The Journal of Psychology, 2010, 144(6), 489505 Copyright C 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Individual Differences as Predictors of Illicit Drug Use Among Turkish College Students
H. BELGIN AYVASIK H. CANAN SUMER Middle East Technical University

ABSTRACT. Although the prevalence of drug use in the young adult population in Turkey is still far below the gures reported for most European Union countries and the United States, there seems to be a noteworthy increase in drug use, especially among high school and college students. The purpose of the present study was to examine the extent of drug use among college students in Turkey and to identify some of the individual-difference variables associated with drug use. Participants were 781 college students. A survey package including (a) measures of sensation seekingrisk taking, self-esteem, affectivity level, global mental health, overall life satisfaction, and the rate and nature of substance use and (b) demographic questions was administered to the participants during regularly held class meetings. A logistic regression analysis revealed that sensation seekingrisk taking, parental education level, smoking, and frequency of alcohol use predicted illicit drug experience. Implications of the ndings and limitations of the study are discussed using the context of the study as a framework. Keywords: illicit drug use, personality traits, risk-taking, sensation seeking, Turkish college students

DRUG USE AND ABUSE is one of the leading problems facing all societies, with adverse health, social, and economical outcomes. A recent report of the World Health Organizations (2007) European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction stated that physical and psychological problems, disabilities due to health problems (e.g., work withdrawal), and legal problems (e.g., violent and criminal behaviors) are among the individual and social costs of the drug use. According to the World Health Organizations report, around the world about 200 million people (almost 5%) between the ages of 15 and 64 years annually use one or another of the illicit drugs. Among the users, about 25 million (almost 0.6%) can be classied as problem drug users (World Health Organization, 2007).
Address correspondence to H. Belgin Ayvasik, Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical University, Inonu Bulvari, 06531 Ankara, Turkey; abelgin@metu.edu.tr (e-mail).
489

490

The Journal of Psychology

A substantial number of studies have been documented regarding the biological, psychological, and social risk factors of drug use and abuse. In addition, different theories or models have been proposed to explain the initial drug use and the development of drug addiction due to biological, social, and environmental factors. Basically, it is suggested that social and environmental factors play an important role in the rst experience with drugs, whereas individual (e.g., personality traits) and biological (e.g., genetic predisposition) factors are associated with substance use disorders (e.g., Glantz, Weinberg, Miner, & Colliver, 1999; West, 2001). A number of individual-difference variables have been studied as potential biological, psychological, and social predictors of drug use and abuse. As far as demographic variables are concerned, gender and age seem to be critical variables predicting drug use. Boys are more likely to start earlier; to use more cigarettes, alcohol, and illicit drugs; and to report more problems associated with drug use than girls throughout early and mid-adolescence years. However, this gender difference disappears during late adolescence (Andrews, 2005). Also, some studies have shown that young people between the ages of 12 and 25 years are at high risk for drug use and abuse. The earlier is the rst experience of drug use, the greater is the risk of developing addiction or substance use disorders as an adult (Glantz, et al., 1999). Recently, Iacono, Malone, and McGue (2008) suggested a conceptual model for the development of drug addiction and emphasized the importance of adolescence in addiction. They suggested that a genetic liability to behavioral disinhibition in preadolescence leads to childhood disruptive disorders. In early adolescence, this liability is expressed as problem behaviors (e.g., substance use, academic difculties, promiscuous sexual activity) due to exposure to certain environmental risk factors (e.g., parentchild relationship, peer effect, and stressful and traumatic life events). Then, an externalizing psychopathologysuch as antisocial personality disorder or nicotine, alcohol, or drug dependencymight emerge in late adolescence or early adulthood. Peer inuence (e.g., Baumann & Ennett, 1994; Simons-Morton, 2007), parental alcohol and drug use (e.g., Drapela & Mosher, 2007), parental monitoring (e.g., Martins, Storr, Alexandre, & Chilcoat, 2008), and parenting style (e.g., Patock-Peckham & Morgan-Lopez, 2006) are among the environmental and social risk factors associated with drug use. The association between parental monitoring and parental style and other risk factors (e.g., sensation seeking, impulsivity) in adolescent drug use has received increased research attention in recent literature. Martins et al. (2008) showed that low parental monitoring, high sensation seeking, and peers drug use were associated with adolescent alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and ecstasy use. Consistently, Simons-Morton (2007) showed that sustained positive parenting practices (i.e., involvement, expectations, and monitoring) protect adolescents from illicit drug use. In addition, positive parenting behavior indirectly reduces the adolescents friendship with those who use alcohol or drugs.

Ayvasik & S mer u

491

Also, parental support plays an important role in preventing the development of behavioral problems (e.g., illicit drug use, deviant behaviors) in adolescents. For example, King and Chassin (2004) reported that parental support and discipline have a buffering effect on the development of drug use and addiction when behavioral control was low in adolescents. Since parental monitoring mainly arises from parenting style, ndings on the association between parental monitoring and the risky behaviors of adolescents are comparable to the results of studies focusing on parenting style and behavioral problems. Patock-Peckham and Morgan-Lopez (2006) reported that permissive parenting style was a predictor of alcohol abuse in adolescents, particularly if the parentchild gender matched. Risk taking and sensation seeking (e.g., Martins et al., 2008; Yanovitzky, 2005), positive and negative dispositional affectivity (e.g., Kashdan, Vetter, & Collins, 2005), extraversionintroversion (e.g., Terracciano, L ckenhoff, Crum, o Bienvenu, & Costa, 2008), neuroticism (e.g., Terracciano et al., 2008), conscientiousness (e.g., Terracciano et al., 2008), self-esteem (e.g., Baker, Beer, & Beer, 1991), and behavioral disinhibition (e.g., Earleywine & Finn, 1991; Iacono et al., 2008) are among the personality traits studied in relation to drug use. Studies have also shown a high comorbidity of drug use with especially disruptive or externalizing behavioral disorders, such as oppositional deant and conduct disorder (Glantz et al., 1999; Roberts, Roberts, & Xing, 2007). High sensation seeking has been largely associated with alcohol and drug use and abuse (Andrew & Cronin, 1997; Martins et al., 2008; Yanovitzky, 2005). Yanovitzky (2005) found that adolescents with high sensation seeking tendencies chose drug or alcohol users to be friends. In addition, sensation seeking as a predictor of adolescent alcohol and drug use is highly associated with parental monitoring (e.g., Martins et al., 2008), personality traits (e.g., Earleywine & Finn, 1991), and peer effect (e.g., Martins et al., 2008). Cultural Changes and Resulting Challenges Facing Turkey Turkey is a Near Eastern country with a rather distinct cultural prole (see Cileli, 2000; Hofstede, 2001; Kagitcibasi, 1990, 1994; Karakitapoglu-Ayg n & u Imamoglu, 2002; Triandis & Bhawuk, 1997). As it waits to be the rst Muslimmajority member of the European Union, Turkey is trying to nd a balance between traditional values and the demands of Westernization. Despite the recent upsurge of conservatism and religiosity, there still exists a strong commitment to modernization in secular Turkey. The country is going through a transformation process with serious economic, technological, and social change implications. Cileli (2000) examined the changes in value orientations of Turkish youths (both college students and college age government workers with a high school degree) from the late 1980s to the mid 1990s. She reported that major changes were observed in the value orientations of Turkish youths toward a more competitive and individualistic orientation. Similarly, in a more recent study, Karakitapoglu-Ayg n u and Imamoglu (2002) studied the factor structure of values among Turkish college

492

The Journal of Psychology

students. Those authors identied three pathways that people in Turkey pursue as value systems: the traditional pathway (characterized by traditionalism and religiosity); the achievement-oriented, self-enhancement pathway (characterized by the transition from traditionalism to modernism); and the universalistic pathway (characterized by emphasis on the welfare of other people and nature). The modernization process that Turkey has been experiencing along with the transition toward a more individualistic and universalistic value system is likely to bring new issues and challenges for the society, especially for the youths (between the ages of 0 and 28.5 years) who make up more than half of the entire Turkish population, 71.5 million in 2008 (Turkish Statistical Institute, 2009). Among these challenges, drug use among youths seems to deserve special attention. Recent empirical evidence suggests that there is a signicant increase in drug use especially among high school and college students in Turkey (Erdem, Eke, Ogel, & Taner, 2006; Ogel, Corapcioglu, et al., 2004; Ogel, Tamar, Evren, & Cakmak, 2001; Ogel, Tamar, Evren, & Hzlan, 1999; Ogel, Taner, & Eke, 2006). Ogel et al. (2001) reported that 22% of high school students are daily smokers, and 9% drink alcohol once per week. The rate of having used a psychoactive drug at least one time in their life was 3.6% for cannabis, 8.6% for inhalants, and 3.3% for other substances (e.g., heroin, benzodiazepines). In another study, Ogel et al. (2006) found that the lifetime prevalence of cigarette and alcohol use among high school students was 37% and 51.2%. The most commonly used psychoactive substances and their prevalence rates were as follows: inhalants (5.9%), marijuana (5.8%), unitrazepam (4.4%), benzodiazepines (3.7%), and ecstasy (3.1%). A survey conducted by the Turkish Psychological Association (2002) in 72 cities of Turkey with 7,681 participants between the ages of 15 and 65 years showed that life-time prevalence was 32% for cigarette, 10.1% for alcohol, and 0.3% for other psychoactive substances. The percentage of individuals who used any one of the illicit drugs at least once in their life is 1.3%. In two studies with college students, the prevalence of drug use was found to be around 3%, and the most commonly used illicit drug was cannabis (e.g., Altindag, Yanik, Yengil, & Karazeybek, 2005; Sevincok, Kucukardali, Dereboy, & Dereboy, 2000). Despite the trend suggesting an observable increase in drug use and abuse in Turkey, the prevalence rates are still far below the ones reported in both the European Union countries and the Unites States. For example, the estimate of at least one-time drug users is reported to be 45.4% in the United States (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006). Although the prevalence of illicit drug use is still far below that reported in Western societies, the trends call for youth prevention and intervention programs in Turkey. Hence, research examining the risk factors for drug use and abuse among Turkish adolescents is urgently needed. Although there are quite a few studies (e.g., Altindag et al., 2005; Bulut et al., 2006; Erdem et al., 2006; Ogel et al., 2004; Ogel et al., 2001; Ogel et al., 1999; Ogel et al., 2006) focusing on the prevalence rates, biological, psychological, social, and environmental predictors

Ayvasik & S mer u

493

of drug use have largely been overlooked by researchers in Turkey. The purpose of the present study was to examine the extent of drug use among college students in Turkey and to identify the sociodemographic and psychological correlates of drug use. Based on the existing literature, sensation seekingrisk taking, self-esteem, affectivity level (especially negative affectivity), global mental health, and overall life satisfaction were expected to be signicant correlates of drug use. Method Participants Originally the data were collected from 851 college students from a wide range of departments in three large state universities in Ankara, Turkey. The data were collected during regular class meetings. The classes from which the data were collected were selected based on convenience using an accidental sampling approach. That is, the student participants were selected based on their availability and willingness to participate. For this purpose, we contacted the instructors from different departments and described to them the purpose of the study, and their approval for data collection was obtained. Although an accidental sampling approach was used, special attention was paid to reach students from different faculties and departments. Although no students refused to ll out the questionnaire package, there were 44 questionnaires with some incomplete data. These questionnaires were eliminated. In addition, 7 respondents not representing traditional college population in terms of age and student status, 9 cases with univariate outliers, and 10 cases with multivariate outliers were excluded from the analyses. The remaining 781 cases (427 men, 352 women, and 2 with gender information missing) constituted the nal sample. The mean and standard deviation of the age of the participants were 20.7 years and 1.9 years, respectively (range = 1729 years). Approximately 38% of the mothers and 59% of the fathers of the participants had a 4-year college degree or above. When asked to indicate their perceived SES, 85.4% of the participants indicated middle class or above. Participation was completely voluntary, and the anonymity of the responses was assured. Measures Measures of self-esteem, emotional affectivity, life satisfaction, mental health, sensation seekingrisk taking, and substance use were used in the present study along with a questionnaire measuring demographic variables of interest. Rosenbergs Self-Esteem Scale The self-esteem of the participants was assessed by using Rosenbergs (1965) Self-Esteem Scale measuring global feelings of self-worth or self-acceptance. This scale consists of 10 items rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Completely disagree, 5 = Completely agree). An internal consistency of .88 and a testretest reliability of

494

The Journal of Psychology

.82 were reported by Fleming and Courtney (1984). The scale was translated into Turkish by Cuhadaroglu (1985). In the current study, the internal consistency of the scale was found to be .80. Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) The emotional state of participants was assessed by the Turkish version of PANAS (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). The PANAS consists of 10 items assessing positive affectivity and 10 items assessing negative affectivity, rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Doesnt describe me; 5 = Describes me completely). An internal consistency of .88 for NA and one of .85 for PA, and a testretest reliability of .47 for both PA and NA dimensions were reported by Watson et al. (1988). The Turkish version of the scale was adapted to Turkish by Gencoz (2000), who revealed an internal consistency of .83 for the PA, .86 for the NA, and a testretest reliability of .40 and .54, for the PA and NA, respectively. In the current study, the coefcient alphas for the positive and negative scales are .86 and .82, respectively. Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) The SWLS (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Grifn, 1985) is a 5-item scale measuring satisfaction with life in general. The extent of agreement on each item is indicated on a 5-point response format (1 = Strongly disagree, 5 = Strongly agree). Internal consistency reliability of the scale was found to be .83. Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) The BSI, developed by Derogatis (1992), is a mental-healthscreening instrument composed of 53 items represented by nine symptom scales (i.e., somatization, obsessivecompulsive, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, anxiety, hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, and psychoticism) and three global mental health indexes. The respondents are asked to indicate the frequency with which they have experienced the items (i.e., the symptoms listed on the BSI) within the last 1 week on a 5-point Likert type scale (0 = Never; 5 = Always). The inventory has been translated and adapted to Turkish by Sahin and Durak (1994). The Turkish version of the scale appeared to have ve dimensions: anxiety, depression, self-negativity, somatization, and hostility. In the current study, Global Severity Index (GSI), which provides a composite measure of the severity of overall symptoms (scores ranging from 0 to 4), was used as an index of global mental health. Although the bivariate correlations of the factors of the BSI with the other variables of interest were examined, only GSI was included in the regression analysis. Sensation SeekingRisk Taking (SSRT) A 15-item measure was used to measure sensation seeking and risk taking. Responses on the SSRT are given on a 4-point scale (1 = Describes me well, 4 =

Ayvasik & S mer u

495

Does not describe me at all). The majority of the items of the SSRT are adapted versions of the items from the Arnett Inventory of Sensation Seeking (Arnett, 1994) and Multidimensional Self-Destructiveness Scale by Persing and Schick (1999). The scale was nalized through exploratory factor analyses and reliability analyses. In the present study, the coefcient alpha for the scale was found to be .77. For ease of understanding, the mean SSRT score was recoded so that higher scores indicated increased sensation seekingrisk taking. Drug Use Questionnaire Two questions were asked to determine drug use among the participants. In the rst question, participants were asked whether they had ever used any of the following drugs: marijuana, amphetamines, cocaine, crack cocaine, LSD, heroin, morphine, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, PCP, darvon, ecstasy, hallucinogens, inhalants, or the other illicit drugs. In the second question, they were asked to indicate whether they had used any of the same illicit drugs over the last 30 days. Based on the responses given to these two questions, participants were then classied into illicit drugexperienced and illicit druginexperienced groups. Those who had tried at least one of the above drugs in the past or over the last 30 days were put into the illicit drugexperienced group. In addition to drug use, participants were asked questions about whether they smoke cigarettes (and if yes, how many per day) and frequency of alcohol use on a 5-point frequency scale (0 = Not using; 1 = Once every two to three months; 2 = Once or twice a month; 3 = Once a week; 4 = More than once a week). Demographic Information Questionnaire The demographic questionnaire included questions about age, gender, major, GPA, education level of both parents, and the perceived SES of the participants. Procedure A questionnaire package including measures of sensation seekingrisk taking (SSRT), self-esteem (Rosenbergs Self-Esteem Scale), affectivity (PANAS), mental health (BSI), overall life satisfaction (SWLS), and drug use, along with a section on demographic information was administered to the participants during regular class meetings. Before the administration of the package, the informed consent of the participants was obtained. In the informed consent form, the voluntary nature of the participation was emphasized, the general purpose of the study was explained, and the condentiality of the respondents was assured. Results Using the criterion described in the methods section, 103 (13.2%) out of 781 students were identied to be illicit drugexperienced, whereas as 678 (86.8%)

496

The Journal of Psychology

were identied to be illicit druginexperienced. Of those who were identied to be illicit drugexperienced, 39 were women, and 64 were men, with a mean and standard deviation of age of 21.37 and 1.91 years, respectively. Of those who were drug-inexperienced, 313 were women, and 363 were men. The mean and standard deviation of age of drug-inexperienced group were 20.63 and 1.88 years, respectively. Approximately 48.60% of the mothers and 68.90% of the fathers of the illicit drugexperienced students had a 4-year college degree or above. The corresponding percentages for the drug-inexperienced group were 45.50% and 56.80%, respectively. Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations of the measures for the illicit drugexperienced and inexperienced participants. Correlations among the variables of interest as well as descriptive statistics are presented in Table 2. As can be seen from the table, drug experience was signicantly positively correlated with both smoking and alcohol abuse. Among the demographic variables, drug use was signicantly related to both parents

TABLE 1. Characteristics of Illicit Drug-Experienced and Drug-Inexperienced Participants Drug Inexperienced Group (N = 678) M 2.44 1.25 2.76 3.89 3.01 3.25 1.95 1.02 1.43 1.04 0.68 1.19 1.08 SD 5.99 1.28 0.51 0.65 0.78 0.64 0.68 0.55 0.69 0.63 0.51 0.64 0.52

Drug Experienced Group (N = 103) Variable Smoking Alcohol use Sensation seeking-risk taking Self-esteem Life satisfaction Positive affectivity Negative affectivity Anxiety Depression Self negativity Somatization Hostility Symptom Severity Index M 8.98 2.55 3.08 3.89 2.89 3.27 2.05 1.12 1.58 1.06 0.82 1.38 1.19 SD 9.89 1.28 0.44 0.61 0.72 0.69 0.67 0.56 0.73 0.56 0.62 0.72 0.53

Note. Smoking (number of cigarettes per day), Alcohol (0 = Not using; 1 = Once every two to three months; 2 = Once or twice a month; 3 = Once a week; 4 = More than once a week). Risk taking (after recoding, 1 = Does not describe me at all; 4 = Describes me well), self-esteem, life satisfaction (1 = Strongly disagree, 5 = Strongly agree), positive affectivity and negative affectivity (1 = Doesnt describe me; 5 = Describes me completely), anxiety, depression, self negativity, somatization, and hostility (0 = Never; 4 = Always), Symptom Severity Index (0 = Low; 4 = High).

TABLE 2. Correlations Among Variables of Interest and Descriptive Statistics

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

No.

Variable

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .35 .03 .25 .71 .02 .77 .02 .22 .17 .01 .16

.16 .02 .01 .06 .13 .02 .05 .25 .08 .07 .19 .05 .18 .15 .10

.28 .32 .13

.11 .12

.07

.08

.15

.04

.09

.21

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .89 .53 .56 .54 .43 .51 .58 .30 .32 .52 .85 .44 .42 .32 .42 .39 .22 .31 .40 .82 .37 .24 .37 .27 .12 .16 .29 2.99 .77 3.25 .65 1.96 .68 .86 .70 .67 .68 .49 .62 .75 3.89 .65 .26 .44 1.42 1.35 5.14 1.93 6.01 1.75 2.20 .51

Gender Age GPA Illicit drug use Smoking Alcohol use Mothers education level Fathers education level Sensation seekingrisk taking Self-esteem Life satisfaction Positive affectivity Negative affectivity Anxiety Depression Self-negativity Somatization Hostility Symptom Severity Index .08 .21 .05 .08 .02 .07 .07 .05 .01 .05 10 .07 .22 .06 .05 .18 .10 .03 .08 .03 .10 .03 .10 .01 .07 .06 .03 .12 .10 .04 .82 .76 .78 .67 .69 .92 1.10 .53 .88 .76 .60 .62 .90 1.03 .55 1.45 .70 1.05 .62 .70 .53

.06 .18 .04 .06 .10 .16 .03 .08 .01 .10

.02 .11 .07 .02 .05 .70 .04 .00 .01 .04

.05 .01 .02 .05 .11 .05 .12 .03 .01 .04 .01 .02 .05 .08 .01 .05 .06 .06 .03 .02 .07 .08 .02 .05 .01 .04 .08 .04 .09 .12 .00 .01 .10 .15 .08 .04 .07 .09 .01

.83 .57 .76 .66 .53 .73 .90 .76 .79 1.22 .66

M SD

1.45 0.50

20.72 1.90

2.74 1.64

.13 .34

Ayvasik & S mer u

Notes. Internal consistency reliabilities are presented at the diagonal in bold. Gender (1 = Woman; 2 = Man), drug use (0 = Not experienced; 1 = Experienced), smoking (1 = Smoker; 2 = Nonsmoker), alcohol (0 = Not using; 1 = Once every 23 months; 2 = Once or twice a month; 3 = Once a week; 4 = More than once a week), education level (1 = Illiterate; 2 = Literate with no diploma; 3 = Primary school; 4 = Secondary school; 5 = High school; 6 = Some college; 7 = College; 8 = Masters degree; 9 = PhD), risk taking (after recoding, 1 = Does not describe me at all; 4 = Describes me well), self-esteem, life satisfaction (1 = Strongly disagree, 5 = Strongly agree), positive affectivity and negative affectivity (1 = Doesnt describe me; 5 = Describes me completely), anxiety, depression, self negativity, somatization, and hostility (0 = Never; 4 = Always), Symptom Severity Index (0 = Low; 4 = High). Correlation is signicant at the .05 level (2tailed). Correlation is signicant at the .01 level (2tailed).

497

498

The Journal of Psychology

education level; as education level of parents increased, participants were more likely to be drug experienced. Concerning the individual-difference variables, as expected, having experienced an illicit drug was signicantly correlated with sensation seekingrisk taking. Correlations between drug experience and overall symptom severity and three dimensions of the brief symptom inventory (i.e., depression, somatization, and hostility) were signicant but low, yet were all in the expected directions. Drug experience failed to have signicant correlations with self-esteem, life satisfaction, positive affectivity, negative affectivity, anxiety, and self-negativity. Last, the general pattern of correlations among the other study variables (e.g., self esteemlife satisfaction, self esteempositive affectivity, self esteemnegative affectivity, and some BSI dimensions) had all in the expected directions. It was expected that sensation seekingrisk taking, self-esteem, affectivity level (especially, negative affectivity), global mental health, and overall life satisfaction would be signicant correlates of drug use. A logistic regression analysisin which risk-taking, self-esteem, negative affectivity, positive affectivity, life satisfaction, symptom severity, and both parents education level were regressed on being illicit drugexperienced or illicit druginexperiencedwas conducted to test the hypothesis of the study. The education levels of both parents were included in this analysis based on the signicant bivariate correlations noted above. Also, smoking and frequency of alcohol use were included as they were conceptually and practically relevant variables for drug use. After the deletion of 36 cases with missing values in the variables of interest, data from 745 participants (drug-inexperienced = 648; and drug-experienced = 97) were available for analysis. The results of the logistic regression analysis are presented in Table 3. Model chi-square, which is a measure of the improvement t that the independent variables make compared to the null model, was found to be signicant, model chi-square (13) = 122.13, p < .001, suggesting that the predictors, as a set, reliably distinguished between illicit drugexperienced and nonexperienced college students (R2 .15). Model chi-square is an important index of the overall signicance of the model; however, as can be seen in Table 3, the signicance of Model chi-square does not necessarily suggest that every single independent variable in the model is signicant. Among the independent variables in the equation, smoking, alcohol use, mothers education level, and sensation seekingrisk taking were found to contribute signicantly to having used an illicit drug. The effects of the other variables were not signicant. The pattern of results was quite the same when a stepwise logistic regression with forward method of entry was conducted. That is, smoking, frequency of alcohol use, mothers education level, and sensation seekingrisk taking were the variables in the equation, whereas the remaining variables did not satisfy the conditions to be in the equation. Similarly, considering the uneven number of students with (n = 103) and without (n = 678) at least one experience with illicit drugs, the logistic regression analysis was repeated with a randomly selected

Ayvasik & S mer u

499

TABLE 3. Correlates of Drug Use: Results of Logistic Regression Analysis Variable Smoking Alcohol use Mothers education Fathers education Sensation seekingrisk taking Life satisfaction Self-esteem Positive affect Negative affect Symptom severity ConstantS B 1.023 .564 .235 .120 .973 .000 .013 .020 .114 .202 7.220 SE .255 .103 .099 .113 .265 .201 .262 .227 .279 .342 1.492 Wald 16.141 30.114 5.667 1.115 13.452 .000 .003 .008 .168 .350 23.417 p .000 .000 .017 .291 .000 .999 .960 .931 .682 .554 .000 Exp. (B) 2.781 1.757 1.265 .887 2.645 1.000 .987 1.020 1.121 1.224 .001

Note. All variables are entered at Step 1.

sample of 120 drug-inexperienced (17.7% of total number of drug-inexperienced participants) versus 103 drug-experienced participants. Results were essentially the same with slight deteriorations in the Wald statistics and the associated significance levels. Discussion This study was conducted to examine the effects of mainly individualdifference variables on drug use among college students. The results suggested that among the variables that we included, smoking and frequency of alcohol use, mothers education level, and sensation seekingrisk taking tendency predicted illicit drug experience. The effects of smoking and alcohol make sense because there is empirical evidence suggesting that for adolescents smoking and alcohol seem to be part of the larger picture associated with the use of illicit drugs. According to gateway hypothesis, adolescents drug use involves a developmental progression. They begin with cigarettes and alcohol and progress to illicit drugs (e.g., Glantz et al., 1999). Interestingly, parental education level, especially mothers education level, was a signicant predictor of having experienced an illicit drug. In another study with Turkish middle and high school students, the mothers education was also found to be a signicant predictor of drug use (Karakas, 2006). There could be at least three plausible explanations for this nding. First, as the education level of the mother increases, she is more likely to be employed outside the home, and hence, may be less likely to monitor or watch over growing children. This reduced availability may contribute to the conditions leading to drug experience.

500

The Journal of Psychology

Supporting this explanation, empirical evidence suggests that along with other variables, parental monitoring and/or positive parenting practices have a buffering effect on drug use and abuse in adolescents (e.g., Martin et al., 2008; SimonsMorton, 2007). Second, with an increase in parental education level, a more permissive parenting style (as opposed to the traditional more controlling, authoritative or authoritarian style) may be more likely, preparing the conditions for illicit drug experience. Tendencies leading to drug experience may go unnoticed within a permissive parenting style. Similarly, Patock-Peckham and Morgan-Lopez (2006) reported that permissive parenting style was a predictor of alcohol abuse in adolescents, particularly, if the parentchild gender matched. Third, as the mothers education level increases, family income increases as well, possibly making illicit drugs more accessible for adolescents. It is important to note that these explanations are speculative at this point, and further studies are needed to understand the nature of the relationship between parental education level and the increased probability of experiencing an illicit drug. The observed relationship between parental education level, especially the mothers education, and drug use requires further research attention. Social, economic, and cultural transformations are evident in many aspects of life in Turkey. These changes have resulted in more and more womens getting educated and entering the Turkish workforce. Largely, as a result of long-standing governmental policies that promote equal opportunities in areas such as education and public sector employment, there is a relatively high percentage of women in many professions in this country. For instance, 60% of the pharmacists, 34% of the lawyers, 30% of the dentists, 23% of the professors, and 19% of the physicians in Turkey are women (Kabasakal, Aycan, & Karakas, 2004). Future studies should explore the nature of the relationships between the mothers education level and risky behaviors including drug use on a sample more representative of the population. Such studies can contribute to the development of large-scale prevention programs against risky behaviors and treatment modalities for substance use disorders in Turkish youths. Concerning the individual-difference variables included in this study, sensation seekingrisk taking appeared to be the only variable associated with drug experience that was consistent with the literature (e.g., Andrew & Cronin, 1997; Martins et al., 2008; Yanovitzky, 2005). According to Martins et al., as a biologically based trait, sensation seekingrisk taking may impair judgment and decision making leading an individual to take more risk to take drug use (2008, p. 920). Based on the current literature, Yanovitsky (2005) summarizes three plausible explanations as to why high sensation seeking adolescents may be more likely to use illicit drugs. First, for high sensation seeking adolescents, risks associated with illicit drug use may be stimulating. Second, the expected neurological effects of drugs could create a motivation to try. Last, these adolescents might underestimate the risks involved.

Ayvasik & S mer u

501

There may be several possible explanations for the failure to nd the expected pattern of results with respect to the individual differences variables other than sensation seekingrisk taking. More specically, some of the methodological limitations of the study may have contributed to the unexpected ndings concerning the effects of self-esteem, negative and positive affectivity, symptom severity, and life satisfaction. First, we acknowledge that the variable illicit drug experience was an imperfect substitute for illicit drug use. A signicant portion of those in the illicit drugexperienced category reported having tried an illicit drug only once. That is, having experienced one of the listed illicit drugs even once qualied participants to be included in the illicit drugexperienced category. Having had a single experience only (which seems to be reasonably associated with risk taking) versus using drugs in a relatively stable, consistent manner are obviously not the same. However, when we wanted to focus exclusively on those with more recent or consistent drug use, the sample size for users became extremely imbalanced compared to nonusers, making most of the statistical analyses unfeasible. Hence we decided to use illicit drug experience as an imperfect proxy for drug use. We believe that the pattern of relationships between the individual-difference variables and a sounder measure of drug use would be different. Future studies with a larger sample size, using more precise measurements of drug use (capturing both frequency and volume of drug use) are needed. A related limitation of the study is that we were not able to conduct separate analyses for users of different illicit drugs. Again, the number of participants who reported to have used each category of drug was quite small, not allowing for separate analyses. A nal limitation of this study concerns the representativeness of the sample used. The present sample included students from three large state universities located in Ankara. Consequently, the generalizability of the ndings to Turkish university students in general could be problematic. However, using nationwide data released by the Higher Education Council, Student Selection and Placement Center of Turkey (2010), we were able to compare our sample with 4-year college students in Turkey in terms of gender and age distribution. While women constituted 43.63% of our sample, they constituted 45.19% of all 4-year college students in Turkey during the time period in which we collected data. With respect to age, our participants ranged from 17 to 29 years. According to the Higher Education Councils report, 95.30% of all 4-year college students are in the same age range. Although in terms of gender and age, our sample seemed not much different from the Turkish college student population, we are not sure about the representativeness of the present sample in terms of the other demographic variables of interest (i.e., mothers and fathers education and SES) as data on these variables are not available. Future studies employing more representative sampling procedures (simple random sampling or stratied random sampling) are needed to assure the generalizability of the reported ndings.

502

The Journal of Psychology

AUTHOR NOTES H. Belgin Ayvasik is an associate professor at the Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey. Her current research interests are substance and alcohol abuse and psy chotechnical assessments of drivers. H. Canan Sumer is a professor at the Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey. Her current research interests involve personality testing, personnel selection, and performance management.

REFERENCES Altndag, A., Yarik, M., Yengil, E., & Karazeybek, A. H. (2005). Sanliurfada universite ogrencilerinde madde kullanimi [Substance use among university students in Sanlurfa]. Bagimlilik Dergisi [Journal of Dependence], 6(2), 6064. Andrew, M., & Cronin, C. (1997). Two measures of sensation seeking as predictors of alcohol use among high school males. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(3), 393401. Andrews, J. A. (2005). Substance abuse in girls. In D. Bell-Dolan, S. Foster, & E. Mash (Eds.), Handbook of behavioral and emotional problems in girls (pp. 181209). New York: Kluwer Academic Press/Plenum. Arnett, J. (1994). Sensation seeking: A new conceptualization and a new scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 289296. Baker, K., Beer, J., & Beer, J. (1991). Self-esteem, alcoholism, sensation seeking, GPA and differential aptitude test scores of high school students in an honor society. Psychological Reports, 69, 11471150. Baumann, K. E., & Ennett, S. T. (1994). Peer inuence on adolescent drug use. American Psychologist, 49, 820822. Bulut, M., Savas, H. A., Cansel, N., Selek, S., Kap, O., Yumru, M., et al. (2006). Gaziantep universitesi alkol ve madde kullanim bozukluklari birimine basvuran hastalarin sosyo demograk ozellikleri [Sociodemographic characteristics of patients, applying to substance usage disorders unit of Gaziantep university]. Ba mllk Dergisi [Journal of g Dependence], 7(2), 6570. Cileli, M. (2000). Change in value orientations of Turkish youth from 1989 to 1995. Journal of Psychology, 134(3), 297305. Cuhadaroglu, F. (1985). Self-esteem in adolescents. Unpublished masters thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. Derogatis, L. R. (1992). The brief symptom inventory (BSI): Administration, scoring and procedures manual: II. Baltimore: Clinical Psychometric Research. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Grifn, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 7175. Drapela, L. A., & Mosher, C. (2007). The conditional effect of parental drug use on parental attachment and adolescent drug use: Social control and social development perspective model. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse, 16(3), 63 87. Earleywine, M., & Finn, P. R. (1991). Sensation seeking explains the relation between behavioral disinhibition and alcohol consumption. Addictive Behaviors, 16, 123 128. Erdem, G., Eke, C. Y., Ogel, K., & Taner, S. (2006). Lise ogrencilerinde arkadas ozellikleri ve madde kullanimi [Peer characteristics and substance use among high school students]. Ba mllk Dergisi [Journal of Dependence], 7(3), 111116. g

Ayvasik & S mer u

503

European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. (2007). The state of the drugs problem in Europe. Lisbon: Author. Retrieved January 22, 2008, from http:// emcdda.europa.eu/html.cfm/index419EN.html. Fleming J. S., & Courtney, B. E. (1984). The dimensionality of self esteem: II. Hierarchical facet model for revised measurement scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 404421. Gencoz, T. (2000). Pozitif ve negatif duygu olcegi: Gecerlik ve guvenirlik calismasi [Positive and negative affect scale: A study of validity and reliability. T rk Psikoloji Dergisi u [Turkish Journal of Psychology], 15(46), 1928. Glantz, M. D., Weinberg, N. Z., Miner, L. L., & Colliver, J. D. (1999). The etiology of drug abuse: Mapping the paths. In M. D. Glantz & C. R. Hartel (Eds.), Drug abuse: Origins & interventions (pp. 345). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Higher Education Council, Student Selection and Placement Center of Turkey. (2010). Higher Education Council Student Selection and Placement Center statistics. Ankara, Turkey: Author. Retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.osym.gov.tr/Genel/ BelgeGoster.aspx?F6E10F8892433CFFA91171E62F0FF15358FF58FE6CBF0AC2. Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultures consequences, comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Iacono, W. G., Malone, S. M., & McGue, M. (2008). Behavioral disinhibition and the development of early-onset addiction: Common and specic inuences. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 325348. Kabasakal, H., Aycan, Z., & Karakas, F. (2004). Women in management in Turkey. In M. J. Davidson & R. Burke (Eds.), Women in management worldwide: Progress and prospects (pp. 273293). Aldershot, England: Ashgate. Kagitcibasi, C. (1990). Family and socialization in cross-cultural perspective: A model of change. In J. Berman (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives: Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 135200). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Kagitcibasi, C. (1994). A critical appraisal of individualism and collectivism: Toward a new formulation. In U. Kim, H. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 5265). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Karakas, O. (2006). Psychological correlates of tobacco, alcohol and drug use among adolescents. Unpublished masters thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey. Karakitapoglu-Aygun, Z., & Imamoglu, E. O. (2002). Value domain of Turkish adults and university students. Journal of Social Psychology, 142(3), 333351. Kashdan, T. B., Vetter, C. J., & Collins, R. L. (2005). Substance use in young adults: Associations with personality and gender. Addictive Behaviors, 30, 259269. King, K. M., & Chassin, L. (2004). Mediating and moderating effects of adolescent behavioral under control and parenting in the prediction of drug use disorders in emerging adulthood. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18, 239249. Martins, S. S., Storr, C. L., Alexandre, P. K., & Chilcoat, H. D. (2008). Adolescent ecstasy and other drug use in the national survey of parents and youth: The role of sensationseeking, parental monitoring and peers drug use. Addictive Behaviors, 33, 919 933. Ogel, K., Corapcioglu, A., Sir, A., Tamar, M., Tot, S., Dogan, O., et al. (2004). Dokuz ilde ilk ve ortaogretim ogrencilerinde tutun, alkol ve madde kullanim yayginligi [The prevalence of tobacco, alcohol, and substance use among elementary and secondary school students in nine cities of Turkey]. T rk Psikiyatri Dergisi [Turkish Journal of u Psychiatry], 15(2), 112118.

504

The Journal of Psychology

Ogel, K., Tamar, D., Evren, C., & Cakmak, D. (2001). Lise gencleri, arasinda sigara, alkol ve madde kullanm yayginligi [Tobacco, alcohol and drug use among high school students]. T rk Psikiyatri Dergisi [Turkish Journal of Psychiatry], 12(1), 4752. u Ogel, K., Tamar, D., Evren, C., & Hizlan, C. (1999). Madde kullanicilarinin ozellikleri: Turkiyede cok merkezli bir arastirma [Characteristics of drug users: A review]. Psikiyatri, Psikoloji, Psikofarmakoloji Dergisi [Journal of Psychiatry, Psychology and Psychopharmacology], 7(S4), 540. Ogel, K., Taner, S., & Eke, C. Y. (2006). Onuncu sinif ogrencileri arasinda tutun, alkol ve madde kullanim yayginligi: Istanbul orneklemi [The prevalence of tobacco, alcohol and substance use among 10th grade students: Istanbul sample]. Ba mllk Dergisi [Journal g of Dependence], 7(1), 1823. Patock-Peckham, J. A., & Morgan-Lopez, A. A. (2006). College drinking behaviors: Mediational links between parenting styles, impulse control, and alcohol-related outcomes. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 20(2), 117125. Persing, C. R., & Schick, C. (1999, June). Development and validation of a multidimensional self-destructiveness scale (MSS) to assess maladaptive and risky behaviors and beliefs in young adults. Paper presented at the meeting of the Pennsylvania Psychological Association Convention, Valley Forge, PA. Roberts, R. E., Roberts, C. R., & Xing, Y. (2007). Comorbidity of substance use disorders and other psychiatric disorders among adolescents: Evidence from an epidemiologic survey. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 88S, S4S13. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Sahin, N. H., & Durak, A. (1994). Kisa semptom envanteri: Turk gencleri icin uyarlamasi [Brief Symptom Inventory: Adaptation to Turkish Youth]. T rk Psikoloji Dergisi [Turkish u Journal of Psychology], 9(31), 4456. Sevincok, L., Kucukardali, Y., Dereboy, C. & Dereboy, F. (2000). Genc erkeklerde madde kullanimi: Sosyodemograk ozellikler ve psikiyatrik tanilar [Substance use among a group of young males: Sociodemographic features and psychiatric diagnoses]. T rk u Psikiyatri Dergisi [Turkish Journal of Psychiatry], 11(1), 4048. Simons-Morton, B. (2007). Social inuences on adolescent substance use. American Journal of Health Behavior, 31(6), 672684. Terracciano, A., L ckenhoff, C. E., Crum, R. M., Bienvenu, J., & Costa, P. T. Jr. o (2008). Five-factor model personality proles of drug users. BMC Psychiatry, 8(22), 110. Triandis, H. C., & Bhawuk, D. P. S. (1997). Culture theory and the meaning of relatedness. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 1352). San Francisco: New Lexington. Turkish Psychological Association. (2002). T rkiyede madde kullanimi ve bagimliligi u proli arastirmasi: Nihai rapor [Study of substance use and abuse prole in Turkey: Final report]. Ankara, Turkey: Author. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2009, December 31). Address based population registration system 2008 population census results. Press Release 14(26). Ankara, Turkey: Author. Retrieved June 01, 2009, from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?tb id=39&ust id=11. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2006). Results from the 2006 national survey on drug use and health: National ndings (DHHS Publication No. SMA 06-4194). Rockville, MD: Author. Retrieved October 28, 2006, from http://www.samhsa.gov Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 10631070. West, R. (2001). Theories of addiction. Addiction, 96, 313.

Ayvasik & S mer u

505

World Health Organization. (2007). World drugs report. Geneva, Switzerland: Author. Retrieved February 5, 2007, from http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/ WDR2007.pdf Yanovitzky, I. (2005). Sensation seeking and adolescent drug use: The mediating role of association with deviant peers and pro-drug discussions. Health Communication, 17(1), 6789.

Original manuscript received November 27, 2008 Final version accepted May 19, 2010

Copyright of Journal of Psychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.