Differential social control theory was investigated with survey data from 860 adolescents using path analytic techniques. Peer non-use expectations, peer use, and the adolescent's own attitude each have a direct influence on drug use. Peer non-use expectations have the largest total effect on drug use and are directly influenced by parental, peer, and school attachments. Student's attitude has a direct effect on drug use, however, a majority of the association is spurious. Peers' drug use has the largest, direct influence on drug use. The likelihood of adolescents' associating with drug using friends is reduced by a close relationship with their parents and by knowing that their friends disapprove of drug use. The model explained 60 percent of the variance. Students do not use drugs if they are unwilling to jeopardize their relationship with their parents and non-using friends. They are also less likely to use drugs if they think their parents and friends disapprove of drug use and if their friends do not use drugs themselves.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HirschiT., Causes of Delinquency, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1969.
2.
BurgessR. L. and AkersR. L., A Differential Association-reinforcement Theory of Criminal Behavior, Social Problems, 14, pp. 128–147, 1966.
3.
AkersR. L., Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach, 2nd Edition, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California, 1977.
4.
SutherlandE. H., Principles of Criminology, 3rd Edition, J. B. Lippencott, Philadelphia, 1939.
5.
SkinnerB. F., Science and Human Behavior, MacMillan, New York, 1953.
6.
SkinnerB. F., Cumulative Record, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1959.
7.
WiatrowskiM. D.GriswoldD. B., and RobertsM. K., Social Control and Delinquency, American Sociological Review, 46, pp. 525–541, 1981.
8.
SchoenbergR. J., A Structural Model of Delinquency, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, 1975.
9.
ColemanJ. S., The Adolescent Society, Free Press, New York, 1961.
10.
CohenA. K., Delinquent Boys, Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois, 1955.
11.
KrohnM. D. and MasseyJ. L., Social Control and Delinquent Behavior: An Examination of the Elements of the Social Bond, Sociological Quarterly, 21, pp. 529–543, 1980,.
12.
HindelangM. J., Causes of Delinquency: A Partial Replication and Extension, Social Problems, 20, pp. 471–487, 1971.
13.
LarsonL. E., The Relative Influence of Parent-Adolescent Affect in Predicting the Salience Hierarchy among Youth, Pacific Sociological Review, 15, pp. 83–102, 1972.
14.
JensenG. F., Parents, Peers, and Delinquent Action: A Test of the Differential Association Perspective, American Journal of Sociology, 78, pp. 562–575, 1972.
15.
JohnsonR. E., Juvenile Delinquency and Its Origins: An Integrated Theoretical Approach, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1979.
16.
PotvinR. H. and LeeC. F., Multistage Path Models of Adolescent Alcohol and Drug Use, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 41, pp. 531–542, 1980.
17.
BurkettS. R. and JensenE. L., Conventional Ties, Peer Influences and the Fear of Apprehension: A Study of Marijuana Use, The Sociological Quarterly, 16, pp. 522–533, 1975.
18.
CongerR. D., Social Control and Social Learning Models of Delinquent Behavior: A Synthesis, Criminology, 14, pp. 17–40, 1976.
19.
LindenE. and HacklerJ. C., Affective Ties and Delinquency, Pacific Sociological Review, 16, pp. 27–46, 1973.
20.
AkersR. L.KrohnM. D.Lanza-KaduceL., and RadosevichM., Social Learning and Deviant Behavior: A Specific Test of a General Theory, American Sociological Review, 44, pp. 636–655, 1979.
21.
JaquithS. M., Adolescent Marijuana and Alcohol Use: An Empirical Test of Differential Association Theory, Criminology, 19, pp. 271–280, 1981.
22.
MatsuedaR. L., Testing Control Theory and Differential Association: A Causal Modeling Approach, American Sociological Review, 47, pp. 489–504, 1982.
23.
StricklandD. E., Social Learning and Deviant Behavior: A Specific Test of a General Theory: A Comment and Critique, American Sociological Review, 47, pp. 162–167, 1982.
24.
AndrewsK. H. and KandelD. B., Attitudes and Behavior: A Specification of the Contingent Consistency Hypothesis, American Sociological Review, 44, pp. 298–310, 1979.
25.
LiskaA. E., Perspectives on Deviance, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1981.
26.
KandelD. B., Inter- and Intra-generational Influences on Adolescent Marijuana Use, Journal of Social Issues, 30, pp. 107–135, 1974.
27.
RiedL. D.MartinsonO. B., and WeaverL. C., The Effect of Earlier or Later Transition into Middle School on Students' Psychosocial Adjustment and Drug Use, Journal of Drug Education, 16, pp. 221–232, 1986.
28.
RiedL. D.MartinsonO. B., and WeaverL. C., Factors Associated with the Drug Use of Fifth through Eighth Grade Students, Journal of Drug Education, 17, pp. 149–161, 1987.
29.
LabovitzS., The Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories, American Sociological Review, 35, pp. 515–524, 1970.
30.
BohrnstedtG. W. and CarterT. M., Robustness in Regression Analysis, in Sociological Methodology, 1971, CostnerW. L. (ed.), Jossey-Bass, Inc., San Francisco, 1971.
31.
LyonsM., Techniques for Using Ordinal Measures in Regression and Path Analysis, in Sociological Methodology, 1971, CostnerH. L. (ed.), Jossey-Bass, Inc., San Francisco, 1971.
32.
AlwinD. F. and HauserR. M., The Decomposition of Effects in Path Analysis, American Sociological Review, 40, pp. 37–47, 1975.
