findings differ from the present results in that their retrospective report predicted smaller head circumference (Jacobson, et al., 1991; 2002) and the current data, after controlling for potential confounders, do not. Also in contrast to the current behavioral results at 14 years, relations of antenatal report with infant behavioral and cognitive outcomes at 13 months (e.g., Bayley scales and slower processing speed and reaction time) were as strong or stronger than for the retrospective report (Jacobson, et al., 2002). The authors concluded that “the antenatal data are more accurate” (p. 822) for these measures in infants and with this interval between the maternal self-reports. Similar to our findings, antenatal report identified 10.6% of women as “at risk” drinkers whereas the 13-month retrospective report identified 32.3% as “risk drinkers,” an increase of more than 300% (Jacobson et al., 1991). While concluding that retrospective report may be “a better indication” of maternal drinking, consistent with Ernhart, et al. (1988), the authors also concluded that retrospective report may be “less precise” in predicting outcomes. Nevertheless, as detailed above, that retrospective report was related significantly to delayed psychomotor development and slower cognitive processing speed in infants (Jacobson, et al., 2002). The present results cannot
