Is the receptivity of substance abuse prevention programming affected by students' perceptions of the instructor?

Health Education and Behavior

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 724-745

  Stephens, Peggy C ^a   Sloboda, Zili ^a   Grey, Scott ^b   Stephens, Richard ^a   Hammond, Augustine ^c   Hawthorne, Richard ^a   Teasdale, Brent ^a   Williams, Joseph ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AKRON   (United States)

^b CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c AUGUSTA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Instructor; Instructor effects; Instructor evaluation; Normative beliefs; Substance abuse prevention

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CANNABIS ADDICTION; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; CURRICULUM; DECISION MAKING; DRINKING BEHAVIOR; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MULTICENTER STUDY; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; POLICE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SMOKING; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT REFUSAL; TRUST; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ALCOHOL DRINKING; ATTITUDE; CHILD; COHORT STUDIES; COMMUNICATION; CULTURE; CURRICULUM; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MARIJUANA ABUSE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; OHIO; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; POLICE; SMOKING; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT REFUSAL; TRUST;

EID: 69549120533     PISSN: 10901981     EISSN: 15526127     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1090198107304388     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Cegala, D. J. (1981). Interaction involvement: A cognitive dimension of communicative competence. Communication Education, 30, 109-121.
2. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., & McArdle, J. (1980). Changing the behavior of alcoholics: Effects of persuasive communication. In I. Ajzen & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Effects of persuasive communication: Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior (pp. 217-242). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
4. Goldstein, A., & McGinnis, E. (1997). Skillstreaming the adolescent: New strategies and perspectives for teaching prosocial skills. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
5. Gottfredson, D. C., & Wilson, D. B. (2003). Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse prevention. Prevention Science, 4(1), 27-38.
6. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
7. Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (2001). The Monitoring the Future project (Funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Institute for Social Research.
8. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2004). Mplus users' guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
9. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
10. Petty, R. E., Fleming, M. A., & White, P. H. (1999). Stigmatized sources and persuasion: Prejudice as a determinant of argument scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 19-34.
11. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: Current states and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 41-72). New York: Guilford.
12. Petty, R. E., Wheeler, S. C., & Tormala, Z. L. (2003). Persuasion and attitude change. In T. Millon & M. J. Lerner (Vol. Eds.) & I. B. Weiner (Ed.), Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 353-382). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
13. Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R., Bichsel, J., & Hoffman, K. (2002). The influence of accessibility of source likeability on persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(2), 137-143.
14. Siegel, J. T., & Burgoon, J. K. (2002). Expectancy theory approaches to prevention: Violating adolescent expectations to increase the effectiveness of public service announcements. In. W. D. Crano & M. Burgoon (Eds.), Mass media and drug prevention: Classic and contemporary theories and research (pp. 163-186). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Wilson, E. J., & Sherrell, D. L. (1993). Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(2), 101-112.