How to Say "No" Most Effectively: Evaluating Resistance Strategies for Prescription Stimulant Diversion to Inform Preventive Interventions

Autor/inn/en	Holt, Laura J.; Schepis, Ty S.; Looby, Alison; Marsh, Eliza; Marut, Paige; Feinn, Richard
Titel	How to Say "No" Most Effectively: Evaluating Resistance Strategies for Prescription Stimulant Diversion to Inform Preventive Interventions
Quelle	In: Journal of American College Health, 68 (2020) 8, S.872-882 (11 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Holt, Laura J.) ORCID (Schepis, Ty S.) ORCID (Looby, Alison)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0744-8481
DOI	10.1080/07448481.2019.1626861
Schlagwörter	Undergraduate Students; Resistance (Psychology); Health Education; Drug Therapy; Stimulants; Student Attitudes; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; Substance Abuse; Student Characteristics; Student Behavior; Peer Relationship + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Resistenz; Gesundheitsaufklärung; Gesundheitsbildung; Gesundheitserziehung; Droge; Schülerverhalten; Drug use; Drug consomption; Drogenkonsum; Student behaviour; Peer-Beziehungen
Abstract	Objective: We evaluated the perceived effectiveness of resistance strategies students could employ if approached to give away, trade, or sell their prescription stimulant medication, a growing concern on college campuses. Participants: We sampled undergraduates (N = 1,521) at three demographically dissimilar institutions between Fall 2017 and Spring 2018. Methods: We administered an anonymous, online survey and used linear mixed models to examine the effects of strategy type, face support (ie, adding politeness), and substance use history on perceived strategy effectiveness. Results: Internal (eg, "I am not comfortable sharing my medication") and external (eg, "My doctor won't prescribe me if I share") explanations were perceived to be most effective. Excuses, direct refusals, and suggesting an alternative (eg, energy drink) were less preferred. Adding face support improved perceived effectiveness for direct refusals and internal explanations. Conclusion: Preventive interventions for stimulant diversion could encourage the use of internal or external explanations or direct refusals with face support. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Taylor & Francis. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01