OBJECTIVE
To identify the peculiarities of alcohol consumption among adolescents who use the Internet daily for 3 hours or more (UIDL) in comparison with adolescents who do not use the Internet daily for a long time (nUIDL).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study was conducted in 17 constituent entities of the Russian Federation from 6 Federal Regions of Russia. Using the questionnaire method, 18.222 rural schoolchildren in grades 9—11 at the age of 15—17 were interviewed: 8208 (45%) boys and 10.014 (55%) girls. Comparison of groups of adolescents UIDL and nUIDL and setting the significance of differences were carried out using the Pearson's criterion χ2.
Results and discussion. It was found that the prevalence of alcohol consumption and frequent alcohol consumption was statistically significantly higher in the UIDL group. The difference was also revealed in the profile of motivation for alcohol consumption. The boys in the UIDL group are dominated by the motives «with friends for a holiday», «just like that» and «because of nothing to do», and in the nUIDL group — «for holidays and family celebrations.» A similar picture was observed in girls of both groups. There were no differences in preference for certain alcoholic beverages between adolescents of both groups. The age-specific structure of alcohol drinking in the UIDL and nUIDL groups is congruent. However, the number of participants in each age interval in adolescents in the UIDL group is statistically significantly higher than in the nUIDL group. The main motive for the first alcohol test for boys and girls of both groups is “holidays and family celebrations”. Almost every 5th boy and every 10th girl in both groups try alcohol for the first time «out of curiosity.» In terms of the number of those who taste certain alcoholic beverages (beer, wine, champagne), the groups of UIDL and nUIDL adolescents practically do not differ. The exception is spirits, which are statistically significantly more frequent among UIDL teenagers for the first time. The level of awareness of the dangers of alcohol among adolescents in the UIDL group is statistically significantly lower than in the nUIDL group. Sources of information about the dangers of alcohol for schoolchildren of the UIDL group are most often not scientifically grounded, logically structured lessons and classes at school, but fragmentary unsystematic, far from scientific information received from friends, close relatives and parents.
CONCLUSION
UIDL does not protect teenagers from either traditional or frequent drinking. Moreover, this use is more aggressive and potentially more dangerous. And using the Internet does not add knowledge about the dangers of alcohol.