THINGS THAT GO BUMP IN THE NIGHT: APPLYING LABELING THEORY TO PARANORMAL BELIEFS AND SUBSTANCE USE Amanda Heitkamp A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May 2021 Committee: Thomas Mowen, Advisor John Boman Stephen Demuth © 2021 Amanda Heitkamp All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Thomas Mowen, Advisor Numerous surveys have demonstrated the common nature of paranormal beliefs, as well as the popularity of substance use in American society, particularly among college students. Studies have also linked substance use to negative consequences including decreased academic performance, cognitive functioning, physical and sexual violence, and even death. Although paranormal beliefs are relatively common, there is a theoretical justification that belief in the paranormal and substance use may be correlated. Drawing from labeling theory, I examine if individuals who embrace paranormal beliefs experience negative label internalization, and if this leads to elevated levels of substance use. Multivariate analysis of an original dataset of college students from a Midwestern public university revealed that respondents who internalized a negative label due to their paranormal beliefs reported elevated levels of substance use. Moreover, contrary to expectations, individuals who reported believing that society assigns a negative label to paranormal beliefs reported lower levels of substance use. An interaction effect between the internalized variable and external views was positive and marginally significant, indicating that greater external labels and negative internalization of the label of paranormal beliefs magnify in their effects on substance use. Given the widespread concern of substance use among college students and the co-occurring broad acceptance of paranormal beliefs, understanding the empirical linkage between these two dimensions is a key first step to address this critical gap in literature. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to give special thanks to my advisor, Thomas Mowen, along with my committee members John Boman and Stephen Demuth for their countless hours of edits, navigation, and encouragement. In particular, Thomas, for always taking time out of his busy schedule to read every single draft I gave him. I could not have done this without him. Last but not least, thank you to my sister, my family, and my friends for being so supportive during my first two years of grad school. It takes a village. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 4 Substance Use in College ............................................................................................. 4 Theoretical Orientation: Labeling Theory ................................................................... 7 Paranormal Beliefs ....................................................................................................... 9 CURRENT STUDY ............................................................................................................... 12 METHODS ........................................................................................................................... 14 Data .................................................................................................................. 14 Dependent Variable: Substance Use ............................................................................ 15 Focal Independent Variable: Labeling ......................................................................... 15 Paranormal Exposure ................................................................................................... 16 Academic Controls ....................................................................................................... 17 Demographic Controls ................................................................................................. 18 ANALYTIC STRATEGY ........................................................................................................ 19 RESULTS ............................................................................................................... 21 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................... 24 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 29 APPENDIX A. TABLES ........................................................................................................ 44 INTRODUCTION Alcohol and drug use among college students are well-documented and persistent issues (Skidmore, Kaufman and Crowell 2016). Substances including alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and amphetamines are used by college students at rates much higher than their non- college attending peers (Merrill and Carey 2016; Schulenberg and Patrick 2012; Silverstri et al. 2015). Significant negative effects associated with drug and alcohol use include poor school performance (Arria et al. 2013), traffic accidents (Borges and Hansen 1993), sexual abuse (Abbey 2002), verbal and physical fights (Mustaine and Tewksbury 1998; Roth 1994), and even death (Hingson, Zha and Weitzman 2009). Additional negative behaviors can arise from the college atmosphere of drugs and binge drinking, studies have shown that substance use from college can remain a lingering problem even after graduation (Jennsion 2004). With about 19.9 million students attending college in 2019 (National Center for Education Statistics 2020), substance use is an issue that affects a significant portion of the population in the United States. One key criminological perspective that has emerged as a fruitful explanation for substance use is labeling theory (Kaplan, Martin and Robbins 1982; Li and Moore 2001). Labeling theory suggests that society assigns deviant labels to particular sets of behavior or acts. These ‘problem behaviors’ are defined by Jessor and Jessor (1997: 33) as “behavior that is socially defined as a problem, source of concern, or as undesirable by the norms of conventional society and the institutions of adult authority, and its occurrence usually elicits some kind of social control response.” There is a stigma (Goffman 1963) placed on individuals who engage in deviant behavior, and these individuals subsequently internalize this stigma (Link and Phelan 2001). This internalization can have serious negative consequences for the emotional well-being of individuals (Schroeder and Mowen 2014). Work on stigma has found that stigmatized people 2 deal with a multitude of adverse consequences including unfavorable self-image (Westbrook, Bauman and Shinnar 1992), decreased employment opportunities (Link 1982; 1987), feelings of blame (Gerstel 1987), depression and anxiety (Lee, Kochman and Sikkema 2002), and other psychological issues (Gilbert and Walker 2010; Monroe and Peterman 1988). Previous work applying labeling theory has shown that individuals who suffer from the stigma of food allergies (Schroeder and Mowen 2014), depression (Wang, Burton and Pachankis 2017) and disabilities (Li and Moore 2001) report using alcohol and other substances due to negative self-perceptions. Although labeling theory has been implemented to explain substance use in a variety of contexts, it has never been applied to understanding how paranormal beliefs might function as a label towards substance use, highlighting a major shortcoming in both the application of labeling theory and understanding the correlates of substance use. Broadly defined, paranormal beliefs tend to describe occurrences or phenomena that go beyond human ability, are physically impossible, or have no scientific explanation (Thalbourne 2003). Surveys have identified broad public support for the paranormal (Markovsky and Thye 2001). For example, Rice (2003) conducted a survey using 1,200 random-dialed telephone interviews throughout the U.S. and found that 60% of respondents believed in extra sensory perception, 59% believed in psychic healing, 42% believed in ghosts, and 40% believed in UFOs. More recently, a survey conducted by Chapman University (2018) found that over 3/4ths of Americans believe in at least one type of paranormal phenomenon. Additionally, this same survey reported higher paranormal beliefs than results from the previous year (Chapman University 2017), indicating that belief in the paranormal is seemingly on the rise. However, despite a significant portion of the U.S. reporting a belief in some form of paranormal (Chapman University 2017; 2018), the term “para” normal implies that belief in these events/experiences 3 are non-normative. This is evidenced by the relatively small sector of academic work on paranormal beliefs. To this point, Castro, Burrows and Wooffitt (2014: 33) highlight, “…sociologists have not really been concerned with paranormal experiences [because] sociologists may be wary of engaging with the paranormal for fear of damaging their professional standing.” Drawing from the literature on similarly common yet stigmatized identities such as cancer (Purohit and Rabari 2020), disabilities (Li and Moore 2001), and women who are involuntarily childless (Miall 1985), I suggest that individuals with paranormal beliefs also fall into this category.