eing legalized decreased and as income increased the rate of those against the legalization of marijuana increased, the results were not statistically significant. In fact, the correlation was extremely weak and the probability was not in our favor, meaning our hypothesis was rejected. Perhaps these results were due to the fact that as we initially stated, deviant behavior, such as drug use and alcoholism, are a way for people to gain social acceptance.When we controlled for gender the results were a little different. Lower income females still favored the legalization of marijuana over women in other income brackets, but females in the high-income bracket favored legalization more than those in the middle income bracket. Surprisingly, males in the middle income bracket were more in favor of the legalization of marijuana than any other income bracket. They were also the least likely to oppose legalization.When we began using the States database, we were finally able to use a measure of alcohol. Due to this new measure, we were able to theorize that people who attend church experience higher levels of social integration, and because of this integration and friendships, these people do not feel as lonely and are not as tempted to drink. Many church members are highly religious and feel as though it is a sin to drink. We then hypothesized that states with higher levels of church members would have lower levels of alcohol consumption. To test these ideas we used a measure of alcohol, gallons of alcoholic beverages consumed per person sixteen and over, as our dependent variable. We used church members, percent of population belonging to a local church, as our independent variable operationalized. Here is what we found:Scatterplot I: States Church Members and Gallons of Alcohol Consumed Per PersonThe results of the scatterplot supported our theory. States with higher percents of church members did have lower rates of alcohol cons...
