LAUSR

How do students make judgments about their future behaviors involving the use of alcohol? The present study advances deterrence theory by introducing elements of attribution theory while examining the perceived deterrent effects of a newly instituted dry policy on a college campus. A phone survey of 508 full-time undergraduate students between the ages of 18 and 26 was conducted 1 year following the ban on alcohol. Hypotheses are presented in two models and predict that deterrence (surveillance and enforcement) and blame explain intentions to violate the alcohol policy. These relationships are expected to be mediated by problem attribution and shame and are moderated by gender. Results show that perceived peer surveillance does reduce intentions to violate the policy in the future but formal enforcement does not. Findings further indicate that attributing blame acts to increase the likelihood of experiencing shame, therefore, reducing intentions to violate the alcohol policy. Gender conditioned the effects of surveillance and shame (stronger for females) on future policy violations. Problems that arise from drinking can be understood as another form of attribution that acts to mediate surveillance. Surveillance and blame contribute to the judgment process as students think about violating the alcohol policy, and shame emerges as the key link between deterrence and attribution.