Teachers' Delivery Skills and Substance Use Prevention Program Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Students' Need for Cognition and Impulse Decision Making
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2010
Teachers' Delivery Skills and Substance Use Prevention Program Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Students' Need for Cognition and Impulse Decision Making
The purpose of this study was to extend the literature in both substance use implementation and persuasive health communication by examining the extent to which students' need for cognition and impulsive decision-making moderated the relationship between teachers' classroom communication behavior and program outcomes in an evidence-based middle school substance use prevention curriculum. Participants included 48 teachers and their respective 7th grade students who participated in a randomized trial testing the effectiveness of personal coaching as a means to improve the quality with which teachers implemented the All Stars curriculum. Need for cognition and impulse decision-making were both associated with positive changes in lifestyle incongruence and commitments to not use substances for students whose teachers displayed greater interactive teaching. Further, need for cognition was associated with lower alcohol use rates while impulse decision making related to lower rates of marijuana use in classes with interactive teaching.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BosworthK.SailesJ. (1993). Content and teaching strategies in 10 selected drug abuse prevention curricula. Journal of School Health, 63(6), 247–253.
2.
BraetC.ClausL.VerbekenS.Van VlierbergheL. (2007). Impulsivity in over-weight children. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 16(8), 473–483.
3.
BukaS. L. (2002). Disparities in health status and substance use: Ethnicity and socio-economic factors. Public Health Reports, 117(4), S118–S125.
4.
BurackJ. A.FlanaganT.PeledT.SuttonH. M.ZygmuntowiczC.ManlyJ. T. (2006). Social perspective-taking skills in maltreated children and adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 42(2), 207–217.
5.
ButlerG.MontgomeryA. (2004). Impulsivity, risk taking and recreational ‘ecstasy’ (MDMA) use. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 76(4), 55–62.
6.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(4), 116–131.
7.
CaronF.GodinG.OtisJ.LambertL. D. (2004). Evaluation of a theoretically based AIDS/STD peer education program on postponing sexual intercourse and on condom use among adolescents attending high school. Health Education Research, 19(2), 185–197.
8.
CohenA. R.StotlandE.WolfeD. M. (1955). An experimental investigation of need for cognition. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291–294.
9.
DasS.EchambadiR.McCardleM.LuckettM. (2003). The effect of interpersonal trust, need for cognition, and social loneliness on shopping, information seeking and surfing on the Web. Marketing Letters, 14(3), 185–202.
10.
DaweS.LoxtonN. J. (2004). The role of impulsivity in the development of substance use and eating disorder. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 28, 343–351.
11.
RouxA. Diez (2002). A glossary for multilevel analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 56(8), 588–594.
12.
DonohewL.ZimmermanR. S.CuppP.NovakS.ColonS.AbellR. (2000). Sensation seeking, impulsive decision-making, and risky sex: Implications for risk-taking and design of interventions. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 1079–1091.
13.
DoughertyD. M.WathiasC. W.MarshD. M.PapageorgiouT. D.SwannA. C.MoellerF. G. (2004). Laboratory measured behavioral impulsivity relates to suicide attempt history. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 34(4), 374–385.
14.
Fearnow-KenneyM.HansenW. B.McNealR. B.Jr. (2002). Comparison of psychosocial influences on substance use in adolescents: Implications for prevention programming. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse, 11(4), 1–24.
15.
ForsterleeR.HoR. (1999). An examination of the short form of the Need for Cognition Scale applied in an Australian sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(3), 471–480.
16.
GilesS.Jackson-NewsomJ.PankratzM.HansenW.RingwaltC.DusenburyL. (2008). Measuring quality of delivery in a substance use prevention program. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 29(6), 489–501.
17.
GranöN.VirtanenM.VahteraJ.ElovainioM.KivimäkiM. (2004). Impulsivity as a predictor of smoking and alcohol consumption. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(8), 1693–1700.
18.
GülgözS. (2001). Need for cognition and cognitive performance from a cross-cultural perspective: Examples of academic success and solving anagrams. The Journal of Psychology, 135(4), 100–112.
19.
HansenW. (1992). School based substance abuse prevention: A review of the state-of-the-art in curriculum, 1980–1990. Health Education Research, 7, 403–430.
20.
HansenW. B.McNealR. B. (1999). Drug education practice: Results of an observational study. Health Education Research, 14(4), 85–97.
21.
HarachiT. W.AbbottR. D.CatalanoR. F.HaggertyK. P.FlemingC. B. (1999). Opening the black box: Using process evaluation measures to assess implementation and theory building. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(5), 711–731.
22.
HarringtonN. G.GilesS. M.HoyleR. H.FeeneyG. J.YungbluthS. C. (2001). Evaluation of the All Stars character education and problem prevention program: Effects on mediator and outcome variables for middle school students. Health Education & Behavior, 28(5), 533–546.
23.
HarringtonN. G.LaneD. R.DonohewL.ZimmermanR. S. (2006). An extension of the activation model of information exposure: The addition of a cognitive variable to a model of attention. Media Psychology, 8, 139–164.
24.
HaugtvedtC. P.PettyR. E. (1992). Personality and persuasion: Need for cognition moderates the persistence and resistance of attitude changes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 308–319.
25.
KassinS. M.ReddyM. E.TullochW. F. (1990). Juror interpretations of ambiguous evidence: The need for cognition, presentation order, and persuasion. Law and Human Behavior, 14(4), 43–55.
26.
KuvaasB.KaufmannG. (2004). Impact of mood, framing, and need for cognition on decision makers' recall and confidence. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17(4), 59–74.
27.
LaneD. R.HarringtonN. G.DonohewL.ZimmermanR. S. (2006). Dimensions and validation of a perceived message cognition value scale. Communication Research Reports, 23(3), 149–161.
28.
LuH. Y.PalmgreenP. C.ZimmermanR. S.LaneD. R.AlexanderL. J. (2006). Personality traits as predictors of intentions to seek online information about STDs and HIV/AIDS among junior and senior college students in Taiwan. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(5), 577–583.
29.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.
30.
McNealR. B.Jr.HansenW. B.HarringtonN. G.GilesS. M. (2004). How All Stars works: An examination of program effects on mediating variables. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 165–178.
31.
MedleyA.KennedyC.O'ReillyK.SweatM. (2009). Effectiveness of peer education interventions for HIV prevention in developing countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. AIDS Education & Prevention, 21(3), 181–206.
32.
PettyR. E.PriesterJ. R.BrinolP. (2002). Mass media attitude change: Implications of the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion. In BryantJ.ZillmanD. (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 155–197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33.
RaudenbushS.ByrckA. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
ReevesA. L.WatsonP. J.RamseyA.MorrisR. J. (1995). Private self-consciousness factors, need for cognition, and depression. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 431–443.
35.
RingwaltC. L.PankratzM. M.HansenW. B.DusenburyL.Jackson-NewsomJ.GilesS. M. (2009). The potential of coaching as a strategy to improve the effectiveness of school based substance use prevention curricula. Health Education & Behavior, 36(4), 696–710.
36.
SojkaJ. Z.GieseJ. L. (2001). The influence of personality traits on the processing of visual and verbal information. Marketing Letters, 12(4), 91–106.
37.
TaylorT.SerranoE.AndersonJ.KendallP. (2000). Knowledge, skills, and behavior improvements on peer educators and low-income Hispanic participants after a Stage of Change-based bilingual nutrition education program. Journal of Community Health, 25(3), 241–262.
38.
ToblerN. (1986). Meta-analysis of 143 adolescent drug prevention programs: Quantitative outcome results of program participants compared to a control or comparison group. Journal of Drug Issues, 16(4), 537–567.
39.
ToblerN. (1992). Drug prevention programs can work: Research findings. Journal of Addictive Diseases, 11(3), 1–28.
40.
ToblerN.StrattonH. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analysis o f the research. Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(4), 71–128.
41.
ToblerN. S. (2000). Lessons learned. Journal of Primary Prevention, 20(4), 261–274.
42.
ToblerN. S.LessardT.MarshallD.OchshornP.RoonaM. (1999). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs for marijuana use. School Psychology International, 20(4), 105–137.
43.
WegenerD. T.PettyR. E.SmithS. M. (1995). Positive mood can increase or decrease message scrutiny: The hedonic contingency view of mood and message processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 5–15.
44.
ZimmermanR. S.PalmgreenP. M.NoarS. M.LustriaM. L. A.LuH. Y.HorosewskiM. L. (2007). Effects of a televised two-city safer sex mass media campaign targeting high-sensation-seeking and impulsive-decision-making young adults. Health Education & Behavior, 34(5), 810–826.
45.
ZuckermanM. (1994). Impulsive, unsocialized, sensation seeking: The biological foundations of a basic dimension of personality. In BatesJ.WachsT. (Eds.), Temperament: Individual differences at the interface of biology and behavior (pp. 219–225). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
46.
ZuckermanM.KuhlmanD. M.JoiremanJ.TetaP.KraftM. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The big three, the big five and the alternative five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757–768.
