Table 5.

Females’ odds ratios comparing multiple-risk drinkers and binge-drinkers to the low-risk drinkers or abstainers.

	Multiple-risk drinkers vs. low-risk drinkers or abstainers		Binge drinkers vs. low-risk drinkers or abstainers
	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI
Hispanic	0.57	[020–1.62]	1.18	[0.87–1.61]
White	13.68***	[4.23–44.26]	1 85***	[1.44–2.37]
Wave 3 age	1.68***	[1.20–2.36]	1.40**	[1.21–1.63]
Wave 3 education	6.30***	[2.71–14.65]	1.13	[0.83–1.52]
Wave 3 single	0.57*	[0.34–0.98]	0.95	[0.74–1.22]
Wave 3 live with parent(s)	1.07	[0.33–3.45]	1.27	[0.76–2.12]
Wave 3 child supervisory  neglect	2.41*	[1.22–4.77]	1.03	[0.71–1.49]
Wave 1 parental drinking	0.95	[0.68–1.34]	0.97	[0.85–1.11]
Wave 3 depression	1.41*	[1.06–1.89]	1.04	[0.92–1.18]
Wave l delinquency	2.01***	[1.50–2.70]	1.13	[0.96–1.34]

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01,

^***p < 0.001.

Note. Low-risk drinkers or abstainers are the referent for both multiple-risk drinkers and binge-drinkers. Hispanic was equal to 1 for individuals who responded yes to a question asking if they were of Hispanic decent and zero for those who responded no. Thus, the referent group for Hispanics was non-Hispanics. Because of their low substance use during emerging adulthood, white was given a value of 1 and the referent group contained individuals who identified as Asian/ Pacific Islander, black, and other.