Table 1.
Independent variables: descriptive data (percentages and mean values) and bivariate correlation (b-values and Adj. R 2) with opinion on restrictive alcohol policies.
| Percentage of respondents (dummy variables) | Mean value (scale variables) | Correlation b-value (bivariate OLS regression) | Correlation Adj R
2
(bivariate OLS regression) |
N (of independent and dependent combined) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social characteristics | |||||
| Gender: female = 1 (Control group: male and others) |
47.4 | +8*** | .017 | 1.640 | |
| Age: young (< 30 years) = 1 | 15.6 | –1 | .000 | 1.640 | |
| Age: old (> 65) = 1 | 31.1 | –1 | .000 | 1.640 | |
| (Control group: middle-aged 31–64 years) | |||||
| Household income: high = 1 | 27.4 | +3 | .000 | 1.640 | |
| Household income: low = 1 | 24.1 | –4* | .003 | 1.640 | |
| (Control group: mid-level income) | |||||
| Education: high = 1 (Control group = low) | 41.2 | +8*** | .020 | 1.640 | |
| “Class”: blue-collar home = 1 | 36.2 | –3 | .001 | 1.640 | |
| “Class”: business owner/farmer = 1 | 10.4 | –6** | .004 | 1.640 | |
| (Control group: white collar home = 1) | 44.9 | +1 | .000 | 1.640 | |
| Geography: village, rural area = 1 | 32.5 | -0 | .000 | 1.640 | |
| Geography: city = 1 | 17.3 | +2 | .000 | 1.640 | |
| (Control group: towns) | |||||
| Nationality: grown up abroad = 1 (Control group: grown up in Sweden) |
8.5 | –6* | .003 | 1.640 | |
| Religiosity: prays to God. Scale 0 (never)–1 (several times per week) | 0.15 | +10*** | .013 | 1.588 | |
| Alcohol consumption | |||||
| Alcohol consumption frequency: scale 0 (never)–1 (several times per week) | 0.30 | –16*** | .030 | 1.601 | |
| Alcohol consumption: abstainer = 1 (control group = consume alcohol) | 11.6 | +16*** | .038 | 1.640 | |
| Knowledge, perception, experience | |||||
| Own experience of someone close drinking too much = 1 (Control group: no experience) | 36.6 | +4* | .004 | 1.621 | |
| Knowledge about alcohol: index scale 0 (low)–1 (high) | 0.54 | +15*** | .011 | 1.475 | |
| Problem perception of alcohol consumption for you personally: 0 (negative consequences dominate)–1 (positive consequences dominate) | 0.55 | –25*** | .063 | 1.363 | |
| Problem perception of alcohol consumption in society: 0 (negative consequences dominate)–1 (positive consequences dominate) | 0.26 | –40*** | .104 | 1.411 | |
| Ideology | |||||
| Left–right ideology: subjective scale 0 (left)–1 (right) | 0.52 | –21*** | .044 | 1.598 | |
| Alcohol liberalism: scale 0 (restrictive)–1 (liberal) | 0.40 | –40*** | .226 | 1.481 |
Source: National Society, Opinion, Media survey, 2016.
Note. OLS = ordinary least squares. All independent variables are coded 0–1, either as categorical variables or as scale variables, with 1 representing the highest possible value of each variable and 0 the lowest. The table includes the percentage of each category and mean value of each scale variable, as well as the bivariate correlation (b-value and adjusted R 2) for each independent variable on the dependent variable (the 0–100 index of support for restrictive policies). The N-value represents number of respondents for the correlation value, i.e., respondents who have values on both the independent and the dependent variables. The control group in sets of dummy variables is described in italics.
*p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.