Adryana Santiago

Research Project

CRIM 2141

11 December 2018

What factors are related to adolescent substance use?

Introduction

There is a problem concerning adolescents involved with drug use. It has been widely

suggested that this is causing an increase in violent crimes by the adolescent age span. Young

adolescents may challenge new stressors and other types of peer pressures. Combining this with

their underdeveloped frontal lobe, which is the area in the brain responsible for impulse control,

decision making, and mood regulation, at this age specifically they may be prone to substance

abuse. High School and college students are prone to more risky behavior and may be influenced

by the social demands of their peers. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA),

by the time individuals reach their senior year of high school, 70 percent will have tried alcohol,

50 percent will have abused an illicit drug, 40 percent will have smoked a cigarette, and 20

percent will have used a prescription drug recreationally, or for nonmedical purposes. (Kilpatrick

2000) Again, most adolescents are introduced to marijuana or cigarettes in high school, but why

do adolescents choose to participate in drug and alcohol use knowing it’s illegal?

According to the NIDA, “Adolescents are biologically wired to seek new experiences and

take risks.”(Volkow 2014) Adolescents might tap into drugs for a number of reasons. One may

use marijuana if they are stressed or turn to alcohol if they feel depressed. Unfortunately they

more likely to become involved in an ongoing cycle of depression when turning to drugs for
comfort. Drugs have the ability to calm down someone who is abusing them for their stress or

anxiety. This is a negative effect of substance abuse. (Volkow 2014). Another negative effect of

substance abuse is that more than 10% of adolescents that become dependent on drugs and/or

alcohol lead to an elevated risk of violence or PTSD. (Kilpatrick 2000) It is important to study

this topic so that prevention tools can be provided to adolescents and to learn how drugs affect

young adolescent behavior. The social learning theory includes four factors. The data used for

this study is from a self- administered survey that was given to adolescents randomly selected

from New Jersey High Schools. The four factors are differential association, differential

reinforcement, definition, and imitation.

Theory

It is important to review the social learning theory because it relays back to modeling and

operant conditioning and basic models that stem from every person. According to social

learning theory, people participate in crime because they affiliate with others who participate in

criminal activity. Their criminal behavior is enforced when they realize it is benefiting their

self-interest. They have criminal representations that they affiliate with.​ (Alder 2007) The four

factors that this study will be focused on from the social learning theory are differential

association, differential reinforcement, imitation, and definition.

Edward Sutherland said that Differential association is when criminal behavior is learned

in interaction with other persons in a process of communication. Learning takes place first and

foremost in intimate personal groups and incorporates the techniques of committing crime and

the positive and negative aspects which accompany crime. Differential associations is when a

person becomes delinquent because they believe that benefits of violating the law outweigh the
consequences. The learning process involves whether a person is learning a criminal lifestyle or

a comfortable one. (Alder 2007)

Differential reinforcement contains two parts. The first part is withholding reinforcement

for the challenging behavior, and providing reinforcement for an appropriate replacement

behavior, an incompatible behavior, or absence of the challenging behavior. Imitation occurs

when an individual engages in a behavior that is modeled on or follows his or her observation of

another individual's behavior. (Leford 2017) Definitions are one’s own orientations and attitudes

toward a given behavior. According to Akers, definition can also be made know into two types,

general and specific. General beliefs are one’s personal definitions that are based on religious,

moral and other conventional values. Specific beliefs are personal definitions that orient an

individual either toward committing or away from participating in certain criminal or deviant

acts. (Akers)

Literature Review

It is important to write a literature review because the researcher will have a

comprehensive and relevant body of supporting materials to their research work. Reviewing

related materials helps the researcher to gather valuable data and ideas that can guide them in

their own research.

Factor 1​: Michael ​Lynskey and his team tested Differential Association through the social

development model and examined the power of middle school in order to predict a form of

antisocial behavior during high school. This study is known as The Seattle Social Development

Project. It is a longitudinal theory driven study. The main population being studied consisted of

all 5th graders from Seattle Elementary Schools. A total of ​808 students, 77 percent of the
population, consented to be a part of the study. The data were collected in the fall 1985 and the

spring of 1989 and 1993, when subjects were aged 9 to 10, 13, 14, and 17 to 18 years,

respectively. Students were interviewed in person and asked for their confidential responses to a

wide range of questions regarding family, community, school, and peers, and questions about

family and peers. The substances focused on throughout this study were marijuana, cigarettes,

and alcohol. By ages 9 and 10 a substantial minority had initiated two of the three substances.

14 percent had tried cigarettes, 26 percent had initiated alcohol use, and 2 percent reported

having smoked marijuana. In conclusion this study was able to predict drug use at ages 17 and

18. (Lynskey 2003)

Factor 2​: Differential Reinforcement; This journal observed alcohol dependency. Marczinski

reported that following an alcohol administration in a challenge prototype, commission errors in

engaging responses increased the relative placebo. Studies of the differential reinforcement

process suggest that chronic alcohol consumption can lead to irregular symptoms that could be

expected to create a negative affect and weak self-regulation. Increasing levels of alcohol

dependence can lead to decreasing levels of self-control. Also alcohol can induce or magnify

impulsive behavior and even increase the likelihood of impulsive behavior. It remains unclear

whether impulsivity actually adds to an enhanced risk for alcohol problems, or if it simply

reects a manifestation of the same likelihood that contributes to alcohol dependence. This

underscores the importance of using a developmental context to understand the

impulsivity/alcohol use relationship. (Dick 2010)

Factor 3​: Imitation; In this journal article the companion longitudinal studies are based on a

community sample designed to investigate the origins and consequences of drug use and related
problem behaviors. Reflecting on the concept of imitation, parents using marijuana is measured.

Throughout this case, measurement is somewhat different across the generations. The population

of selected parents were divided into three generations. The first generation of parents were

asked if they had ever used marijuana and, if so, if they currently used. The second generation of

parents were asked a basic self-reported drug use inventory, and the measure used in the current

analysis indicates whether or not they used marijuana in the past year. It was noted that all

relationships are positive and in the expected direction. For either generation, spending

unsupervised or risky time with friends involved in drug use are each statistically significantly

related to participating drug use. Parent marijuana use is also related to adolescent drug use, but

only for the third generation. Deviant beliefs are significantly related to adolescent drug use for

only the second generation. Importantly, the equality of coefficients tests reveals that none of

these pairs of coefficients are significantly different from one another across the two generations.

(Krohn 2016)

Factor 4​: Definition This review tested the impact of variables of the socio-cognitive theories on

adolescent substance use. The study mainly focused on students. It had been shown earlier in the

study that adolescents are prone to exaggerate the number of their peers who participate in

substance use. False estimates such as these affect the makeup of their personal behavior related

to the use of substances. Attitudes towards substances and their use turn out to be the factors that

determine the decision whether to become involved in substance use or not. This study shows

that one’s point of view of his/her abilities regarding their behavior and the ability to refuse

substance abuse. (Giovazolias 2014)

 Studies of the differential reinforcement process suggest that chronic alcohol

consumption can lead to irregular symptoms that could be expected to create a negative affect

and weak self-regulation. The substances focused on throughout this studies were marijuana,

cigarettes, and alcohol. Michael Lynskey and his team tested Differential Association through

the social development model and examined the power of middle school in order to predict a

form of antisocial behavior during high school. (Dick 2010) For Imitation; this journal article the

companion longitudinal studies are based on a community sample designed to investigate the

origins and consequences of drug use and related problem behaviors. Parent marijuana use is

also related to adolescent drug use, but only for the third generation. 14 percent had tried

cigarettes, 26 percent had initiated alcohol use, and 2 percent reported having smoked marijuana.

This study shows that one’s point of view of his/her abilities regarding their behavior and the

ability to refuse substance abuse. For either generation, spending unsupervised or risky time with

friends involved in drug use are each statistically significantly related to participating drug use.

Students were interviewed in person and asked for their confidential responses to a wide range of

questions regarding family, community, school, and peers, and questions about family and peers.

Abstract for factor 1

Adolescent substance use is an important area of research in sociology; however, there is a lack

of research on nonmedical prescription drug use. The dearth of research on this topic is

problematic given the relatively high prevalence of use among adolescents, the drastic increase

in use in recent years, and the potential negative consequences from misusing prescription drugs.

Using data from a national sample of adolescents, this research fills an important gap in the

literature by testing one of the most prominent theories of deviance: social learning theory.
Findings support variables related to social learning theory as correlates of nonmedical

prescription drug use. Adolescents with definitions that are pro-substance use, whose peers use

drugs, and whose parents and peers have attitudes that condone substance use are more likely to

report nonmedical prescription drug use in the past year. Important implications and future

research directions are discussed. Adapted from the source document.

Abstract for factor 2

Drawing data from the first year of a longitudinal study of 508 families with focal adolescents

aged 11 to 13 years and their older siblings (14 to 18 years), the investigators examined the

influence of older siblings' drug-using attitudes and behaviors, in comparison with parental and

peer drug-using attitudes and behaviors, on focal adolescents' nonuse and use of substances.

Older siblings are frequently a source of drugs and use substances with their younger siblings,

though peers remain the primary source and the most frequent courses. For most substances,

frequency of use was predicted by older sibling and peer substance use, each after controlling for

the other. Parental drug use was found to be minimal in comparison to older siblings and peers.

Findings relative to the potentially important role of older siblings in influencing their younger

siblings' drug-using behavior are discussed.

Abstract for factor 3

We tested the assumption that theories of drug use are able to account for behavior across

varying contexts and populations by examining whether control, learning, and elaborated

theories provide similar explanations for adolescent drug use in adjacent generations. We used

data from the Rochester Youth Development Study and Rochester Intergenerational Study

which followed a sample of adolescents starting at age 14 and their oldest biological child. Cross
- generational analysis between theoretical variables measured at age 14 and drug use measured

at approximately ages 15 and 16 were used. Regression models testing for each theoretical

framework found that in general, they appear to operate similarly in adjacent generations. We

conducted 14 tests of equality for pairs of coefficients across the generations; no statistically

significant differences were observed. Overall, these theories offer general explanations for

adolescent drug use with respect to risk and protective factors for parents and their children.

Theoretical and policy implications are discussed.

Abstract for Factor 4

Peer influence is generally believed to be a major cause of adolescent drug behavior. This paper

reviews research findings on friend selection and projection to suggest that the magnitude of

friend influence may be overestimated. This paper also observes that, although adolescent drug

use is assumed to begin in response to peer group influence, peer groups have rarely been

measured in studies of drug behavior. Social network analysis is identified as a promising

method for measuring peer groups. The implications of this review for research and programs are

considered.

Methods

The Current Study

The purpose of the study is to find information on adolescent drug use and see if it

connects any four factors of the social learning theory. It is important to write a methods section

so that other researchers can understand the process of the study and all of the factors that went

into conducting it.This section will include how the data was collected, the sampling method, the

research design, the validity, how the variable measures, and the results.
 ​This research has a deductive approach. Deductive means that it approaches to research

is that whilst a deductive approach is aimed and testing theory. A deductive approach usually

begins with a hypothesis. For deductive approaches the emphasis is generally on causality, whilst

for inductive approaches the aim is usually focused on exploring new phenomena or looking at

previously researched phenomena from a different perspective. The four hypotheses that are

being tested are:

● According to differential association, adolescents participate in substance abuse because

they believe that the benefits outweigh the consequences

● According to differential reinforcement, adolescents participate in substance use based

on their friends reaction.

● According to imitation, adolescents participate in substance abuse when an individual is

modeling another person’s behavior.

● According to definition, adolescents participate in substance abuse based are on their

own attitudes towards a given behavior.

Method of Data Collection

The data is collected from a self-administered survey distributed among 100 high school

students in New Jersey. The 100 high school students are randomly selected from all the high

school students enrolled in New Jersey public schools. The survey included questions such as:

“How many times during the last two month did you use illegal drugs?” “What percentage of

your close friends use illegal drugs regularly?” “One a scale of 1 to 5 (1 is very negatively and 5

is very positively), how most of your friends would react if they discovered you are using drugs

regularly?” “To what extent do you agree that there is nothing wrong about using drugs (1
strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree)?” “To what extent do you agree that you usually copy your

close friends’ behaviors (1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree)?”

A strength of this survey is that questionnaires are cost efficient. It is simple way to save

a lot of money just by having the participant record the answers themselves on a piece of paper

and money does not need to be spent on hiring surveyors to ask people the questions. Another

strength for this type of survey is that it covers all aspects of the study. Researchers are able to

ask as many questions as they want in order to get the information they need. Although the self

administered survey has it’s advantages, the survey also has its disadvantages. One weakness of

this survey is that the participants can be dishonest. Even if the participants are aware that the

survey is anonymous, some may still feel the need to be dishonest about their answers or not put

thought into the answer because they want to get it over with. Another weakness is that there is a

chance of skipped questions. there is a chance that some questions will be ignored. If questions

are not required, there is always that risk they won’t be answered.

Sampling Method

It is necessary to sample because it allows researchers to gather data from an entire

population. The type of sampling method used for this study is ​Simple random sampling.​ Simple

random sampling is a method of sampling in which every sample element is selected only on a

basis of chance through a random process. Out of all the high schools in New Jersey, 100

students were randomly selected from those schools. Each student was then given a self-

administered survey to complete. One strength to this sampling method is its simplicity. It’s a

quick and understandable way to get a sample from a population. One weakness to this sampling
method is that there are over 2,000 high schools in New Jersey so only 5% of those high schools

are being represented in the sample.

Sample
Output

Gender Frequency Percent Valid % Cumulative %

Male 58 58.0 58.0 58.0

female 42 42.0 42.0 100.0

Total 100 100 100

Race Frequency Percent Valid % Cumulative %

White 69 69.0 69.0 69.0

Other 31 31.0 31.0 100.0

Total 100 100 100

Table 1 Sample Distribution (N=100)

Variables % Mean (SD)

Race
White 69%
Other 31%
Gender
Male 58%
Female 42%

The gender of this sample is 58% male and 42 % female. The race for this sample is 69%

white 31% other. This study has generalizability because it uses probability sampling.

Generalizability is usually defined as the degree to which the results of a study based on a
sample can be said to represent the results that would be obtained from the entire population

from which the sample was drawn. The other races not represented as well as the whites.

Although New Jersey is mostly represented by caucasians, there are a large number of hispanics

and should have been represented more in the sample.

Cross population refers to the ability to generalize from one group, population to other

groups or populations. This sample does not have cross population generalizability because only

one sample is being tested from the population.

Research Design

The board category of design used in the study was non experimental. Non-experimental

research is the label given to a study when a researcher cannot control, manipulate or alter the

predictor variable or subjects, but instead, relies on interpretation, observation or interactions to

come to a conclusion. One strength of this research design is not requiring researchers to

administer them. Researchers need only hand out the surveys and collect and study the data. This

becomes a strong advantage when working with a minimum of researchers and funding or when

keeping the number of variables in a study very low. One weakness of this research design is that

it does not allow for the gathering of data post-treatment. Gathering data post-treatment can

introduce entire new areas for researchers to consider. Without the inclusion of experimentation

or applied treatments, the research becomes mostly one-dimensional -- focused on a small series

of variables. (Becker 2001)

Validity

​ his study does not have external validity. External validity is exist when
External validity: T

findings about one group, population, or setting hold true for other groups, populations, or
settings. Based on the information that resulted for the separate races and genders, one will not

account for the other. In addition to the statement above one can further argue the findings for

the sample of New Jersey high school students will not hold true for all high school students.

​ his study does have internal validity. Internal validity is refers to how well an
Internal Validity: T

experiment is done, especially whether it avoids confounding more than one possible

independent variable cause acting at the same time. The study was successfully performed by all

participants. The participants were able to answer the questions on the self- administered

questionnaire. Based on their answers numbers were correlated into results that represent the

population.

​ his study does have measurement validity. Measurement validity is the

Measurement validity: T

type of validity that is achieved when a measure measures what it is presumed to measure. The

goal of this study was to see whether adolescents participate in substance abuse based on the four

factors of the social learning theory.

● Face validity is the type of validity that exist when an inspection of the items used to

measure a concept suggests that they are appropriate. Face validity is also known as

logical validity, and example is the variable use, because it states that adolescents will

participate in substance use if they believe the benefits outweigh the consequences.

● Content validity is the type of validity that exist when full range of a concepts meaning

is covered by the measure.An example of content validity is Not Wrong variable because

the students are testing on a scale of how the feel about the use of drugs.

Measures

● Use: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable is ratio.
 ● Friend use: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable is

ordinal.

● Friend React: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable

is ordinal.

● Not Wrong: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable is

ordinal.

● Imitation: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable is

ordinal.

● Gender: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable is

nominal.

● Race: This is an independent variable. The level of measurement for this variable is

nominal.

Results

Descriptive Statistics
Table 2.1

Independent Variable Mean Standard Deviation

Use 1.632 .053

Friend Use .2254 .22314
Friend React 1.93 1.335
Not Wrong 2.62 1.496
Imitation 2.14 1.414
Table 2.2

Frequency​ ​Distribution (N=100)

Gender 58%
Race 69%

Table 2.1 represents the descriptive statistics for the independent variables. The first

variable is substance use: use “How many times during the last two month did you use illegal

drugs?” This variable measures as nominal. The mean distribution was analyzed as illegal drugs

being used 1.63 times in the past two months. The standard deviation was 2.053. The second

variable is Differential Association: friend use “What percentage of your close friends use illegal

drugs regularly?” This variable measures as a scale. The mean distribution is .2254 The standard

deviation is .22314. The next variable is Differential Reinforcement: FriendReact “One a scale of

1 to 5 (1 is very negatively and 5 is very positively), how most of your friends would react if

they discovered you are using drugs regularly?” The mean distribution is 1.93. The standard

deviation is 1.335 . The next variable is Definition: Not Wrong “To what extent do you agree

that there is nothing wrong about using drugs (1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree)?” The

mean distribution is 2.62. The standard deviation is 1.496. The last variable is Imitation:

Imitation “To what extent do you agree that you usually copy your close friends’ behaviors (1

strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree)?” The mean distribution is 2.14. The standard deviation is

1.414. Table 2.2 represents the frequency distribution. The frequency distribution for gender is

58%. The frequency distribution for race is 69%.

Hypothesis Testing

Output

Table 2 Bivariate Correlation between Use, Friend use, Friend react, Imitation, and Not wrong
(N=100)

Use FriendUse FriendReact Imitation NotWrong

Use 1 .88 .88 .79 .62

Friend Use .88 1 .80 .69 .54
Friend React .88 .80 1 .85 .66
Imitation .79 .69 .85 1 .80
Not Wrong .62 .54 .66 .80 1

P > 0.01

Table 2 presents the correlation between the personal use, friend use, friend’s reaction,

imitation, how one feels about drug use​.​ The result shows there is a significant and positive
relationship between the variables (r=0.8, p<0.01). It means individuals who have friends that

participate in drug use will most likely participate in drug use as well. This result supports the

hypothesis that there is a relationship between drug use and the social learning theory.

Discussion

The purpose of this study is to explore the problem concerning adolescents involved with

drug use. It is important to study this topic so that prevention tools can be provided to

adolescents and to learn how drugs affect young adolescent behavior. The variables tested were

use, friend use, friend react, imitation, and not wrong. The frequency distribution for gender is

58%. The frequency distribution for race is 69%. This results support the hypothesis that there is

a relationship between drug use and the social learning theory. The strongest variable is ​Not

wrong ​because it is an opinion question and is personal to the individual answering it. The

weakest variable is ​Friend Use​ because it cannot be certain that all students are aware if their

friends participate in drug use.

Implications for Theory

This study implies that adolescent drug use is related to the four factors of the social

learning theory. The four factors are differential association, differential reinforcement,

definition, and imitation. This results support the hypothesis that there is a relationship between

drug use and the social learning theory. It is already known, based on the theory, that ​people

participate in crime because they affiliate with others who participate in criminal activity. Their

criminal behavior is enforced when they realize it is benefiting their self-interest. They have

criminal representations that they affiliate with.​ An interesting fact about this study is that the

results show negative reactions based on friend use, friend react, and not wrong; but there is still
a decent amount of personal use with a mean distribution of 1.63

Implications for Literature

According to the literature review on differential association the study predicted drug use

at ages 17 and 18. Students were interviewed in person and asked for their confidential

responses to a wide range of questions regarding family, community, school, and peers, and

questions about family and peers. The substances focused on throughout this study were

marijuana, cigarettes, and alcohol. (Lynskey 2003) The journal on differential reinforcement

suggest that chronic alcohol consumption can lead to irregular symptoms that could be expected

to create a negative affect and weak self-regulation. Increasing levels of alcohol dependence can

lead to decreasing levels of self-control. This study proves the importance of using an

experimental context to understand the impulsivity/alcohol use relationship. (Dick 2010) The

article about the imitation factor states that all relationships are positive and in the expected

direction. For either generation, spending unsupervised or risky time with friends involved in

drug use are each statistically significantly related to participating drug use. (Krohn 2016) The

review on definition tested the impact of variables of the socio-cognitive theories on adolescent

substance use. The study mainly focused on students, which is very similar to the current study.

This study shows that one’s point of view of his/her abilities regarding their behavior and the

ability to refuse substance abuse. (Giovazolias 2014)

Implications for Policy

The results of this study have implications for differential association, differential

reinforcement, imitation, and definition. A policy for Differential association can include a

principal bringing in programs into the school to inform the students about the negative effects of
drug use. A policy for differential reinforcement can include a boss administering random drug

test in the workplace in order to decrease or prevent intoxication among the employees at the

workplace. A policy for definition is for parents to raise their kids to a certain standard so that

their views on drugs are negative. Lastly a policy for imitation is for students to stay away from

other students that may be involved in drug and/or alcohol use.

Limitations and Future Research

All research have their limitations. In this study the sample size was 100 high school

students. There are over 2,000 public high schools in New Jersey, which means only less than

20% of high schools were included in the study. This is also not including an private schools in

New Jersey, who end up being left out of the study. The population of high school students in

New Jersey is 1.3 million. With the sample size only being 100, this can lead to a lot of

demographics and areas of New Jersey being left out of the study. If the sample included mostly

students from North Jersey, there is a chance that students in North Jersey do not participate in

substance use as much as students in South Jersey.

This study can be used to benefit future research on adolescent substance use. ​The

current report suggests a framework for selecting the sample of high school students. A

limitation of the survey is that the participants can be dishonest. Even if the participants are

aware that the survey is anonymous, some may still feel the need to be dishonest about their

answers or not put thought into the answer because they want to get it over with. For future

research, it may be more beneficial to interview the students in person because they are more

likely to be truthful. ​A limitation of the research design is that it does not allow for the gathering

of data post-treatment. Gathering data post-treatment can introduce entire new areas for
researchers to consider. For future research, data can be collected from the students once they are

in college to see if their use has increased or decreased based on their new peer relationships.

The current study showed that there are significant relationships between high school student

substance use and the social learning theory. Based on this research and experimentation, one

can be informed of the relationships and use them for future research.
 References

Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., & Laufer, W. S. (2007). Criminology and the criminal justice system.

Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Becker, Tom. “What Are the Advantages & Disadvantages of Non-Experimental

Design?”(2001) ​Synonym​, 21 Nov. 2017,

classroom.synonym.com/advantages-disadvantages-nonexperimental-design-8078209.ht

ml.

Debois, Stefan. “9 Advantages and Disadvantages of Questionnaires.” Survey Anyplace, 18 Oct.

2018, surveyanyplace.com/questionnaire-pros-and-cons/.

Dick, D. M., Smith, G., Olausson, P., Mitchell, S. H., Leeman, R. F., Omalley, S. S., & Sher, K.

(2010). Understanding the construct of impulsivity and its relationship to alcohol use

disorders. ​Addiction Biology,​ ​15​(2), 217-226. doi:10.1111/j.1369-1600.2009.00190.x

Giovazolias, T., & Themelia, O. (n.d.). Social Learning Conceptualization for Substance Abuse:

Implications for Therapeutic Interventions. (2014) Retrieved from

https://ejcop.psychopen.eu/article/view/23/html

Kilpatrick, D. G., Acierno, R., Saunders, B., Resnick, H. S., Best, C. L., & Schnurr, P. P. (2000).

Risk factors for adolescent substance abuse and dependence: Data from a national

sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(1), 19–30.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.68.1.19
Krohn, M. D., Loughran, T. A., Thornberry, T. P., Jang, D. W., Freeman-Gallant, A., & Castro,

E. D. (2016). Explaining Adolescent Drug Use in Adjacent Generations. Journal of Drug

Issues, 46(4), 373-395. doi:10.1177/0022042616659758

Ledford, J., Ph.D BCBA-D. (2017, December 12). Differential Reinforcement. Retrieved

September 28, 2018, from ​https://vkc.mc.vanderbilt.edu/ebip/differential-reinforcement/

Lynskey, M. T., Coffey, C., Degenhardt, L., Carlin, J. B., & Patton, G. (2003, May 07). A

longitudinal study of the effects of adolescent cannabis use on high school completion.

Retrieved September 28, 2018, from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00356.

Volkow, N. D., M.D. (2014, January). Principles of Adolescent Substance Use Disorder

Treatment: A Research-Based Guide. Retrieved September, 2018, from

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-adolescent-substance-use-disorder-treatment-

research-based-guide/introduction