The effectiveness of a week long television campaign — Get High on Yourself — was assessed at three urban high schools, through measures of self-esteem, drug use, and drug attitudes administered ten days prior to the campaign and four weeks later. The results indicate no significant changes that could be attributed to the campaign. A significant relationship was obtained between level of self-esteem, drug use, and drug attitudes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LouriaD. B., A Critique of Some Current Approaches to the Problems of Drug Abuse, American Journal of Public Health, 65: 6, pp. 581–583, 1975.
2.
RandallD. and WongM. R., Drug Education to Date: A Review, Journal of Drug Education, 6: 1, pp. 1–21, 1976.
3.
R. H. Blum and Associates (eds.), Students and DrugsVolumes 1 and 2, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1969.
4.
National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, Drug Use in America: Problem in Perspective, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1973.
5.
ChurchM. A.TrussC. V., and MartinoE. R., Trends in Psychoactive Drug Use and in Attitudes Toward Marijuana at a Large Metropolitan University, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 21: 3, pp. 228–231, 1974.
6.
VictorH. R.GrossmanJ. C., and EisenmanR., Openness to Experience and Marijuana Use in High School Students, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41: 1, pp. 78–85, 1973.
7.
GoodstadtM. S., Drug Education — A Turn On or a Turn Off?, Journal of Drug Education, 10: 2, pp. 89–99, 1980.
8.
CornacchiaH. J.SmithD. E., and BentelD. J., Drugs in the Classroom, C. V. Mosby Company, St. Louis, 1978.
9.
FeshbachS. and SingerR. D., Television and Aggression, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1971.
10.
MurrayJ. P.ComstockG. A., and RubinsteinE. A. (eds.), Television and Social Behavior, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1972.
11.
SingerJ. L. and SingerD. G., Television, Imagination, and Aggression: A Study of Preschoolers, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1981.
12.
BreedW. and DeFoeJ. R., Mass Media, Alcohol and Drugs: A New Trend, Journal of Drug Education, 10: 2, pp. 135–143, 1980.
13.
PayneD. E., The Relationship Between Television Advertising and Drug Abuse Among Youth: Fancy and Fact, Journal of Drug Education, 6: 3, pp. 215–220, 1976.
14.
WongM. R. and BarbatsisG. S., Attitude and Information Change Effected by Drug Education via Broadcast Television and Group Viewing, Journal of Drug Education, 8: 2, pp. 161–171, 1978.
15.
WotringC. E.HeoldG.CarpenterC. T., and SchmelingD., Attacking the Drug Norm: Effects of the 1976–77 Florida Drug Abuse TV Campaign, Journal of Drug Education, 9: 3, pp. 255–261, 1979.
16.
EisenmanR. and TownsendT. D., Studies in Acquiescence: I. Social Desirability; II. Self-Esteem; III. Creativity; and IV. Prejudice, Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment, 34: 1, pp. 45–54, 1970.
17.
OsgoodC. E.SuciG. J., and TannenbaumP. H., The Measurement of Meaning, University of Illinois Press, Champaign, Illinois, 1967.
18.
NehemkisA.MacAriM. A., and LettieriD. J., Drug Abuse Instrument Handbook, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Washington, D. C., 1976.
19.
SimpsonM. L. and KoenigF. W., The Use of the Semantic Differential Technique in Drug Education Research: An Example and Some Suggestions, Journal of Drug Education, 5: 3, pp. 251–259, 1975.
