In the full sample (Table 2 ), there was an interaction of FH with alcohol availability in relation to high-risk drinking. Contrasts showed the interaction was present for the combined group of respondents with either an affected first-degree relative or with both affected first-degree and affected extended family members (F(2, 18951) = 3.06, p = .047). This group had a significant increase in high-risk drinking compared to negative FH, and these FH effectsTable 2Regression models in full sample of past-year drinkers.High-risk Drinking(wtd N = 9,999)Dependence(wtd N = 10,540)OR95% CIOR95% CIAUD in extended family only1.297***(1.112–1.512)1.719**(1.185–2.492)AUD in 1st degree1.400***(1.194–1.641)2.383***(1.642–3.458)AUD in 1st degree and extended1.323**(1.093–1.601)4.451***(3.130–6.330)Liquor/convenience stores per mi21.012(0.990–1.035)1.012(0.981–1.044)Extended family X Liquor stores1.009(0.959–1.062)–a1st degree X Liquor stores1.056(0.989–1.128)–1st degree & extended X Liquor stores1.088*(1.002–1.180)–Religious adherents in countyb1.000+(0.999–1.000)1.001(1.000–1.002)Neighborhood disadvantage0.717(0.386–1.334)0.470(0.103–2.137)Male1.098+(0.984–1.226)2.641***(1.963–3.554)Black0.414***(0.345–0.497)1.288(0.889–1.866)Hispanic0.754**(0.631–0.901)1.289(0.906–1.833)Age 30–390.536***(0.445–0.644)0.748(0.528–1.060)Age 40–490.312***(0.259–0.377)0.426***(0.278–0.652)Age 50–590.204***(0.167–0.249)0.265***(0.163–0.430)Age 60+0.123***(0.098–0.154)0.076***(0.0325–0.177)High school graduate0.772*(0.615–0.970)0.618*(0.410–0.932)Some college0.898(0.714–1.129)0.683+(0.457–1.020)College graduate0.704**(0.558–0.889)0.414***(0.259–0.662)Separated/divorced/widowed1.289***(1.116–1.489)1.724*(1.128–2.633)Never married1.353***(1.152–1.590)2.075***(1.483–2.904)Unemployed1.068(0.809–1.410)1.619*(1.026–2.556)Not in workforce0.809**(0.699–0.937)1.409+(0.945–2.099)Income $20,001–40,0001.049(0.881–1.250)0.624*(0.434–0.897)Income $40,001–70,0001.193+(0.992–1.436)0.722(0.483–1.080)Income $70,001+1.375**(1.125–1.680)0.797(0.492–1.292)Missing income0.889(0.708–1.117)0.926(0.552–1.553)Own religion discourages drinking0.599***(0.529–0.678)1.227(0.920–1.638)2005 NAS1.443***(1.278–1.629)1.041(0.773–1.401)2010 NAS1.299***(1.115–1.512)1.206(0.836–1.741)Constant2.377***(1.651–3.423)0.0315***(0.0134–0.0737)aAdjusted Wald test was not statistically significant for the interaction of FH with liquor store density for dependence (F(3,19522) = 0.44, p = .727), so interaction terms were removed to improve interpretability of the model.bThe interaction of FH
