Crano William D, Gilbert Cindy, Alvaro Eusebio M, Siegel Jason T
Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA 91711, USA.
Addict Behav. 2008 Jul;33(7):895-905. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.02.006. Epub 2008 Feb 21.
The theory of reasoned action (TRA) was used to estimate adolescents' vulnerability to inhalant abuse, operationalized by intentions to use or avoid inhalants. The model correctly differentiated 78% of all respondents (N=596). A second analysis highlighted variables that discriminated properly identified from misclassified youth. False positives, those defined as being at-risk, but who repudiated inhalants, were significantly less likely than their at-risk peers to have used inhalants; they used inhalants and marijuana less frequently; were monitored more closely by parents; and were less rebellious (all p<.05). False negatives, defined as not at-risk, but who had not unequivocally rejected inhalants, were significantly more likely than their similarly classed peers to have used inhalants and marijuana, and to have used both more frequently; also, they were less highly acculturated. This study reaffirmed the utility of the TRA and underscored factors that might improve classification accuracy. This approach may facilitate prevention efforts, and may be extrapolated to any context in which risk categorization is used as a basis for prevention or amelioration.
理性行动理论(TRA)被用于评估青少年吸入剂滥用的易感性,通过使用或避免吸入剂的意图来进行操作化。该模型正确区分了所有受访者中的78%(N = 596)。第二项分析突出了能区分正确识别的青少年和误分类青少年的变量。假阳性,即那些被定义为有风险但拒绝使用吸入剂的人,与有风险的同龄人相比,使用吸入剂的可能性显著更低;他们使用吸入剂和大麻的频率更低;受到父母的密切监督;且叛逆性更低(所有p <.05)。假阴性,即那些被定义为无风险但未明确拒绝吸入剂的人,与同样分类的同龄人相比,使用吸入剂和大麻的可能性显著更高,且使用频率更高;此外,他们的文化适应程度较低。这项研究重申了TRA的效用,并强调了可能提高分类准确性的因素。这种方法可能有助于预防工作,并且可以推广到任何将风险分类用作预防或改善基础的情境中。