Parenting practices and adolescent drug-related knowledge, attitudes, norms and behavior.
AbstractThe current study explored the relationships between parenting practices and adolescent drug use. Suburban middle school students (N = 2129) completed surveys that included measures of perceived parental monitoring, discipline and setting an anti-drug message as well as measures of drug-related knowledge, attitudes and peer norms. Results indicated that effective parenting practices had a direct protective effect in terms of adolescent drug use and that the protective effect of parenting practices remained significant after including the effects of parenting on adolescent drug-related knowledge, attitudes and perceived norms in a structural equation model. These findings suggest that effective parenting practices have a robust protective effect on youth drug use via multiple pathways that extend beyond parenting effects on the most proximal predictors of adolescent drug use.
INTRODUCTION
Despite significant achievements in drug abuse prevention over the past two decades, in particular the development of effective research-based approaches to drug abuse prevention, drug use among adolescent American youth has continued to be a leading preventable health risk. During much of the 1990s, national surveys revealed an increase in drug use among American youth (Johnston, O'Malley, & Bachman, 2001), a rise attributed to an alarming increase in drug use among the very youngest cohorts. The most recent data show that by the end of eighth grade, 35% of all students have tried an illicit drug. By the end of high school, approximately 50% of all students have initiated drug use. Though many factors have been shown to contribute to adolescent drug use, parental influence has been shown to play an especially important role in adolescent drug use initiation. However, few studies have examined the mechanisms by which good parenting practices are associated with reduced youth drug use. It is important to understand the protective effects of parenting behaviors on youth drug use in order to improve drug prevention programs that are implemented in the home setting.
Several parent-related factors have been shown to influence adolescent drug use in previous research. Several studies have demonstrated that early adolescents are more likely to smoke, drink alcohol and use other drugs when their parents engage in these behaviors or when parents directly or indirectly communicate that these behaviors are normative and common (Stanton, Li, Galbraith, Cornick Feigelman, Kaljee, & Zhou, 2000; Ary, James, & Biglan, 1999; Jackson, Henriksen, & Dickinson, 1999; Kosterman, Hawkins, Spoth, Haggerty, & Zhu, 1997). For example, studies indicate that permissive parental attitudes toward drugs and alcohol are also important determinants of adolescent drug use (Hansen, Graham, Sobel, Shelton, Flay, & Johnson, 1987; Brook, Gordon, Whiteman, & Cohen, 1986; McDermott, 1984). In addition, research has demonstrated the importance of positive parenting skills by showing that by increasing family bonding and communication, parenting skills training can decrease the risk of adolescent drug use (Kosterman et al., 1997; Dishion & Andrews, 1995; Werch et al., 1991; Klein & Swisher, 1983; Patterson, Chamberlain, & Reid, 1982). On the other hand, poor parenting practices have been shown to be associated with adolescent drug use and similar negative behavioral outcomes among youth. Poor parental monitoring has been found to be associated with higher rates of adolescent substance use, particularly in terms of initiation of use at earlier ages (Chilcoat & Anthony, 1996; Steinberg, Fletcher, & Darling, 1994) and higher levels of delinquency and aggression (Patterson & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1984). Correspondingly, poor parent-child communication and poor parental support are frequently associated with greater youth substance use (Anderson & Henry, 1994; Selnow, 1987; Wills & Cleary, 1996) and delinquency (Clark & Shields, 1997). For example, infrequent communication between parent and child and fewer hours of time spent together have been found to be associated with higher rates of alcohol and tobacco use onset in fifth to seventh graders (Cohen, Richardson, & La Bree, 1994). Additional studies have shown that other parenting variables such as poor discipline practices play an important role in the development of adolescent antisocial behavior (Gorman-Smith, Tolan, Zelli, & Huesmann, 1996).
A limitation of existing research on parenting practices and adolescent drug use is that little work has focused on the mechanisms by which parenting behaviors are protective. By examining the intervening variables through which parenting behaviors influence youth drug use, we can learn more about the processes by which effective parenting practices exert a protective influence on youth behavior. For example, it is possible that effective parenting has a protective effect by influencing young people's knowledge, attitudes and/or normative expectations regarding drug use. Alternatively, the protective effects of parenting may extend beyond their effects on these drug specific outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to test whether effective parenting practices have an impact on adolescent drug use above and beyond the effects of parenting on youth drug knowledge, attitudes and perceived norms.
METHOD
Overview
Participants in the present study were part of a larger evaluation study of a parenting prevention program. Data is from the baseline data collection, prior to the intervention. Participants were recruited from 34 middle and junior high schools in suburban New York City and rural New York State. The following steps were used for school recruitment: (1) New York State Public School administrators were contacted by mail and provided with a description of the study and the benefits and requirements of participation; (2) the initial contact was followed with a telephone call; (3) schools were informed that if they participate they would be randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions and students would be asked to complete a survey; (4) demographic information was collected from interested schools to determine their appropriateness for the planned study; and (5) finally, after asking the appropriate school administrator to provide a letter committing the school to participate, 34 schools responded to our invitation and completed the study.
Participants
The sample for the present study included an N of 2,238 middle school students. The sample was 49% boys and 51% girls. In terms of ethnicity, this sample was predominantly white (81%), with the remaining students comprising the following ethnicities: Black (4%), Hispanic (4%), Native American (3%), Asian (2%) and other (6%). Approximately 77% of respondents lived with two parents.
Procedure
Participating students completed questionnaires that measured self-reported parental behavior and several drug-specific outcomes hypothesized to be related to drug use initiation. Of the original sample, 109 students had missing data on one or more variables and were eliminated from the analysis. The final sample of 2129 with complete data represents over 95% of the original sample. Questionnaires were administered according to a standardized protocol during a regular 40-minute class period by classroom teachers. Classroom teachers took the following steps to ensure that student responses remained confidential. Per specific instructions, teachers distributed surveys to the student according to the names listed on a "tear-off" sheet. Student identification codes were used instead of names to emphasize the confidential nature of the surveys. The person responsible for data collection was told to follow specific guidelines that included providing a quiet and confidential environment for the students, requesting the students to remove and discard the tear-off sheet, reading specific instructions to the students prior to the administration of the tests and collecting completed surveys and returning them to a delivery box to ensure confidentiality.
Measures
Questionnaires included items that assessed perceived parental behavior related to setting an anti-drug message, parental monitoring and disciplinary practices as well as students' drug-related knowledge, attitudes, peer norms and drug use behavior. The reliabilities (Cronbach a) for relevant scales used in the current study are indicated below. Further information about the psychometric properties and descriptive statistics for the measures of drug knowledge, pro-drug attitudes, perceived norms for peer drug use, and substance use behaviors can be found in Macaulay et al. (2002).
Parenting Practices. Parental Monitoring (a = .67) was assessed with several items that assessed the degree to which parents "talk to me everyday about my activities, school and friends," "know where I am and what I am doing after school" and "set a curfew for when I have to be home." Setting an Anti-Drug Message (a = .74) was assessed with several items such as whether parents "talk to me about the risks of using tobacco, alcohol and other drugs" and "told me that they do not want me to use tobacco, alcohol, or other drugs." Parental Discipline was assessed by asking students whether their parents "enforce clear rules that spell out what I should and should not do." Response options for these items ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (always).
Drug Knowledge: Consequences & Prevalence. A series of eight true-false items were used to assess drug-related knowledge, focusing on the physical effects and consequences of use (e.g., "Smoking reduces a person's endurance for physical activity") and on the perceived prevalence of use (e.g., "Most adults smoke cigarettes"). Four summary scores for smoking knowledge, drinking knowledge, marijuana knowledge and other drug knowledge were calculated.
Pro-Drug Attitudes. Four items (a = .78) from the Teenager's Self-Test: Cigarette Smoking were used to assess Pro-Smoking Attitudes. Items included "Kids who smoke have more friends" and "Smoking cigarettes makes you look cool." Four corresponding items (a = .77) were created to assess Pro-Drinking Attitudes and four corresponding items (a = .77) were created to assess Pro-Marijuana Attitudes. Response options for all items ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Perceived Norms for Peer Drug Use. Peer Norms for smoking were assessed by asking participants "How many people your age do you think smoke cigarettes?" and similar items were used to assess Peer Norms for alcohol use and marijuana use. Response options for these items ranged from 1 (none) to 5 (all or almost all).
Substance Use. Frequency measures of smoking, alcohol and marijuana use were used by asking students how often (if ever) "do you smoke cigarettes?" "do you drink beer, wine, wine coolers or hard liquor?" and "do you smoke marijuana (pot, grass) or hashish (hash)?" with response categories ranging from 1 (never) to 9 (more than once a day).
Data Analysis. Structural equation modeling (SEM), used in the present study, is a statistical modeling technique that can be viewed as a combination of factor analysis and regression or path analysis. First, SEM enables the researcher to specify a hypothesized measurement model indicating how unmeasured latent factors or constructs are represented by specific measured variables. The adequacy of the measurement model is tested using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) techniques. Second, SEM enables the researcher to specify a hypothesized structural model indicating how the latent factors are interrelated with each other. The adequacy of the structural model is tested by examining the extent to which the proposed model provides a good fit to the data.
The EQS computer program (Bentler, 1995) was used for the confirmatory and structural analyses. All model testing used maximum likelihood estimation. In addition, robust statistics were used in order to account for the skewed distributions for the drug use measures. Robust statistics included the Satorra-Bentler chi-square statistic and robust Comparative Fit Index (Satorra & Bentler, 1994), both of which adjust standard errors to calculate parameter estimates in situations where multivariate normality cannot be assumed. In evaluating the overall goodness-of-fit for the CFA and SEM models, the following criteria were used: (1) the Robust Comparative Fit Index (CFI) for which a cutoff of .90 is generally accepted as indicating a good fit and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), which should be .05 or below.
RESULTS
At baseline, 9% of participants reported that they had tried alcohol, 20% reported that they had tried cigarettes and 4% reported that they had tried marijuana.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The five latent factors specified in the measurement model each contained three to five indicator items. Parenting Practices had loadings ranging from .61 to .76; Drug Knowledge had loadings ranging from .39 to .52; Pro-Drug Attitudes had loadings ranging from .92 to .93; Peer Norms had loadings ranging from .78 to .86; and Drug Use had loadings ranging from .67 to .71. Factor loadings for all latent constructs were highly significant (ps < .001) and in the expected direction. Thus, the measurement model was properly specified and each factor appears to be statistically reliable. The model fit criteria indicated that the CFA model was a good fit, Satorra-Bentler (Robust CFI = .93, RMSEA = .04). The correlations among the latent factors from the CFA are shown in Table 1.
Structural Equations Model. Two structural equation models were tested. First, a direct effect model examining the relationship between Parenting Practices and participants' Substance Use was examined. This model, shown in Figure 1, revealed that effective Parenting Practices had a strong protective effect on Substance Use ([beta] = -.33, p < .001). The goodness-of-fit measures indicated that this was a good fit of the model to the data, (Robust CFI = .97, RMSEA = .03).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
A second SEM was examined to determine if the protective effect of Parenting Practices remained significant after including the effects of parenting on adolescent Drug Knowledge, Pro-Drug Attitudes and Peer Drug Norms. The results indicated that effective Parenting Practices predicted greater Knowledge ([beta] = .28, p < .001), lower Pro-Drug Attitudes ([beta] = -.37, p < .001) and lower Drug Norms ([beta] = -.14, p < .001). The protective effect of Parenting Practices on Drug Use was decreased in magnitude but remained significant ([beta] = -.14, p < .01) with the inclusion of Drug Knowledge, Attitudes and Norms in the model. Furthermore, while Pro-Drug Attitudes ([beta] = .38, p < .001) and Drug Norms ([beta] = .28, p < .001) predicted Drug Use, Drug Knowledge (Consequences and Prevalence) did not significantly predict Drug Use. The goodness-of-fit measures indicated that this was a good fit of the model to the data, (Robust CFI = .90, RMSEA = .05).
DISCUSSION
The present baseline study tested the relationships between parenting practices and adolescent drug use and the extent to which adolescent drug knowledge, pro-drug attitudes and perceived norms may mediate this relationship among middle school students. Structural equation modeling indicated that effective parenting practices had a direct protective effect in terms of decreased adolescent drug use as indicated by frequency of smoking, alcohol use and marijuana use. Furthermore, a second SEM revealed that the direct protective effect of parenting practices remained significant after including the effects of parenting on adolescent knowledge about the consequences and prevalence of drug use, pro-drug attitudes, and peer normative expectations in the model. Taken together, these findings indicate that effective parenting practices had a direct protective effect in terms of adolescent drug use even after controlling for the effect of parenting on adolescent drug-related knowledge, attitudes and perceived peer norms. These findings indicate that effective parenting practices have a robust protective effect on youth drug use that persists beyond the effects of parenting on several drug-specific outcomes. More global parenting practices such as monitoring; discipline and communication are likely to play significant roles in protective youth from drug use, above and beyond these drug-specific variables. Therefore, these findings are consistent with previous research showing that parenting is a broadly defined protective factor in terms of youth drug use. Furthermore, the finding that parenting practices had both direct and indirect effects on youth drug use are consistent with the notion that effective parenting provides multiple protective pathways. For example, in addition to providing guidance on the dangers of drug use, attentive and effective parents may increase resiliency in children and adolescents by instilling relevant coping skills as well as appropriate values and norms regarding conventional behavior.
Implications for Prevention. There is considerable evidence in literature showing that family-based interventions are effective in decreasing the risk of adolescent drug use (Kosterman et al., 1997; Dishion & Andrews, 1995; Werch et al., 1991; Klein & Swisher, 1983; Patterson et al., 1982). Several studies indicate that the use of family-based preventive interventions have shown consistent, significant intervention effects on children's problem behaviors and on potential mediating processes such as parenting behaviors and aspects of family functioning (Lochman & van den Steenhoven, 2002).
The findings from the present study have several implications for the development of parenting programs to prevent youth drug use. One clear implication is that prevention programs that provide instruction to parents on how to discuss the issue of drug use with their children are important, yet approaches limited to drug-related information may not be sufficient. Prevention programs that aim to reduce adolescent drug use should be broad-based, teaching parents skills for monitoring their children, how to appropriately discipline them and how to stay connected and bonded with their children through open communication and parent-child bonding. Essential elements of skills-based family interventions include communication skills, family norm setting, drug abuse prevention skills and knowledge, as well as parental monitoring and appropriate, consistent discipline by a parent (Stanton et al., 2000; Kettinger et al., 2000; Haynie et al., 1999; Ary et al., 1999; Jackson et al., 1999). Reviews of several drug abuse prevention programs for students and their families have showed marked improvements in skills related to family management, communication, family bonding and parental involvement (Hawkins, Catalano, & Morrison, O'Donnell, Abbott, & Day, 1992; Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992).
Limitations and Directions for Future Research. The present study has some limitations that should be addressed. First, this was a cross-sectional study, which limits our ability to infer causality regarding the relationships observed. Second, since all data was obtained by student self-reports, the significant relationships among variables may partly reflect shared method variance. Third, certain measures used in the study were brief, consisting of a relatively small number of items. Findings of this study should be replicated with more comprehensive measures of drug knowledge, for example. Fourth, the participant pool is predominantly Caucasian and of higher socioeconomic status compared to the national average. Therefore, these findings will not necessarily generalize to other demographic groups.
Further research is needed to identify the mechanisms by which parenting behaviors can protect young people from drug use and such work may help to improve future drug prevention programs aimed at parents and their children. Areas that should be explored in future research include the extent to which parent-based or family-based programs can add to the effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs. For example, some research suggests that combining an effective evidence-based prevention program in schools with a family-focused program that primarily targets parent behavior and parent-child interactions can produce significant relative reduction in drug use initiation (Spoth, Redmond, Trudeau, & Shin, 2002). Additional work is also needed regarding ways to best encourage parents to participate in such preventive interventions, particularly parents who have poor parenting skills to begin with and could benefit the most from such an intervention.
Table 1 Correlations Among Latent Factors from Confirmatory Factor Analysis Latent Factor 1 2 3 4 1. Parenting Practices 2. Drug Knowledge: Consequences & Prevalence .24 3. Pro-Drug Attitudes -.35 -.44 4. Peer Norms -.10 -.44 .28 5. Substance Use -.33 -.44 .51 .40 Note: p < .001
References
Anderson, A.R., & Henry, C.S. (1994). Family system characteristics and parental behaviors as predictors of adolescent substance use. Adolescence, 29, 405-420.
Ary, D.V., James, L., & Biglan, A. (1999). Parent-daughter discussions to discourage tobacco use: Feasibility and content. Adolescence, 34(134), 275-282.
Bentler, P.M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
Brook, J.S., Gordon, A.S., Whiteman, M., Cohen, P. (1986). Some models and mechanisms for explaining the impact of maternal and adolescent characteristics on adolescent state of drug abuse. Developmental Psychology, 22, 460-467.
Chilcoat, H.D., & Anthony, J.C. (1996). Impact of parental monitoring on initiation of drug use through late childhood. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 91-100.
Clark, R.D., & Shields, G. (1997). Family communication and delinquency. Adolescence, 32, 81-92.
Cohen, D.A., Richardson, J., & La Bree, L. (1994). Parenting behaviors and the onset of smoking and alcohol use: A longitudinal study. Pediatrics, 94, 368-375.
Dishion, T.J., & Andrews, D.W. (1995). Preventing escalation in problem behaviors with high-risk young adolescents: Immediate and 1-year outcomes. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 63, 538-548.
Gorman-Smith, D., Tolan, P.H., Zelli, A., & Huesmann, L.R. (1996). The relation of family functioning to violence among inner-city minority youth. Journal of Family Psychology, 10, 115-129.
Hansen, W.B., Graham, J.W., Sobel, J.L., Shelton, D.R., Flay, B.R., & Johnson, C.A. (1987). The consistency of peer and parent influences on tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use among young adolescents. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 10, 559-579.
Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F., & Miller, J.Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 64-105.
Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F., Morrison, D.M., O'Donnell, J., Abbott, R.D., and Day, L.E., (1992). The Seattle Social Development Project: Effects of the first four years on protective factors and problem behaviors. In Preventing Adolescent Antisocial Behavior: Interventions From Birth Through Adolescence, edited by J. McCord and R.E. Tremblay. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 139-161.
Haynie, D.L., Beck, K., Crump, D., Shattuck, T., Simons-Morton, B. (1999). Parenting strategies regarding teen behavior: Parent and teen perceptions. American Journal of Health Behavior, 23(6), 404-414.
Jackson, C., Henriksen, L., Dickinson, D. (1999). Alcohol-specific socialization, parenting behaviors and alcohol use by children. Journal of Studies on Alcohol May, 60(3):362-7.
Johnston, L.D., O'Malley, P.M., & Bachman, J.G. (2001). National survey results on drug use from the "Monitoring the Future study, 1975-1992" (Volume h Secondary School Students). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Kosterman, R., Hawkins, J.D., Spoth, R., Haggerty, K.P., & Zhu, K. (1997). Effects of a preventive parent-thinking intervention on observed family interactions: Proximal outcomes from preparing for the drug free years. Journal of Community Psychology, 25(4), 337-352.
Kettinger, L.A., Nair, P., Schuler, M.E. (February 2000). Exposure to environmental risk factors and parenting attitudes among substance-abusing women. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse. 26(1), 1-11.
Klein, M.A., Swisher, J.D. (1983). A statewide evaluation of a communication and parenting skills program. Journal of Drug Education, Vol. 13(1), 73-82.
Lochman, J. E., & van den Steenhoven, A. (2002). Family-based approaches to substance abuse prevention. Journal of Primary Prevention, 23, 49-114.
Macaulay, A. P., Griffin, K. W., & Botvin, G. J. (2002). Initial internal reliability and descriptive statistics for a brief assessment tool for the Life Skills Training drug abuse prevention program. Psychological Reports, 91, 459-462.
McDermott, D. (1984). The relationship of parental drug use and parent's attitude concerning adolescent drug use to adolescent drug use. Adolescence, 19, 89-97.
Patterson, G.R., Chamberlain, P., & Reid, J., (1982). A Comparative Evaluation of a Parent Training Program. Behaviour Therapy, Vol. 13, 638-50.
Patterson, G.R., & Stouthamer-Loeber M. (1984). The correlation of family management practices and delinquency. Child Development, 55, 1299-1307.
Satorra, A., and Bentler, P.M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye and C. C. Cloggs (Eds.), Latent variable analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399-419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Selnow, G.W. (1987). Parent-child relationships and single and two parent families: Implications for substance usage. Journal of Drug Education, 17, 315-326.
Spoth, R.L., Redmond, C., Trudeau, L., & Shin, C. (2002). Longitudinal substance initiation outcomes for a universal preventive intervention combining family and school programs. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 129-134.
Stanton, B.F., Li, X., Galbraith, J., Cornick, G., Feigelman, S., Kaljee, L., Zhou, Y. (2000). Parental underestimates of adolescent risk behavior: A randomized, controlled trial of a parental monitoring intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 26, 18-26. New York, NY: Elsevier Science, Inc.
Steinberg, L., Fletcher, A., & Darling, N. (1994). Parental monitoring and peer influences on adolescent substance use. Pediatrics, 93, 1060-1064.
Werch, C.E.; Young, M., Clark, M., Garrett, C., Hooks, S., Kersten, C. Effects of a take-home prevention program on drug-related communication and beliefs of parents and children. (1991). Journal of School Health, Vol. 61, No 8, 346-350.
Wills, T.A., & Cleary, S.D. (1996). How are social support effects mediated? A test with parental support and adolescent substance use. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 71, 937-952.
Author Note
Araxi P. Macaulay, Teachers College, Columbia University; Kenneth W. Griffin, Weill Medical College, Cornell University; Elizabeth Gronewold and Christopher Williams, National Health Promotion Associates; Gilbert J. Botvin, Weill Medical College, Cornell University.
This research was supported in part by a grant from the National Institute of Drug Abuse to the first author, Grant Number 1-R 43 DA 12772-01. The authors would like to acknowledge Heidi Johanns, Samantha Ritt, Jeanne Chun, and Amy Weiss for their support on this project.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Araxi Macaulay, National Health Promotion Associates, 711 Westchester Avenue, White Plains, NY 10604.
 Printer friendly
 Cite/link
 Email
 Feedback
| |
| Title Annotation: | PARENTING PRACTICES AND ADOLESCENTS |
|---|---|
| Author: | Botvin, Gilbert J. |
| Publication: | Journal of Alcohol & Drug Education |
| Date: | Jun 1, 2005 |
| Words: | 4076 |
| Previous Article: | A national study of substance abuse prevention professionals in higher education. |
| Next Article: | Exploring the Spiritual Experience in the 12-step Program of Alcoholics Anonymous Spiritus Contra Spiritum. |
| Topics: | |