Addictive Behaviors 37 (2012) 524–527

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Addictive Behaviors

Short Communication

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Brazilian version of the Drinking Motives

Questionnaire-Revised (DMQ-R)
Nelson Hauck-Filho a,⁎, Marco Antonio Pereira Teixeira a, M. Lynne Cooper b
a
Graduate Program in Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil
b
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the factor structure of the Brazilian version of the Drinking
Drinking motives Motives Questionnaire-Revised (DMQ-R; Cooper, 1994) in a sample of 584 university students. A secondary
Alcohol use goal was to investigate the relationships between motives and measures of alcohol use and drinking problems.
Factor structure The DMQ-R assesses four motive dimensions: social, enhancement, coping, and conformity. Confirmatory factor
Confirmatory factor analysis analysis supported a revised four-factor model identical to the original, with the exception of one item that did
not load on its intended factor. Relative to coping and conformity motives, enhancement and social motives were
strongly related to both alcohol use and drinking problems. Overall results indicate that the factor structure of the
Brazilian DMQ-R parallels that observed in North America and Europe using the original English language
DMQ-R, despite a distinct pattern of relationships with alcohol use and drinking problems.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Drinking motives can be understood as personal needs that people
attempt to satisfy through alcohol consumption (Ham & Hope, 2003),
and as efforts to attain desired social or internal psychological goals
(Cooper, Kuntsche, Levitt, Barber, & Wolf, in press). Despite the exis-
tence of many psychometric instruments developed to assess drinking
motives and related constructs (for reviews, see Cooper et al., in press;
and Kuntsche, Knibbe, Gmel, & Engels, 2005), the Drinking Motives
Questionnaire-Revised (DMQ-R; Cooper, 1994) is the most widely
used measure (Kuntsche et al., 2005). DMQ-R has 20 items distributed
among four subscales: social, enhancement, coping, and conformity.
According to Cooper (1994), social motives are positively reinforced
and externally focused (e.g., drinking “to celebrate a special occasion
with a friend”), whereas enhancement motives are positively rein-
forced, but internally driven or directed (e.g., drinking “because it's
fun”). On the other hand, conformity motives are negatively reinforce-
ment and externally focused (e.g., drinking “so you won't feel left
out”), whereas coping motives are negatively reinforcement but inter-
nally directed (e.g., drinking “to forget your worries”).
In recent years, the four-factor structure of the DMQ-R has been
investigated in diverse cultural contexts and compared with other plau-
sible models. With only a few exceptions (see Martens, Cox, Beck, &
Heppner, 2003; Mushquash, Stewart, Comeau, & McGrath, 2008), the
four-factor model has consistently shown the best fit to the data
(Kuntsche, Knibbe, Gmel, & Engels, 2006; Kuntsche, Stewart, &
Cooper, 2008; MacLean & Lecci, 2000; Martens, Rocha, Martin, &
Serrao, 2008). Nevertheless, the DMQ-R has not been previously exam-
ined in Brazil, nor as far as we know in any Latin American country.
Therefore, the main objective of this study was to determine if a four-
factor structure also fits the Brazilian version of the DMQ-R (Cooper,
1994) in a sample of university students.
The relationships between motives and measures of alcohol use were
also investigated to determine if patterns similar to those found in North
America and Europe hold. Based on prior research (see Cooper, 1994;
Cooper et al., in press; Kuntsche et al., 2005, for reviews), we expect
that motives will predict alcohol consumption and drinking problems,
and that each motive will show a pattern of associations with alcohol
use and drinking problems. Specifically, we hypothesize that approach
motives (both enhancement and social) should be strongly related to pat-
terns of alcohol use, but less strongly or even unrelated (once use has
been controlled) to drinking problems. In contrast, avoidance motives
(both coping and conformity) should be less strongly related to use per
se, but more strongly predictive of drinking problems, even after control-
ling for levels of use (see Cooper et al., in press, for a detailed discussion).

2. Method

⁎ Corresponding author at: Institute of Psychology, Federal University of Rio Grande
do Sul (UFRGS), Ramiro Barcelos Street, 2600, room 117, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil Zip
Code: 90035-003. Tel.: + 55 51 33085454.
E-mail addresses: hauck_psychology@hotmail.com (N. Hauck-Filho),
mapteixeira@yahoo.com.br (M.A.P. Teixeira), cooperm@missouri.edu (M.L. Cooper).
2.1. Participants
The initial sample was composed of 674 university students from
two universities from the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. After

0306-4603/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.11.023
 N. Hauck-Filho et al. / Addictive Behaviors 37 (2012) 524–527
selecting those with lifetime drinking experience who had complete
DMQ-R protocols, 584 participants remained. The mean age was
23.56 years (SD = 6.55; range: 16–60). Females comprised 52.9% of
the sample.
2.2. Instruments
2.2.1. Drinking motives
The DMQ-R (Cooper, 1994) was translated to Brazilian Portuguese
following procedures recommended by Geisinger (1994). Items were
answered on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never or almost never;
5 = always or almost always).
2.2.2. Alcohol use intensity
Three questions based on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification
Test (AUDIT; Babor, La Fuente, Saunders, & Grant, 1992) were used
to assess frequency of alcohol consumption, number of drinks con-
sumed on a typical occasion, and frequency of heavy drinking epi-
sodes, defined as drinking six or more drinks on a typical occasion.
2.2.3. Drinking problems
Based on several existing instruments (Hurlbut & Sher, 1992;
White & Labouvie, 1989), a 24-item measure was developed to assess
alcohol-related problems common among university students. Stu-
dents were asked to indicate (Yes, No) all possible negative alcohol-
related consequences they had experienced in the past 12 months.
Sample items are “Problems with the law”, “Missing classes”, and
“Having fights.” “Yes” responses were summed to compute a total
score.
2.3. Procedures
This research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Psy-
chology Institute of Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. The
data were collected in groups during class hours, after obtaining in-
formed consent.
2.4. Data analysis
Confirmatory factor analyses, using maximum likelihood estimation
(AMOS 18.0), were used to test the structure of the Brazilian DMQ-R.
The following indicators were used to evaluate and compare competing
models: χ² test, Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973), Com-
parative Fit Index (CFI; Bentler, 1990), and Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation (RMSEA; Steiger & Lind, 1980). Competing models
were derived from the literature (Cooper, 1994), and included: 1)
one-factor; 2) two-factor, comparing positive and negative reinforce-
ment (enhancement combined with social; coping combined with con-
formity); 3) two-factor, comparing internal vs. external source (social
combined with conformity; enhancement combined with coping); 4)
three-factor (coping; conformity; social combined with enhancement);
and 5) the hypothesized four-factor model.
3. Results
Consistent with prior results, the four-factor model fit the data
significantly better than any of the comparison models, although fit
indices were slightly lower than usually recommended, χ² = 891.20,
df = 164, TLI = .85, CFI = .87, RMSEA = .09. Inspection of modification
indices suggested that item 15 (“Because you feel more self-confident
and sure of yourself,” originally intended to assess coping) was jointly
explained by the coping, social, and conformity factors. Freeing this
item to load on the aforementioned factors yielded the following
factor loadings: .74 (social), .65 (conformity), and .07 (coping). As
the large loadings were not theoretically expected, and the loading on
the intended (coping) factor was not statistically significant (p = .15),
525
this item was dropped. After the exclusion, fit indices were acceptable
for the 19-item four-factor model, χ² = 612.95, df = 146, TLI= .90,
CFI = .91, RMSEA= .07. Table 1 shows the factor loadings, internal con-
sistencies, means, standard deviations and factor correlations for the
19-item, four-factor model (excluding item 15).
DMQ-R subscale scores (based on the 19-item version) were used
to predict scores on alcohol use and drinking problems with multivar-
iate regression analysis (Enter method). Results, presented in Table 2,
showed that enhancement and social motives were significant predic-
tors of all dependent variables. Coping motives significantly predicted
drinking problems, but not alcohol use per se, whereas conformity
motives negatively predicted frequency of alcohol use, but did not
predict drinking problems. Because social and specially enhancement
motives were strongly related to alcohol use per se, we wanted to de-
termine whether their links to drinking problems were an indirect re-
sult of consumption (i.e., individuals experienced more problems
simply because they drank more) or whether these motives also di-
rectly predicted drinking problems. In North American and Western
European samples, typically only coping and conformity motives di-
rectly predict drinking problems once use is controlled (see Cooper
et al., in press). Thus a final series of regression models was estimated
in which motive effects on drinking problems were re-estimated con-
trolling for quantity and frequency of use. Results showed that social
(β = .13, p b .05), enhancement, (β = .14, p b .05) and coping motives
(β = .13, p b .05) each uniquely predicted drinking problems. Only
conformity motives (β = .06, ns) were unrelated. (Parallel effects
were obtained controlling for binge drinking.)
4. Discussion
Results of the present study indicate that, with the exception of a
single item that failed to load on its intended factor (see Martens et
al., 2003, for similar findings), the hypothesized four-factor structure
provided a good fit to the data and indeed fits the data better than a
number of plausible alternative models. All scales showed adequate
reliability and discriminant validity vis-à-vis model comparisons
and patterns of unique prediction of important outcomes in multivar-
iate analyses. The correlation patterns among factors also generally
agreed with results from prior research (e.g., Cooper, 1994), with
the social and enhancement factors being most strongly correlated,
and conformity being the least strongly correlated. Furthermore, the
relative rates of endorsement – with social motives being most strong-
ly endorsed followed by enhancement, coping, and conformity in that
order – were highly consistent with findings in the literature, includ-
ing studies conducted in the US, Canada, Switzerland, England, Ice-
land, Hungary, and Spain (Cooper et al., in press). Overall, then the
results of the present study using the Brazilian DMQ-R largely repli-
cate findings reported in previous studies.
As hypothesized, both social and enhancement motives were signif-
icantly positively related to alcohol use (frequency, quantity, and binge
drinking). Consistent with expectation, enhancement motives were
more strongly related than social motives to quantity and frequency
of drinking, though not to binge drinking. Also consistent with results
of at least some prior studies (see Cooper et al., in press), coping motives
were unrelated to alcohol use and conformity motives were significant-
ly negatively related to frequency of use, once the effects of other
motives were controlled. Thus, results linking motives to alcohol use
were also largely consistent with expectations based on prior studies,
with the exception that social motives were more strongly related to
use than is typically observed.
However, contrary to findings typically observed in North America
and Western Europe, enhancement, social and coping motives were
equally strongly related to drinking problems once frequency and quan-
tity of alcohol use were controlled. This contrasts with the typical
pattern in which avoidance (coping, conformity), but not approach (en-
hancement, social) motives are significantly positively related to
526 N. Hauck-Filho et al. / Addictive Behaviors 37 (2012) 524–527

Table 1
Standardized regression weights, Cronbach's alphas, descriptive information for subscales, and factor correlations.

Items Soc Con Cop Enh

14. Porque melhora as festas e as comemorações .88

(Because it improves parties and celebrations)
11. Porque torna eventos sociais mais divertidos .84
(Because it makes social gatherings more fun)
3. Porque ajuda você a aproveitar uma festa .80
(Because it helps you enjoy a party)
5. Para ficar mais sociável (To be sociable) .62
16. Para comemorar uma ocasião especial com amigos .50
(To celebrate a special occasion with friends)
20. Para que você não se sinta deixado de lado .84
(So you won't feel left out)
19. Para que gostem de você (To be liked) .64
12. Para fazer parte de um grupo de que você gosta .59
(To fit in with a group you like)
2. Porque seus amigos fazem pressão para que você beba (Because your friends pressure you to drink) .54
8. Para que os outros não tirem sarro de você por não estar bebendo (So others won't kid you about not drinking) .53
17. Para esquecer seus problemas .91
(To forget your problems)
1. Para esquecer suas preocupações .83
(To forget your worries)
4. Porque ajuda quando você se sente deprimido ou nervoso .64
(Because it helps when you feel depressed or nervous)
6. Para se animar quando você está de mau humor .47
(To cheer up when you are in a bad mood)
7. Porque você gosta de como se sente .81
(Because you like the feeling)
13. Porque dá a você uma sensação agradável .79
(Because it gives you a pleasant feeling)
9. Porque deixa você animado (Because it's exciting) .79
18. Porque é divertido (Because it's fun) .74
10. Para ficar “alto” (To get high) .63
Cronbach's alpha .85 .75 .79 .87
Mean 3.04 1.23 1.81 2.71
SD 1.04 .46 .93 1.11
r with social – .26 .40 .85
r with conformity – .22 .19
r with coping – .43

Note. All factor loadings and correlations with p b .001. Soc = social; Con = conformity; Cop = coping; Enh = enhancement.

drinking problems after controlling for measures of use (see Cooper et
al., in press, for a review). Together these findings point to possible cul-
tural differences in the motivational processes that underlie alcohol use,
especially heavy or problematic drinking.
Results suggest that social motives more strongly influence and cop-
ing motives more weakly influence alcohol use among Brazilian college
students than among their North American and European counterparts.
Consistent with results of recent research showing that social motives
more strongly predict measures of use and abuse in social environments
that strongly support and encourage alcohol use (Lee, Geisner, Lewis,
Neighbors, & Larimer, 2007; Lewis & Neighbors, 2006), the pattern
observed in the present study might be explained by the presence of
unusually strong social norms among Brazilian college students pro-
moting alcohol use. Future cross-cultural studies using the Brazilian
DMQ-R should seek to replicate this pattern of differential predictive
validity, and to test the possibility that cultural differences in social
norms for drinking explain these differences.
5. Conclusion
This study was the first to evaluate the factor structure of the DMQ-R
in a Latin American country. The results provide strong support for the
hypothesized four-factor structure of the Brazilian version of the DMQ-
R. Finally, results of the present study raise the possibility of intriguing
differences in the relative importance of motives underlying alcohol
use, and lay the groundwork for future studies aimed at replicating
and understanding the sources of these differences.
Role of funding source
This research was supported by an academic scholarship from Coordenação de
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) to the first author.

Contributors
Table 2 The first two authors developed the study design and implementation. All authors
Motives predicting alcohol use and drinking problems. contributed to preparing the data analyses and writing of the manuscript. All authors
have approved the final version.
Bivariate correlations/betas

Frequency Quantity Binge Drinking problemsa Conflict of interest

All the authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Social .42⁎/.19⁎ .43⁎⁎/.20⁎ 48⁎⁎/.25⁎⁎ .53⁎⁎/.22⁎
Conformity −.01/−.08⁎ .05/−.05 .07/−.03 .13⁎/.04
Coping .26⁎⁎/.08 .24⁎⁎/.02 .29⁎⁎/.08 .39⁎⁎/.16⁎⁎ References
Enhancement .45⁎⁎/.29⁎⁎ .47⁎⁎/.32⁎⁎ .48⁎⁎/.26⁎⁎ .55⁎⁎/.31⁎⁎
R² adj. .22⁎⁎ .23⁎⁎ .26⁎⁎ .35⁎⁎ Babor, T. F., La Fuente, J. R., Saunders, J., & Grant, M. (1992). AUDIT: The alcohol use
disorders identification test: Guidelines for use in primary health care. WHO (World
⁎ p b .05. Health Organization)/PSA, 4, 1–29.
⁎⁎ p b .001. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,
a
Drinking problems were assessed only for part of the total sample (n = 427). 107, 238–246.
 N. Hauck-Filho et al. / Addictive Behaviors 37 (2012) 524–527
Cooper, M. L. (1994). Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: Development
and validation of a four-factor model. Psychological Assessment, 6(2), 117–128.
Cooper, M. L., Kuntsche, E., Levitt, A., Barber, L. L., & Wolf, S. (in press). Motivational
models of substance use: A review of theory and research on motives for using
alcohol, marijuana and tobacco.
Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adapta-
tion issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments.
Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 304–312.
Ham, L., & Hope, D. (2003). College students and problematic drinking: A review of the
literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 23(5), 719–759.
Hurlbut, S. C., & Sher, K. J. (1992). Assessing alcohol problems in college students. Jour-
nal of American College Health, 41, 48–57.
Kuntsche, E., Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., & Engels, R. (2005). Why do young people drink? A
review of drinking motives. Clinical Psychology Review, 25(7), 841–861.
Kuntsche, E., Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., & Engels, R. (2006). Replication and validation of the
Drinking Questionnaire Revised (DMQ-R, Cooper, 1994) among adolescents in
Switzerland. European Addiction Research, 12, 161–168.
Kuntsche, E., Stewart, S., & Cooper, M. L. (2008). How stable is the motive-alcohol use
link? A cross-national validation of the drinking motives questionnaire revised
among adolescents from Switzerland, Canada, and the United States. Journal of
Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 69(3), 388–396.
Lee, C. M., Geisner, I. M., Lewis, M. A., Neighbors, C., & Larimer, M. E. (2007). Social
motives and the injunction between descriptive and injunctive norms in college
student drinking. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 68(5), 714–721.
527
Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. (2006). Social norms approaches using descriptive drink-
ing norms education: A review of the research on personalized normative feed-
back. Journal of American College Health, 54, 213–218.
MacLean, M., & Lecci, L. (2000). A comparison of models of drinking motives in a uni-
versity sample. Psychology of Addictive, 14(1), 83–87.
Martens, M., Cox, R., Beck, N., & Heppner, P. (2003). Measuring motivations for intercolle-
giate athlete alcohol use: A confirmatory factor analysis of the drinking motives mea-
sure. Psychological Assessment, 15(2), 235–239.
Martens, M., Rocha, T., Martin, J., & Serrao, H. (2008). Drinking motives and college stu-
dents: Further examination of a four-factor model. Journal of Consulting Psychology,
55(2), 289–295.
Mushquash, C., Stewart, S., Comeau, M., & McGrath, P. (2008). The structure of drinking
motives in First Nations adolescents in Nova Scotia. American Indian and Alaska
Native Mental Health Research, 15(1), 33–52.
Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980, May). Statistically based tests for the number of com-
mon factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting on the Psychometric Society, Iowa
City, IA.
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor
analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.
White, H. R., & Labouvie, E. W. (1989). Towards the assessment of adolescent problem
drinking. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 50, 30–37.