Person. indioid. DifJ Vol. 23, No. 4, pp.

559-567, 1997
CJ1997 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Pergamon Printed in Great Britain
w PII: s0191-s86P(P7)ooo80-9 0191~8869/97
$17.00+0.00

PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS OF DEPRESSED OR

ALCOHOLIC ADULT CHILDREN OF ALCOHOLICS

Carole M. Beaudoin,* Robert P. Murray, John Bond Jr and Gordon E. Barnes

Department of Family Studies, Faculty of Human Ecology. University of Manitoba,
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2, Canada

(Received 21 January 1997)

Summary-G. Winokur (1987, Family (genetic) studies in neurotic depression. Journal of Psychiarric
Research, 21, 357-363) suggested that in an alcoholic family, alcohol abuse and depression among adult
children of alcoholics (ACOAs) may be two ways of expressing the same propensity. It was hypothesised
that Winokur’s “propensity” could be characterised as a construct of personality variables, specifically low
self-esteem, high neuroticism, and high psychoticism. This study examined Winokur’s hypothesis using 982
male and female participants (18-64 yr of age) of a general population survey in an attempt to identify the
commonalities connecting alcoholic and depressed ACOAs. ACOAs were found to have significantly
different personality scores than adults from non-alcoholic families (non-ACOAs), and alcoholic ACOAs
shared similar scores with depressed ACOAs on all three personality variables. No differences were seen
between alcoholic and depressed participants across family history groups. It would appear from these
data that ACOAs can be differentiated from non-ACOAs at least by their low self-esteem, high neuroticism,
and high psychoticism, and that alcoholism and depression are two ways that ACOAs can manifest these
traits. @) 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

INTRODUCTION

Winokur (1983) proposed that adult children of alcoholics (ACOAs) may exhibit either depression
or alcoholism, and that these behaviours are similar consequences of having an alcoholic parent.
Specifically, Winokur (1987, p. 362) hypothesised that “within one family, alcoholism and depression
co-exist and, in fact, are two ways of expressing the same propensity”. It follows then that the
population distribution of alcoholism and depression should be skewed toward the offspring of
alcoholics (Russell, Cooper & Frone, 1990). Also, if alcoholism and depression are indicative of a
common propensity in ACOAs, one would expect this propensity to be absent in children from
non-alcoholic homes (non-ACOAs). The intention of this study is to examine if, in a general
population sample of individuals grouped according to the presence or absence of a family history
of alcoholism, this propensity could be characterised as a construct of personality, specifically an
aggregate of neuroticism, psychoticism, and low self-esteem.
As self-esteem is generally defined as feeling worthy and self-satisfied, individuals with low self-
esteem should be more likely to exhibit symptoms of depression. This relationship has been sup-
ported in samples of college students (Russo, Green & Knight, 1993; Wong & Whitaker, 1993) and
psychiatric patients (Silverstone, 1991). Indeed, studies examining treatments for depression tend
to find that an increase in self-esteem is associated with decreases in depression symptomatology
(Maynard, 1993).
The link between self-esteem and alcoholism is also strongly supported (Rosenberg, 1965; Sandahl,
Lindberg & Bergman, 1987) with alcoholics scoring significantly lower on self-esteem measures than
non-alcoholics. Researchers such as Labouvie (1987); Labouvie and McGee (1986) have postulated
that this relationship exists because those with a weak ego are more likely to use emotion-focused
coping rather than problem-focused coping. Thus, as the desire to reduce the effects of stressful
situations increases, people with low self-esteem may be more likely to use alcohol as a coping
mechanism. Finally, the literature relating self-esteem to ACOAs has consistently shown a significant
relationship, with ACOAs exhibiting greater levels of self-depreciation (El-Guebaly, Walker, Ross

*To whom all correspondence should be addressed: Alcohol and Tobacco Research Unit, Health Sciences Centre, MS74OA-
820 Sherbrook Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3A lR9, Canada.

559
560 Carole M. Beaudoin et al.

greaterilK!idelua

ofdepIW&n

-I T
bighneurotieiYm

WplryebotiLig
--_,
gl&dneidoneo

ofal-

Fig. 1. Substantiated links between parental alcoholism, depression, alcoholism, and personality.

& Currie, 1990) and lower self-esteem (Domenico & Windle, 1993; Gondolf & Ackerman, 1993)
compared to adult children from non-alcoholic homes.
There is an abundance of literature supporting the relationships between neuroticism and
depression (Benson & Heller, 1987; Knowles & Schroeder, 1990), and between depression and
familial alcoholism (Sher, 1991; Tweed & Ryff, 1991). Furthermore, the relationship among these
three (neuroticism, depression, and parental alcoholism) appears to be not only strong, but inter-
twined. Persons who have elevated neuroticism scores tend to be (a) more susceptible to feelings of
depression (Saklofske, Kelly & Janzen, 1995), and (b) overrepresented among ACOAs (Kashubeck,
1994; Williams & Corrigan, 1992). The literature demonstrating a relationship between neuroticism
and alcohol use is also abundant and strongly supported (Calaycay & Altman, 1985; Ogden, Dundas
& Bhal, 1989; Sher & Trull, 1994), indicating that individuals with elevated neuroticism scores tend
to be more susceptible to alcoholism. Indeed, as early as 1945 Jellinek reported that alcohol could
be used to relieve tension (Jellinek, 1945). Similarly, Conger (1956) found that alcohol can become
a conditioned reinforcer because of its ability to reduce tension. Indeed, in a group of in-treatment
alcoholics with elevated fear and trait anxiety scores, Stravynski, Lamontagne, and Lavalle (1986)
found that 82% of the Ss reported their alcohol abuse began after their anxiety disorder, and 40%
had used alcohol to relieve their emotional stress.
When compared to control groups, higher levels of aggression, emotionality, inattention, and
impulsivity have been reported among both ACOAs and depressed individuals (Bradley, Moog,
Perrett & Galbraith, 1993; El-Guebaly et al., 1990; Tarter, Kabene, Escallier, Laird & Jacob, 1990),
although discrepancies regarding the strength of this relationship do exist (Pearson, 1993; Saklofske
et al., 1995). The prevalence of these antisocial characteristics has also been firmly established in
alcoholic populations (Rankin, Stockwell & Hodgson, 1982; Sher, 1991). A history of these tend-
encies has also been found to precede the development of alcohol problems in prospective studies
(e.g. Hawkins, Catalan0 & Miller, 1992). The complexity of these interrelations are shown in Figs
1 and 2 as they relate to the substantiated correlations between the variables discussed (Fig. 1) and
Winokur’s (Winokur, 1983) proposed model (Fig. 2).

METHOD

Sample
The Winnipeg Health and Drinking Survey was a longitudinal survey which examined the
personality characteristics associated with alcohol and nicotine consumption in a general population
sample. Participants were interviewed twice, giving their informed consent both at the time of the
first interview, and again at the second wave, occurring approximately two years after the first. The
original sample was drawn in 1989 from a random list of names obtained from the Manitoba Health
Services Commission. Of the 612 males and 655 females interviewed at Wave 1, 61 could not be
located for Wave 2,8 had since died, 83 had moved out of the city, and 128 refused to complete the
second wave. In total 987 participants completed both the first and second wave interviews (see
Table 1 for the age-sex distribution of participants). Other issues related to personality have
 Adult children of alcoholics 561

ACOAa noJlAcoA8

u
-Pm-e
(e.g., low S-E, high N, high P)

u u
gx8eterincidenmof el~~onto

depmdoq aknholimn leaaer mt than i ACOAa

Fig. 2. Winokur’s proposed link between parental alcoholism and alcohol abuse and depression.

Table 1. Age and sex breakdown of Wave 2 sample

Age (yr) Males N=476 (48%) Females N = 506 (52%) Total N=982

IS-34 158 193 351

3S49 153 169 322
50-64 165 144 309

previously been reported using this data, including smoking and personality (see Patton, Barnes &
Murray, 1993) and spouse abuse and personality (see Sommer, Barnes & Murray, 1992). Additional
information regarding sampling techniques, questionnaire procedures, and participant demo-
graphics has been reported elsewhere (Murray, Barnes & Patton, 1994).
For the purpose of this analysis Wave 2 participants have been divided into those with a history
of parental alcoholism (FH+) and those with no such family history (FH-), as measured by the
parental Short Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (SMAST; Sher & Descutner, 1986) using a
criterion score of five or greater. Comparing the participants in each family history group on
education, income, employment, and race revealed no significant differences.
Of the 987 participants interviewed at both Time 1 and Time 2, 829 18-64-yr-old males and
females reported no parental alcoholism at Time 1, while 153 had one (n= 144) or two (n=9)
alcoholic parents (see Table 2). Five participants had missing values for the parental MAST.

Measures
Family history. Family history of alcohol abuse was measured by the Short Michigan Alcoholism
Screening Test adapted to refer to the drinking patterns of participant’s biological parents while the
participant was growing up (Sher & Descutner, 1986). Following Sher and Descutner’s protocol, if
either parent scored five or greater on the SMAST then the participant was considered to have a
positive family history. While a personal interview with the parents is considered the gold standard,
this method of assessment is regarded as a reliable and valid measure of parental alcoholism (Crews
& Sher, 1992). Additional items were included to assess the participant’s perceptions of possible
alcohol problems among other biological relatives including grandparents, aunts and uncles, and
siblings.
Alcoholism. Diagnostic classifications for survey respondents themselves were based on the Diag-
nostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition Revised (DSM-III-R) (APA,

Table 2. Incidence of alcoholism and depression by familial alcoholism

Parental alcoholism (FH+) No parental alcoholism (FH -)

Participant N= 153 N=829 Total N = 982

Treated for depression 12 (8%) 70 (8%) 82 (8%)

Alcoholic 25 (16%) 96 (12%) 121 (12%)
Alcoholic and treated for depression 3 (2%) 11 (1%) 14 (1%)
Neither alcoholic nor depressed 113 (74%) 652 (79%) 765 (78%)
562 Carole M. Beaudoin et al.

1987). A DSM-III-R diagnosis was arrived at using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule items relating
to alcohol use (DIS-III-R; Robins, Helzer, Cottler & Goldring, 1989).
Depression. The second wave survey included questions pertaining to the participant’s history of
being treated for depression. Specifically, each participant was asked whether he/she had ever been
treated for depression, and if so, when the treatment began, and whether depression was currently
a problem.
Personality measures. Self-esteem was assessed with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Inventory (Rosen-
berg, 1965). The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised (Eysenck, Eysenck & Barrett, 1985)
was used to measure neuroticism (EPQR-N) and psychoticism (EPQR-P).

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics
To identify any confounding demographic variables, FH + participants were compared to FH -
participants on a variety of demographics. Any significant differences found were then statistically
controlled in subsequent analyses. While age differences were not found for alcoholic or depressed
participants across family history groups, FH + participants were, on average, 5.26 yr younger than
FH - participants (F( 1,967) = 20.50, P < 0.0001). Similarly, alcoholic participants were significantly
younger than their depressed counterparts for both the FH+ (F(2,153)= 5.17, PcO.01) and the
FH- group (F(2,814) = 16.14, P<O.OOOl). Given these observed differences, age was first dich-
otomised (18-40 yr, 4165 yr) using the median (41 .O yr) as a dividing age. All subsequent analyses
statistically controlled age by entering the age group as an independent variable.
Participants’ levels of education, income and employment were analysed for differences between
family history groups. No differences were found between FH + and FH - participants on any of
these three variables.

Personality characteristics
Using a 2 x 2 factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the effects of age removed, FH+
participants were compared to FH - participants with respect to the three personality variables. As
seen in Table 3, FH+ participants had higher neuroticism, higher psychoticism, and lower self-
esteem scores than FH- participants. In addition, significantly higher psychoticism scores were
observed for the younger group of participants (M=4.51, S.D. =2.95) compared to the older
participants (M = 3.76, S.D. = 2.42; F( 1,961) = 8.49, PC 0.005). Despite the two main effects, there
were no interaction effects between age and family history for psychoticism.
Winokur (1987) stated that there exists some propensity which was common to FH + alcoholic
and depressed participants by virtue of their membership in an alcoholic family. This link was
proposed to be absent in non-alcoholic families. Assessing whether this commonality could be a
construct of personality, a 2 x 2 factorial ANOVA with the effects of age removed was completed
to examine whether FH + alcoholic participants had self-esteem, neuroticism, and psychoticism
scores similar to those of FH+ participants who had been treated for depression. If Winokur’s
hypothesis were valid for this sample, there would be no observed differences. Indeed, the FH+
alcoholic participants did not differ from their depressed counterparts on any of the dependent
variables. However, significant differences were found between FH - alcoholic and FH - depressed
participants for neuroticism and self-esteem. Since males were overrepresented in the FH - alcoholic
group, while the reverse was true for the FH- depressed group, gender was entered in a 2 x 2 x 2
factorial ANOVA. Removing the effect of gender, lower self-esteem scores were evident for the

Table 3. A comparison of FH + and FH - participants on the mean personality scores with the effects of age removed

Dependent variable FH+ N= 153 FH- N=829 Significance

Neuroticism 12.42 (5.77) 9.96 (5.19) fl I ,964) = 24.58”’

Psychoticism 4.49 (2.62) 3.79 (2.75) fl1,961)=7.46”
Self-esteem 32.19 (4.54) 33.28 (4.55) F(1,962)=6.58”

Note. Standard deviations in parentheses.

“Pt0.01: “‘P<O.o001.
 Adult children of alcoholics 563

Table 4. A comparison of FH - participants by outcome on the mean personality scores with the effects of age
and gender removed

Dependent variable FH - alcoholic N = 96 FH - depressed N = 70 Significance

Neuroticism 10.09 (5.14) 13.03 (5.10) F(1,164)=3.32

Psychoticism 4.79 (2.99) 3.94 (2.81) F(1,163)=4.04’
Self-esteem 33.31 (4.05) 30.75 (5.08) F(1,163)=4.37’

Note. Standard deviations in parentheses.

‘PcO.05.

depressed participants. There was no difference for neuroticism, and the alcoholic participants
showed significantly higher psychoticism scores (see Table 4).

DISCUSSION

Winokur (1987) hypothesised that both alcohol abuse and depression among adult children of
alcoholics are manifestations of a common propensity. In the literature, ACOAs tend to be charac-
terised by high levels of neuroticism and psychoticism, and low levels of self-esteem (Sher, Walitzer,
Wood & Brent, 1991; Williams & Corrigan, 1992). Similar high scores on measures of these
personality variables also tend to be found among people suffering from depression (Knowles 8~
Schroeder, 1990; Silverstone, 1991) and from alcoholism (Rankin et al., 1982; Sandahl et al., 1987).
Our data were analysed in accordance with Winokur’s theory to examine whether alcoholic or
depressed ACOAs (a) share common personality traits with one another, and (b) can be differentiated
from alcoholic and depressed children of non-alcoholics on the basis of these personality traits. For
Winokur’s theory to be fully supported with respect to the three identified personality variables,
three criteria have been identified.
The first is that, given that a condition is suggested to exist in FH+ individuals that is not
necessarily present in FH - individuals, it would be reasonable to assume that there should be more
pathology evident in the FH + than in the FH - group. That is, one could expect to find a greater
proportion of alcoholic and depressed individuals in the FH + group. In fact, there were no observed
differences in the proportion of people suffering from alcoholism or depression between the two
family history groups. In a recent prevalence study by Mathew, Wilson, Blazer, and George (1993)
no significant differences were found in the proportion of alcoholic or depressed individuals in the
FH + group compared to the FH - group. However, when divided according to gender, there was
a significantly higher proportion of alcoholics among male ACOAs when compared to male adults
from nonalcoholic homes. While Mathew er al. (1993) did not report any differences in diagnoses
of depression, they did note that female ACOAs were disproportionately represented among those
having generalised anxiety disorder.
The differentiation by gender is an interesting issue. The literature suggests that sons of alcoholics
may be more inclined toward alcohol abuse, whereas the daughters are more likely to be depressed
(see Parker & Harford, 1987; Schuckit, 1987). Wagner-Glenn and Parsons (1989) however, in their
study of 76 male and 72 female in-treatment alcoholics and 50 male and 51 female controls, found
that family history positive groups, in both the alcoholic and the control sample, had more depressive
symptoms than the family history negative groups, with no sex differences for any of the groups.
The controversy over increased proportions of pathology by gender among ACOA groups can
unfortunately not be addressed with these data. With only 25 alcoholic ACOA participants, dividing
them by gender would decrease cell size below the accepted norm of n = 25 per cell. As well, with
no gender differentiation, the power of the test of proportions of alcoholic ACOAs versus alcoholic
non-ACOAs is approximately 20%. For the 4% difference in observed proportions, increasing the
power to a conventional standard of 80% (Cohen, 1988) would require n = 1570.
The second criterion is that, by virtue of belonging to an alcoholic family, FH+ participants
should have neuroticism, psychoticism, and self-esteem scores different from those of FH- par-
ticipants. In all instances, this was supported by the data. Individuals with a history of parental
alcoholism had significantly higher psychoticism, higher neuroticism, and lower self-esteem scores
than FH- participants. These results lend support to similar studies finding lower self-esteem
564 Carole M. Beaudoin et al.

(Domenico & Windle, 1993), and elevated neuroticism (Kashubeck, 1994) and psychoticism (Tarter
et al., 1990) scores among ACOAs compared to adult children of non-alcoholics. Given these
results, it would appear that something differentiates FH+ individuals from FH- participants.
Furthermore, it would seem that this ‘something’ may be characterised as a construct of personality.
That is not to say that the propensity observed in this analysis is necessarily a result of personality
differences. Indeed, the observed differences may simply be a manifestation of an underlying
condition (e.g. biological differences). As Blum and Payne (1991) and Schuckit (1987) have proposed,
it is possible that children of alcoholics may inherit a predisposing condition that exhibits itself
through personality traits.
The third criterion is that, given that Winokur (1987) proposed a common propensity between
ACOA alcoholics and ACOA depressed people it would be reasonable to expect FH + alcoholics
to have similar personality scores to FH+ depressed individuals, while differences in personality
scores between FH - alcoholics and FH - depressed participants would be expected. These assump-
tions were partially supported. FH - alcoholic participants, upon controlling for gender as well as
age, had higher psychoticism and higher self-esteem scores than the FH- depressed participants.
There were no differences on the index of neuroticism between the FH- alcoholic and FH -
depressed group, nor were there any observed differences on the three personality scores between
FH + alcoholics and FH + depressed participants.
A note of caution must be made regarding the finding of ‘no difference’ between FH + alcoholic
and FH+ depressed participants. The sample sizes for these two groups were quite small (n= 12
depressed and n = 25 alcoholic) such that if differences were present they may not have been detected.
Indeed, the power for these ANOVAs ranged from 0.05 to 0.17. Furthermore, there exists an
abundant amount of literature relating alcoholism and depression to low self-esteem, high neur-
oticism, and high psychoticism (e.g. Eysenck et al., 1985; Wong & Whitaker, 1993). There is,
however, far less evidence suggesting that alcoholics and depressed people have similar scores on
measures of these variables, and that this relationship may exhibit itself to varying degrees depending
on familial alcoholism. Therefore, while these data seem to support Winokur’s theory (Winokur,
1987), the results must be interpreted with some degree of tentativeness, particularly since support
for the notion of similarities between FH + depressed and FH - alcoholic participants assumes
support for the null hypothesis, clearly not conventional methodology.
It is apparent from these findings that Winokur’s theory (Winokur, 1987) has gained support.
There indeed appears to exist a relationship between alcoholism, depression, and parental alcohol-
ism. Furthermore, this relationship seems to manifest itself through a construct of personality,
specifically, in measures of neuroticism, psychoticism, and self-esteem. However there were simply
too few participants in the family history positive cells to detect important differences that would
be necessary to fully support Winokur’s claims with respect to the proposed hypotheses.

CONCLUSION

Studies examining personality differences based on family history have typically focused their
efforts on group differences, that is, adult children of alcoholics versus adult children of non-
alcoholics, as opposed to differences between subgroups of individuals within a familial alcoholism
framework. While this study examined Winokur’s theory (Winokur, 1983, 1987) from a perspective
not readily found in the literature, it is important to remember that it is indeed a preliminary study.
To gain a better understanding of the relationship between alcoholism and depression within a
family of alcoholics, one would need a much larger sample of alcoholic and depressed participants
from both family history groups to increase the power of the analyses.
Fulton and Yates (1990) suggest that 20-30% of adult Americans were raised in an alcoholic
home. Also, many have suggested that ACOAs have an increased probability of developing alcohol-
ism (e.g. Hill, Nord & Blow, 1992; Russell et al., 1990). However in this study, only 15.6% of our
sample indicated having alcoholic parents while growing up. Furthermore, these individuals did not
have a greater likelihood of developing alcoholism or depression. While this raises the issue of a
non-representative sample, our sample is comparable to the general population from which it was
derived in other respects, such as demographics and income (see Murray el al., 1994 for details).
 Adult children of alcoholics 565

Also, Sher (1991) has suggested that the usual finding of a greater prevalence of depression among
ACOAs than non-ACOAs may be situational and tied to the active drinking of an alcoholic parent.
However, since both the parental MAST and our depression question assess lifetime alcoholism
and depression, respectively, and not current use or depression, the relationship to which Sher refers
cannot be addressed in this study.
For these data, it is possible that there exists a group of individuals who have never been treated
for depression but would receive a diagnosis of depression on various clinical scales. Conversely,
there may have been some individuals who indicated receiving treatment for depression but were,
in fact, not clinically depressed. Therefore, a more clinically based diagnostic tool for assessing
depression should be included in future research. Barnes, Currie, and Segall(1988) found that 15%
of males and 19% of females in a general population Winnipeg sample scored above the CES-D
cutoff for depression. Studies that have employed self-report measures of depression typically report
prevalence rates between 15-21% (see Barnes et al., 1988 for a review). In this study, 9.78% of the
sample endorsed our depression item. While this proportion is not significantly lower from other
reported prevalence rates, it does suggest that this method is a more conservative tool for assessing
depression.
The results of this study suggest that there does, indeed, exist a propensity which may differentiate
subgroups of adult children of alcoholics from individuals with no familial alcoholism. The strength
of this study lay in its sample. As Baker and Stephenson (1995) comment, the majority of studies in
this area use either clinical or university populations. The use of a clinical sample may skew the results
toward more serious pathology than that found in a general population of ACOAs. Conversely,
introductory psychology students may be more well-adjusted than a typical ACOA sample. Given
the generalisability of these study findings, a next step for research in this field is to explore whether
or not this propensity is, in fact, a construct of personality, or is a manifestation of a more complex
phenomenon such as a biological predisposition exhibiting itself through personality traits. Most
theories of personality, Eysenck’s (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975) included, are biological in basis,
mostly focusing on levels of cortical arousal (Zuckerman, 1989). For years researchers have been
looking, with some success, at a genetic marker for alcoholism (e.g. Schuckit, 1987). It could be
proposed that a specific genetic make-up may play a causal role in predisposing one to certain
personality traits as well as behavioural manifestations of those traits, such as alcoholism.
Also, since adoption studies allow researchers to discover whether children of alcoholics reared
with their biological parents manifest these traits to the same extent as those reared apart from their
parents, a learning theory paradigm could be an important addition to such a genetic study. Rubio-
Stipec, Bird, Canino, Bravo, and Alegria (1991) found that ACOAs in a dysfunctional family
environment were at a greater risk of developing psychopathology than ACOAs from non-dys-
functional families. Similarly, Werner and Broida (1991) compared ACOAs to non-ACOAs from
both well-adjusted and dysfunctional homes. They found that significantly less self-esteem was
associated with family discord, with no main effect of parental alcoholism. Hadley, Holloway, and
Mallinckrodt (1993) revealed similar results with family dysfunction associated with internalised
shame, addiction, and emotional problems, irrespective of parental alcoholism. These studies pro-
vide evidence suggesting family discord may be more influential on individuals than parental
alcoholism (Kashubeck & Christensen, 1995). Research that integrates biological and environmental
markers as well as the behavioural manifestations of personality seems a likely direction for
advancement in this area.

Acknowledgement-This research was supported by grant 6607-1474-DA from the National Health Research and Develop-
ment Program, Health and Welfare Canada, to Dr. Gordon Barnes.

REFERENCES

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed., revised). Washington.
D.C.: APA.
Baker, D. E. & Stephenson, L. E. (1995). Personality characteristics of adult children of alcoholics. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 51,694-702.
Barnes, G. E., Currie, R. F. & Segall, A. (1988). Symptoms of depression in a Canadian urban sample. Canadian Journal of
Psychiatry. 33, 386-393.
566 Carole M. Beaudoin et al.

Benson, C. S. & Heller, K. (1987). Factors in the current adjustment of young adult daughters of alcoholic and problem
drinking fathers. Journalof Abnormal Psychology, 96,305:312. _ -
Blum. K. & Pavne. J. E. (1991). Alcohol and the addictive brain. New York. N.Y.: The Free Press.
Bradley, B. P.: Mbog, K., Perrett, A. & Galbraith, M. (1993). The e&et of depressed mood on personality measures.
Persona&v and Individual Differences, 14, 599-601.
Calaycay, P. R. & Altman, H. A. (1985). A study of personality characteristics of outpatient alcoholics. Journal of Alcohol
and Drug Education, 31, S-15.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statisticalpower analysisfor the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Conger, J. J. (1956). Alcoholism: theory, problem and challenge. Reinforcement theory and the dynamics of alcoholism.
Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 17,296305.
Crews, T. M. & Sher, K. J. (1992). Using adapted short MASTS for screening parental alcoholism: reliability and validity.
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 16,576584.
Domenico, D. & Windle, M. (1993). Intrapersonal and interpersonal functioning among middle-aged female adult children
of alcoholics. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61,659-666.
El-Guebaly, N. A., Walker, J. R., Ross, C. A. & Currie, R. F. (1990). Adult children of problem drinkers in an urban
community. British Journal of Psychiatry, 156,249-255.
Eysenck, S. B. G. & Eysenck, H. J. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. San Diego, CA: EdITS/
Educational and Instructional Testing Service.
Eysenck, S. B. G., Eysenck. H. J. & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual
Differences, 6,21-29.
Fulton, A. & Yates, W. R. (1990). Adult children of alcoholics. A valid diagnostic group?. Journal of Nervous and Mental
Diseases, 178, 505-509.
Gondolf, E. W. &Ackerman, R. J. (1993). Validity and reliability of an “Adult Children of Alcoholics” index. International
Journal of the Addictions, 28, 257-269.
Hadley, J. A., Holloway, E. L. & Mallinckrodt, B. (1993). Common aspects of object relations and self-representations in
offspring from disparate dysfunctional families. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 40, 348356.
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F. & Miller, Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in
adolescence and early adulthood: implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112,64-105.
Hill, E. M., Nord, J. R. & Blow, F. C. (1992). Young-adult children of alcoholic parents: protective effects of positive family
functioning. British Journal of Addiction. 87, 1677-1690.
Jellinek, E. M. (1945). The problem of alcohol. In Yale Centre of Alcohol Studies. Alcohol, science, and society (12th edn, pp.
153-178). New Haven, CT: Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol.
Kashubeck. S. (1994). Adult children of alcoholics and psychological distress. Journal of Counselling and Development, 72,
538-543.
Kashubeck, S. & Christensen, S. A. (1995). Parental alcohol use, family relationship quality, self-esteem, and depression in
college students. Journal of College Student Development, 36,43 l-443.
Knowles, E. E. & Schroeder, D. A. (1990). Personality characteristics of sons of alcohol abusers. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 51, 142-147.
Labouvie, E. W. (1987). Relation of personality to adolescent alcohol and drug use: a coping perspective. Drug and Alcohol
Abuse in Children and Adolescence, 14, 19-24.
Labouvie, E. W. & McGee, C. (1986). Relation of personality to alcohol and drug use in adolescence. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 54,289-293.
Mathew, R. J., Wilson, W. H., Blazer, D. G. & George, L. K. (1993). Psychiatric disorders in adult children of alcoholics:
data from the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Project. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150,793-800.
Maynard, C. K. (1993). Comparison of effectiveness of group interventions for depression in women. Archives of Psychiatric
Nursing, 7, 277-283.
Murray, R. P., Barnes, G. E. & Patton, D. (1994). The relative performance of diverse measures of alcohol abuse and
dependence in a community sample. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 55, 72-80.
Ogden, M. E., Dundas, M. 8~ Bhal, A. V. (1989). Personality differences among alcohol misusers in community treatment.
Personality and Individual Differences, IO, 265-267.
Parker, D. A. & Harford, T. C. (1987). Alcohol-related problems, marital disruption and depressive symptoms among adult
children of alcohol abusers in the United States. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49, 306-313.
Patton, D., Barnes, G. E. & Murray, R. P. (1993). Personality characteristics of smokers and ex-smokers. Personality and
Individual Dtfferences, 15, 653664.
Pearson, P. R. (1993). Item endorsement of the short form of the EPQ-R among a group of elderly female psychiatric
patients. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 747-748.
Rankin, H., Stockwell, T. & Hodgson, R. (1982). Personality and alcohol dependence. Personality and Individual DSf/erences,
3,145151.
Robins, L. N., Helzer, J. E., Cottler, L. & Goldring, E. (1989). NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule, Version III Revised.
St. Louis, M.O.: Washington University, 1989.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Sociery and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rubio-Stipec, M., Bird, H., Canino, G., Bravo, M. & Alegria, M. (1991). Children of alcoholic parents in the community.
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52, 78-88.
Russell, M., Cooper, M. L. & Frone, M. R. (1990). The influence of sociodemographic characteristics on familial alcohol
problems: data from a community sample. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 14, 221-226.
Russo, N. F., Green, B. L. & Knight, G. (1993). The relationship of gender, self-esteem, and instrumentality to depressive
symptomatology. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 12, 218236.
Saklofske, D. H., Kelly, I. W. & Janzen, B. L. (1995). Neuroticism, depression, and depression proneness. Personality and
Individual Differences, 18, 27-3 1.
Sandahl, C., Lindberg, S. SCBergman, H. (1987). The relation between drinking habits and neuroticism and weak ego among
male and female alcoholic patients. Acfa Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 75, 50&508.
Schuckit, M. A. (1987). Biological vulnerability to alcoholism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55,301-309.
Sher, K. J. (199 1). Children of alcoholics: a critical appraisal of theory and research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 Adult children of alcoholics 567

Sher, K. J. SCDescutner, C. (1986). Reports of paternal alcoholism: reliability across siblings. Addictive Behaviors, II, 25-
30.
Sher, K. J. & Trull, T. J. (1994). Personality and disinhibitory psychopathology: alcoholism and antisocial personality
disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,. 103,92-102.
Sher. K. J.. Walitzer. K. S.. Wood. P. K. & Brent. E. E. (1991). Characteristics of children of alcoholics: mutative risk factors.
substance use and abuse, and psychopathology. Journal if AbnormalPsychology, 100,427448. -
Silverstone, P. H. (1991). Low self-esteem in different psychiatric conditions. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30, 185-
188.
Sommer, R., Barnes, G. E. & Murray, R. P. (1992). Alcohol consumption, alcohol abuse, personality and female perpetrated
spouse abuse. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 1315-1323.
Stravynski, A., Lamontagne, Y. SCLavalle, Y. J. (1986). Clinical phobias and avoidant personality disorder among alcoholics
admitted to an alcoholism rehabilitation setting. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 31, 714-719.
Tarter, R. E., Kabene, M., Escallier, E. A., Laird, S. B. & Jacob, T. (1990). Temperament deviation and risk for alcoholism.
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 14,38&382.
Tweed, S. H. SCRyff, C. D. (1991). Adult children of alcoholics: profiles of wellness amidst distress. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 52, 133-141.
Wagner-Glenn, S. & Parsons, 0. A. (1989). Alcohol abuse and familial alcoholism: psychosocial correlates in men and
women. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, SO, 116-127.
Werner, L. J. & Broida, J. P. (1991). Adult self-esteem and locus of control as a function of familial alcoholism and
dysfunction. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52,249-252.
Williams, 0. B. & Corrigan, P. W. (1992). The differential effects of parental alcoholism and mental illness on their adult
children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48,406-414.
Winokur, G. (1983). Alcoholism and depression. Substance and Alcohol Actions/Misuse. 4. 11l-l 19.
Winokur, G. (1987). Family (genetic) studies in neurotic depression. Journal ofPsychiatric Research, 21, 357-363.
Wong, J. L. & Whitaker, D. J. (1993). Depressive mood states and their cognitive and personality correlates in college
students: they improve over time. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 49.615621.
Zuckerman, M. (1989). Personality in the third dimension: a psychobiological approach. Personality and Individual Differ-
ences, 10, 391418.