among female underage drinkers; and (5) There are 12 alcohol brands that are uniquely popular among Black underage drinkers.

Previous studies that looked at demographic differences in youth consumption of alcoholic beverage types led to an incomplete understanding of underage drinking. For example, we had reported previously that the consumption of flavored alcoholic beverages decreases with age (Siegel et al., 2011c). That is the case, but we have shown here that the consumption of some of these brands actually increases substantially with age. Some flavored alcoholic beverage brands appear to be popular “starter” drinks because of their sweet and flavorful taste (Siegel et al., 2011c), whereas other brands such as Smirnoff and Bacardi become increasingly popular as youth begin to consume hard liquor associated with the same brand name—namely, Smirnoff vodka and Bacardi rum.

Another incomplete understanding of youth drinking behavior was our previous observation that beer is much less popular among females than males (Siegel et al., 2011c). Again, that is the case, but we found here that the most popular alcoholic drink among females is the beer Bud Light, which is about equally popular among males and females. In fact, there are four top beer brands consumed by females at roughly the same prevalence rate as males.

Our most striking finding was the difference in alcohol brand preference by race. We found that 12 of the top 25 brands among Black youth were not among the top 25 for non-Hispanic White youth. Future research should attempt to identify the reasons for the observed racial/ethnic differences in alcohol brand popularity among underage youth, including the unique popularity of these 12 brands among African American youth. Previous research suggests one potential hypothesis: urban music (i.e., rap, hip/hop, and R&B), to which Black youth are more heavily exposed, disproportionately contains alcohol brand references (Siegel et al., 2013b). While a formal analysis is beyond the scope of this paper, a preliminary internet search revealed that for each of the 12 brands, there are either lyrics to popular urban songs that reference these brands or direct promotion of these brands through rap artists as brand spokesmen or through concert/party sponsorship (Table 4). Future research should investigate the direction of this relationship between brand promotion in music lyrics and brand consumption among black youth in order to determine whether exposure to lyrics in popular culture may be influencing the brand preferences of African American youth, or the presence of these brands in the music culture is merely reflecting brand popularity among African American drinkers.

Table 4.

Examples of alcohol brand promotion in urban music culture.

Hennessy Hennessy sponsors numerous parties and concerts featuring urban artists, including Trey Songz and Nas (Carol, 2012; Guzzle up, 2010). Graffiti artists design new Hennessy bottles (Resnick, 2012). Hennessy sponsors a contest called “Chase the Music. Own the Stage” where new artists can play and be recognized (Hennessy Chae the Music, Own the Stage, 2012). Erykah Badu is featured in Hennessy’s latest campaign (Williams, 2012). 50 Cent, Ya Heard Me lyrics: “Shorty the Henny got me feeling right. Ya heard me?” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, Ya Heard Me Lyrics, 2012) Tupac, Hennessy lyrics: “They wanna knows my role model—it’s in a brown bottle. Yo, what’s our…motto…? Hennessy…Even the cops can’t stop us, my enemies flip when they see me drink a fifth of that Hennessy (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, Hennessy Lyrics, 2012).

1800 Rick Ross is the spokesman for 1800 Tequila (Starbury, 2009). Ab Soul, Bohemian Grove lyrics: “… you. I'm just living how I'm living. Hennessy and Coke. We mixing dark and light like the 1800s. And we getting blunted, what it do? Yes, indeed” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, Bohemian Grove Lyrics, 2012). Snoop Dogg, 1800 lyrics: “1800, I'm blunted, fa cert’ Snoop D-O-dub', turn that … up. I don't buy bub, tequila got me goin” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, 1800 Lyrics, 2012).

Ciroc Diddy (Sean Combs) is a paid spokesman for Ciroc and has a $100 million marketing deal with the company (Diddy really think they wouldn’t notice, 2011). Diddy owns a music management company called Ciroc Entertainment and a group called Ciroc Boyz, which manages artists including Rick Ross, Fabolous, Red Café and French Montana (Bad Boy Records, 2012). Meek Mill, House Party lyrics: “Ciroc all on my table … in the living room” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, House Party Lyrics, 2012). Chris Brown ft Lil Wayne, I Can Transform Ya lyrics: “Ciroc and lime, give it a lil time, and she can transform like Optimus Prime” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, I Can Transform Ya Lyrics, 2012).

Seagram’s Gin Has sponsored both Mary J. Blige and Ja Rule concerts (Mack, 2011; Mary J Blige Open Up about Drugs and Drinking Hell, 2011). Petey Pablo, Freak-A-Leak lyrics: “Not a problem, you know I do it cause I love ya. Now I got to give a shout out to Seagram's gin cause I drink it, and they payin’ for it” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, Freek-a-leak lyrics, 2012). Snoop Dogg, Gin and Juice lyrics: “Rollin down the street, smokin ENDO, sippin on gin and juice. Laid back [with my mind on my money and my money on my mind]. Now that I got me some Seagram's gin” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, Gin and Juice Lyrics, 2012).

E&J Gallo Brandy Sponsored John Legend’s 2009 Tour (Recent Work, 2012). Sponsored a summer concert series with hip-hop and R&B radio station 97.9 in Dallas, TX featuring artists Snoop Dogg, T.I., Rick Ross, Young Jeezy, and Baby Bash (E&J Brandy Partners with Hip-Hop and R&B Station, 2012; Smooth and Authentic Mix, 2012). Angie Martinez featuring Snoop Dogg Ladies and Gents “See that’s gansta’ ….(gangsta’ style) It taste like E and J brand sweet, like candy Baby said she wanna be down wit’ a …. Brandy” (365lyrics.com: Save Your Time, Ladies and Gents Lyrics, 2012).

Bud Ice Jay-Z is a spokesman for Budweiser Beer (Blanco, 2012; Jay-Z Signs Up as Budweiser Spokesman, 2006). Danny Brown, Bruiser Brigade “Bruiser! But don't forget the brew Coronas and Bud Ice But don't forget the Miller High Life” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Danny Brown, 2012). Yung B from Farlin, Sittin’ On The Game “Sippin Bud Ice, got me throwed than a mug I’m in college, getting knowledge, but she know that I’m a thug” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Yung B from Farlin, 2012).

Andre Owned by E&J Gallo (E&J Gallo Winery, 2012). Nas, Halftime “I be slayin’ them fast, doing this that and the third But chill, pass the Andre and let’s slay” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Nas, 2012).

Gallo Wines Mac Dre, Mafioso “I’m in my sneaks with freaks on the beach was shallow Bossed up drinkin Ernest and Julio Gallo (wine)” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Mac Dre, 2012).

Miller High Life Danny Brown, Bruiser Brigade lyrics: “Bruiser! But don't forget the brew Coronas and Bud Ice But don't forget the Miller High Life” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Danny Brown, 2012). Lupe Fiasco, All the Way Turnt Up lyrics: “And I’ve come to take it all back like Miller High Life” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Lupe Fiasco, 2012).

Christian Brothers Brandy E-40, My Cup lyrics: “I'm a guerilla meals must like Brandy Like the R&B singer, Christian brother twist Getting gone, plastic cup in the traffic bumping this” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, E-40, 2012). Foesum, Listen to the Sound lyrics: “Sippin' Christian Brothers, Lina pour me some mo'” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Foesum, 2012).

Colt 45 Malt Liquors Snoop Dogg is the spokesman for Colt 45 malt liquor (Walker, 2011). Afroman, Ghetto Memories lyrics: “Colt 45 got your boy on buzz” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Afroman, 2012). Youngbloodz, 85 lyrics: “Now the wind blows as I'm on 85, and chiefin good With a six-pack a that Colt 45 just like I should” (Rap Genius, If You Don’t Know, Now You Know, Youngbloodz, 2012).

The major limitation of this study is the low response rate of about 43%. We attempted to adjust for the differential non-response of Black and low-income youth through post-stratification weights, though it is not clear whether our weighting adjustment was sufficient. Accordingly, these results should be interpreted with caution. Another limitation found that the findings for any specific brand by race ethnicity has large confidence intervals due to the sample size, so one should also be cautious of the precision of estimates for any particular brand on that basis. It should be noted that the underrepresentation of Black youth would not affect the race/ethnicity-related results.

Despite these limitations, this paper presents the first analysis of differences in alcohol brand consumption among age, gender, and race/ethnicity subgroups of the underage youth population. The next step in our research is to examine the associations between demographic brand preferences and the prevalence of targeted brand marketing toward different youth subgroups. If alcohol brand preferences for different demographic groups are related to differential advertising exposure, then public health intervention and policies can be directed towards reducing underage youth’s exposure to these brand promotions.