U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Substance Use and Abuse Among Urban Adolescents (From Substance Misuse in Adolescence, P 92-122, 1995, Thomas P Gullotta, Gerald R Adams, and Raymond Montemayor, eds. -- See NCJ-162486)

NCJ Number
162491
Author(s)
P S Cole; R P Weissberg
Date Published
1995
Length
31 pages
Annotation
This review of current research in the area of adolescent substance use and abuse in urban areas discusses prevalence information provided by national surveys, patterns of change within national survey samples, limitations of self-report national surveys, differences in urban compared to nonurban levels of use, the role of theory in identifying substance use in urban and nonurban areas, and ethnic and gender differences in substance use.
Abstract
Studies show that with the exception of cigarettes, the use of drugs and alcohol among adolescents in general has been dropping since the mid-1980's. Generally, differences in adolescent substance use based on population density alone are relatively slight. Research suggests, however, that inner-city neighborhoods and other areas where ethnic minorities live separately from the greater society may experience higher levels of drug use. Among various ethnic groups, Native American youth report the highest level of drug and alcohol use, followed closely by whites, then blacks and Asians, with the various groups of Hispanics falling somewhere in between. Minority youth are often more susceptible to the negative consequences of substance use, and adolescent boys are more likely to abuse illicit substances than are girls, with larger differences emerging with respect to heavy usage of certain substances such as alcohol. Conclusions about substance use and abuse rates, especially for subgroups such as those based on ethnicity or population density, must be considered within the context of the limitations of the studies, which may be unintentionally biased by differential dropout rates and absenteeism, the lack of data from alternative settings for youth, panel loss, and the problems of self-report in general. 71 references