The purpose of this paper is to suggest that the Semantic Differential Technique is an efficient and reliable instrument for measuring attitudes in drug education. Its sensitivity to gradations in attitudes is demonstrated in an actual research study and suggestions for its potential uses in drug education programs are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
OsgoodC.E.SuciG. E.TannenbaumR. H.The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. 1957.
2.
SniderJ. G.OsgoodC. E. (Eds.) Semantic Differential Technique: A Sourcebook. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. 1969.
3.
HeiseDavid R.“The Semantic Differential and Attitude Research.” Pages 235–253 in SummersG. F. (ed.), Attitude Measurement. Chicago: Rand McNally Co.1970.
4.
RichmanA.TriggH. L.“Assessment of Attitudes of Methadone Maintenance Patients with the Semantic Differential Technique.” Pages 479–481 in the Fifth National Conference on Methadone Treatment, New York: Napan. 1972.
5.
McShaneW.ChristensenJ.“The Use of the Semantic Differential in Determining Male and Female Concept Differences Among Methadone Maintenance Clients.” Pages 562–573 in the Fifth National Conference on Methadone Treatment, March 17–19, 1973. Volume I. New York: Napan. 1973.
6.
LincolnL.BerrymanM.LinnM. W.. “Drug Abuse: A Comparison of Attitudes.” Pages 465–471 in Comprehensive Psychiatry, V. 14, number 5. 1973.
7.
LoveHarold D.Youth and the Drug Problem: A Guide for Parents and Teachers. Springfield, Illinois: C. C. Thomas Company. 1971.
8.
BedworthA. E.D'EliaJ. A.Basics of Drug Education. New York: Baywood Publishing Company. 1973.
9.
CornacchiaH. J.BentelD. J.SmithD. E.Drugs in the Classroom: A Conceptual Model for School Programs. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Company. 1973.
10.
KrinerR. F.RoutenbergD. C.SeabrightC. L.Educational Approaches to the Prevention of Non-Therapeutic Uses of Drugs. Springfield, Virginia: National Technical Information Service. 1973.
11.
FagerbergS. W.VarnesP. R.AllenR. E.HolyoakO. J. (eds.) Contemporary Views in Drug Education, Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. 1974.
12.
LewisD. C.“Towards Relevant Drug Education.” Pages 63–66 in NellisM. (ed.), Resource Book for Drug Abuse Education. 1972.
13.
AbramsL. A.GarfieldE. F.SwisherJ. D. (eds.). Accountability in Drug Education: A Model for Evaluation. The Drug Abuse Council, Washington, D. C.1973.
14.
SniderJ. G.“Profiles of Some Stereotypes Held by Ninth-Grade Pupils.” Pages 493–502 in SniderJ. G.OsgoodC. E. (eds.), Semantic Differential Technique: A Sourcebook. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. 1969.
15.
HoranJohn J.“Basic Experimental Designs.” Pages 29–35 in AbramsL. A., Accountability in Drug Education: A Model for Evaluation. 1973.
16.
WarnerR. W.Jr.“Research: An Evolutionary Perspective.” Pages 37–46 in AbramsL. A., Accountability in Drug Education: A Model for Evaluation. 1973.
17.
RichardsL. G.“Evaluation in Drug Education: Methods and Results.” Pages 87–90 in NellisM. (ed.), Resource Book for Drug Abuse Education. Washington, D. C.: National Clearinghouse for Drug Abuse Information, U. S. Government Printing Office. 1972.
