Protecting Alabama Students From Alcohol and Drugs: A Multi-Level Modeling Approach

• NCJ Number: 216308
• Journal: Journal of Drug Issues Volume: 36 Issue: 3 Dated: Summer 2006 Pages: 687-718
• Author(s): Celia C. Lo; Anita S. Anderson; P. A. Minugh; Nicoletta Lomuto
• Date Published: 2006
• Length: 32 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study examined individual-level and county-level data in identifying both risk and protective factors related to frequency of drug and alcohol use among Alabama students in grade 6 through 12.

Abstract

Overall, findings show that after controlling all other protective and risk factors, the protective role of family bonds and values provided the most protection against alcohol and drug use, except marijuana. Apparently adolescents believe marijuana use is acceptable as a less dangerous drug. Other protective factors were religious attendance, personal beliefs/values, and the protective role of the community and school. The weakened influence of these protective factors and association with peers who used illegal drugs increased the risk for drug and alcohol use. Study findings did not support the hypothesis that students who resided in counties with many structural disadvantages would use drugs more often than students from less disadvantaged counties. In fact, increases in a county's structural disadvantage were associated with decreased frequency of drug use. Possible interpretations of these findings are discussed. One source of data for this study was the Alabama Student Survey, which targeted students enrolled in public school for the spring term of 2002 in grades 6-12 in 812 schools across the State's 67 counties. The final sample consisted of 92,822 students. Another data source was the Social Indicators Study, which consisted of county-level indicators of substance abuse and social conditions in the 67 counties. Dependent measures pertained to the frequency of lifetime and last 30-day use of alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs. Independent variables were five protective factors and one risk factor (association with peers who use drugs). Independent variables at the county-level were seven factors pertinent to socioeconomic disadvantage. The two control variables were gender and grade level. 2 tables, 76 references, an appended listing and measurement of variables