The constitution of the alcoholic self, communicative processes and administrative practices: On the varied uses of four terms denoting problematic drinking

AIMS: The aims of this article were to examine the various meanings ascribed by three stakeholder groups – social workers, journalists and individuals with previous experience of problematic drinking – to four widely used terms in the alcohol field – alcoholism, alcohol dependence, alcohol misuse and risky drinking – and to examine how variations in the definitions of these terms correspond to specific pragmatic needs arising within different practices. DESIGN: We conducted focus-group interviews with 15 individuals from the above-mentioned stakeholder groups. We identified three practices, we identified three practices which shaped the meanings ascribed to the four terms denoting problematic drinking. RESULTS: The results showed that the meanings ascribed to the four terms were both fixed and fluid. For the individuals with previous experience of problematic drinking, the four terms had fixed meanings, and their definition of the term “alcoholism” as denoting a disease, for example, was vital to the practice through which they sought to come to an understanding of themselves (“practice of self”). The social workers and the journalists on the other hand saw the four terms as being context dependent – as fluid and imprecise. This allowed them to establish trustful communicative relationships with informants and clients (“practice of trustful communication”), and to control the communicative process and successfully navigate between different administrative systems (“practice of administration”). CONCLUSIONS: Since the meanings ascribed to the examined terms denoting problematic drinking are shaped within varying practices, confusion regarding the actual meaning of a given term could be avoided by referring to the practical context in which it is used.