Workplace drug-testing programs in the United States have proliferated over the past 10–15 years. It appears that many companies see drug-testing programs as an effective policy for deterring illicit drug use among their employees. However, there is little empirical research that has examined the relationship between drug-testing programs and worker drug use. Using data from the 1994 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA), this paper examines the associations among drug use, drug-testing programs, and perceptions of programs. The results suggest that weekly users of marijuana or cocaine are less likely than others to work for companies that have drug-testing programs. In general, users of marijuana and cocaine are also less likely to want to work for such companies. These findings suggest a deterrent effect of drug-testing programs, although the mechanisms underlying this deterrent effect remain unknown.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgrestiAlan, Categorical Data Analysis. New York: Wiley, 1990.
2.
American Management Association, 1997 AMA Survey: Workplace Drug Testing and Drug Abuse Policies, Summary of Key Findings. New York: American Management Association, 1997.
3.
BennettNathanBlumTerry C. & RomanPaul M., “Employee attitudes toward drug testing: Effects of individual characteristics and employment setting,”Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal7:117–128, 1994.
4.
BlackwellBrenda Sims & GrasmickHarold G., “Random drug testing and religion,”Sociological Inquiry67:135–150, 1997.
5.
BlackwellJudith C., “Drug testing, the war on drugs, workers, and the workplace: Perspectives from sociology.” In: MacdonaldScott and RomanPaul M., eds., Research Advances in Alcohol and Drug Problems, Volume II: Drug Testing in the Workplace. New York: Plenum Press, 1994, pp. 319–333.
6.
Boyes-WatsonCarolyn, “Corporations as drug warriors: The symbolic significance of employee drug testing,”Studies in Law, Politics, and Society17:185–223, 1997.
7.
BrayRobert M.MarsdenMary EllenHerboldJohn R. & PetersonMichael R., “Progress toward eliminating drug and alcohol use among US military personnel,”Armed Forces and Society18:476–496, 1992.
8.
BroganDonna J., “Pitfalls of using standard statistical software packages for sample survey data.” In: ArmitagePeter & ColtonTheodore, eds., Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. New York: Wiley, 1998.
9.
Cornell/Smithers, Report on Workplace Substance Abuse Policy. Ithaca, NY: Smithers Institute, Cornell University, 1992.
10.
DuPontRobert L., “Never trust anyone over 40: What employers should know about drugs in the workplace,”Policy Review48:52–57, 1989.
11.
DuPontRobert L.GriffinDavid W.SiskinBernard R.ShirakiSara & KatzeEdward, “Random drug tests at work: The probability of identifying frequent and infrequent users of illicit drugs,”Journal of Addictive Diseases14:1–17, 1995.
12.
HansonAllan F., Testing Testing: Social Consequences of the Examined Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1993.
13.
HartwellTyler D.SteelePaul D.FrenchMichael T. & RodmanNathaniel F., “Prevalence of drug testing in the workplace,”Monthly Labor Review119:35–42, 1996.
14.
HaygheHoward V., “1988 Bureau of Labor Statistics' survey of employer anti-drug programs.” In: GustSteven W.Michael WalshJ.ThomasLinda B. & CrouchDennis J., eds., Drugs in the Workplace: Research and Evaluation Data, Volume II. NIDA Research Monograph No. 100. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1991.
15.
HoffmannJohn P. & LarisonCindy L., “Drug use, workplace accidents, and worker turnover,”Journal of Drug Issues, in press.
16.
HorganJohn, “Test negative: A look at the ‘evidence’ justifying illicit-drug tests,”Scientific American March: 18, 22, 1990.
17.
HosmerDavid W. & LemeshowStanley, Applied Logistic Regression. New York: Wiley, 1989.
18.
International Labour Organization, Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace. Geneva: International Labour Organization, 1994.
19.
KandelDenise B. & YamaguchiKazuo, “Job mobility and drug use: An event history analysis,”American Journal of Sociology92:836–878, 1987.
20.
KapurBhushan, “Drug testing methods and interpretation of results.” In: MacdonaldScott and RomanPaul M., eds., Research Advances in Alcohol and Drug Problems, Volume II: Drug Testing in the Workplace. New York: Plenum Press, 1994, pp. 103–120.
21.
KravitzDavid A. & BrockPetra, “Evaluations of drug-testing programs,”Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal10:65–86, 1997.
22.
LeRoyMichael H., “Discriminating characteristics of union members' attitudes toward drug testing in the workplace,”Journal of Labor Research12:453–466, 1991.
23.
LiaoTim Futing, Interpreting Probability Models: Logit, Probit, and Other Generalized Linear Models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994.
24.
MacdonaldScott, “The role of drugs in workplace injuries: Is drug testing appropriate?”Journal of Drug Issues25:703–722, 1995.
25.
MacdonaldScott, “Workplace alcohol and other drug testing: A review of the scientific evidence,”Drug and Alcohol Review16:251–259, 1997.
26.
MacdonaldScott & WellsSamantha, “The impact and effectiveness of drug testing programs in the workplace.” In: MacdonaldScott and RomanPaul M., eds., Research Advances in Alcohol and Drug Problems, Volume II: Drug Testing in the Workplace. New York: Plenum Press, 1994, pp. 121–142.
27.
MarshmanJoan A., “Evaluation approaches for cost-effectiveness and effectiveness of drug testing programs.” In: MacdonaldScott and RomanPaul M., eds., Research Advances in Alcohol and Drug Problems, Volume II: Drug Testing in the Workplace. New York: Plenum Press, 1994, pp. 143–164.
28.
MurphyKevin R.ThortonGeorge C. & PrueKristin, “Influence of job characteristics on the acceptability of employee drug testing,”Journal of Applied Psychology76:447–453, 1991.
NewcombMichael, “The prevalence of alcohol and other drug use on the job: Cause for concern or irrational hysteria?”Journal of Drug Issues24:403–416, 1994.
31.
NormandJacquesLempertRichard O. & O'BrienCharles P., eds., Under the Influence? Drugs and the American Work Force. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1994.
32.
NormandJacquesSalyardsStephen D. & MahoneyJohn J., “An evaluation of preemployment drug testing,”Journal of Applied Psychology75:629–639, 1990.
33.
RothsteinMark A., “Screening workers for drugs: A legal and ethical framework,”Employee Relations Law Journal11:422–437, 1985.
34.
SchottenfeldRichard S., “Drug and alcohol testing in the workplace: Objectives, pitfalls, and guidelines,”American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse15:413–427, 1989.
Stata Corporation, Stata Reference Manual. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation, 1996.
37.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Main Findings 1994. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1996.
38.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, An Analysis of Worker Drug Use and Workplace Policies and Programs. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1997.
39.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Main Findings 1996. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1998.
40.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1995.
41.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Standard Occupational Classification Manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, 1987.
42.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings, January 1993. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, 1994.
43.
ZwerlingCraigRyanJames & OravJohn Endel, “The efficacy of preemployment drug screening for marijuana and cocaine in predicting employment outcome,”Journal of the American Medical Association264:2639–2643, 1990.
