How D.A.R.E. Works: An Examination of Program Effects on Mediating Variables

Abstract

The D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program has relied on a curriculum that addresses a variety of psychosocial processes thought to be related to substance use and potentially modifiable through programmatic intervention. This study examines 12 postulated mediators of substance use prevention programs to determine the degree to which D.A.R.E. has an effect on mediators and the degree to which those effects account for behavioral outcomes of the program. Results indicate that the primary effect of D.A.R.E. is a change in commitment to not use substances. This change significantly mediates behavioral effects. However, the magnitude of D.A.R.E.'s effect on the mediator is relatively small. Other mediators that offer strong potential paths for intervention effectiveness are not affected by the program. These results suggest that in order to achieve prevention effectiveness, the curriculum used in the D.A.R.E. program needs to be replaced with one that targets and meaningfully changes appropriate mediating variables.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. Monroe S : D.A.R.E. bedeviled. Time, October, 1994, p. 49.

2. Ennett S , Tobler N , Ringwalt C , Flewelling R : How effective is Drug Abuse Resistance Education? A meta-analysis of project DARE evaluations. Am J Public Health 84:1394-1401, 1994.

3. McNeal RB , Hansen WB : An examination of strategies for gaining convergent validity in natural experiments: D.A.R.E. as an illustrative case study. Eval Rev 19:141-158, 1995.

4. Hansen WB : School based substance abuse prevention: A review of the state-of-the-art in curriculum, 1980-1990. Health Educ Res 7:403-430, 1992.

5. Moskowitz JM : The primary prevention of alcohol problems: A critical review of the research literature. J Stud Alcohol 50:54-88, 1989.

6. Tobler NS : Meta-analysis of 143 adolescent drug prevention programs: Quantitative outcome results of program participants compared to a control or comparison group. J Drug Issues 16:537-567, 1986.

7. Hansen WB , Rose LA , Dryfoos JG : Causal Factors, Interventions and Policy Consideration in School-Based Substance Abuse Prevention. Report submitted to Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress, 1993.

8. Hansen WB , Johnson CA , Flay BR , Graham JW , Sobel J : Affective and social influences approaches to the prevention of multiple substance abuse among seventh grade students: Results from Project SMART. Prev Med 17:135-154, 1988.

9. Hansen WB , Uebersax JS , Rose LA : Comparison of Postulated Mediators of School-Based Substance Use Prevention in Adolescents: A Longitudinal Examination. Unpublished manuscript, Wake Forest University, Bowman Gray School of Medicine.

10.

10. MacKinnon DP , Dwyer JH : Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies. Eval Rev 17:144-158, 1993.

11.

11. Bryk A , Raudenbush S : Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1992.

12.

12. Goldstein H : Multilevel Models in Educational and Social Research. London, Oxford University Press, 1987.

13.

13. Murray D , Hannan P : Planning for the appropriate analysis in school-based drug use prevention studies. J Consult Clin Psychol 58:458-468, 1990.

14.

14. Alwin D : Assessing school effects: Some identities. Sociol Educ 49:294-303, 1976.

15.

15. Iversen G : Contextual Analysis (Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-081). Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1991.

16.

16. Bollen K : Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York, John Wiley, 1989.

17.

17. Sobel M : Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models, in Leinhard S (ed.): Sociological Methodology, 1982. Washington, DC, American Sociological Association, 1982, pp. 290-293.

18.

18. Hansen WB , Rose LA : Recreational use of inhalant drugs by adolescents: A challenge for family physicians. Family Med 27(6):383-387, 1995.

19.

19. Edwards RW : Drug use among 8th grade students is increasing. Int J Addict 28(4):1621-1623, 1993.

20.

20. Johnston LD , O'Malley PM , Bachman JG : National Survey Results on Drug Use From the Monitoring the Future Study, 1975-1993. Volume I: Secondary School Students. Rockville, MD, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1994. (DHHS Pub. No. [NIH] 94-0000.)

21.

21. Rohrbach LA , Graham JW , Hansen WB , Flay BR , Johnson CA : Evaluation of resistance skills training using multitrait-multimethod role play skill assessments. Health Educ Res 2:401-407, 1987.