Developmental Trajectories of Substance Use From Early to Late Adolescence: A Comparison of Rural and Urban Youth

Abstract

Objective-This study investigated differences in the development of heavy drinking and marijuana use among students in urban and rural areas and assessed whether any such differences can be accounted for by locality differences in racial/ethnic makeup, social disorganization/low social bonding, feelings of despondency and escapism, and the availability of drugs.Method-Drawn from 62 South Dakota middle schools involved in a drug prevention field trial, participating students were assigned to a locality category based on the location of their seventhgrade school. Schools in metropolitan areas were distinguished from schools in nonmetropolitan areas. Schools in nonmetropolitan areas were further distinguished into those in micropolitan (medium and large towns) and noncore (rural areas without towns and with small towns) areas. We used latent growth curve analysis to model the influence of locality on the development of heavy drinking and marijuana use from ages 13 to 19 and to determine whether differences in development across locality were attributable to location-based differences in race/ethnicity, social disorganization/bonding, feelings of despondency and escapism, and alcohol and marijuana availability.Results-Heavy drinking increased at a faster rate among youth living in micropolitan areas compared with youth living in metropolitan areas. Marijuana use increased at a faster rate among youth living in metropolitan and micropolitan areas compared with youth living in noncore areas. Differences in the rate of change in heavy drinking were attributable to differences in the racial/ ethnic composition of metropolitan and micropolitan areas. Differences in the rate of change in marijuana use were attributable to differences in residential instability and marijuana availability.Conclusions-This study underscores the diversity of drug use within rural communities, suggesting that living in a very rural area is protective against some forms of drug use but that living in a rural area that includes a medium or large town is not.Although adolescent substance use was once perceived as primarily an urban problem, growing evidence suggests a relative convergence in rates of substance use between rural and urban youth (Cronk and Sarvela, 1997;Donnermeyer and Scheer, 2001;Edwards, 1997). In fact, recent data suggest that use rates for certain substances, such as methamphetamines and inhalants, are higher among rural youth than among urban youth (Cronk and Sarvela, 1997;. The upward trend in rural adolescent drug use, paralleled by a decline in use rates among urban youth , has prompted questions about the availability of drugs, the effectiveness of prevention programs, and the erosion of social factors that may have previously suppressed rates of substance use

The Use of an Ecodevelopmental Approach to Examining Substance Use Among Rural and Urban Latino/a Youth: Peer, Parental, and School Influences

“…Research spanning the past 20 years has consistently suggested that substance use in rural communities is a serious problem (Atav & Spencer, 2002;Briddell, 2009;Edwards, 1992;Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2005;Shears, Edwards, & Stanley, 2006;Wright & Neeraja, 2005). Researchers have also found that heavy drinking increases at a faster rate among rural adolescents when compared to urban adolescents (Martino, Ellickson, & McCaffrey, 2008). Atav and Spencer (2002) found that rural students were at significantly higher risk for substance use and other disruptive behavior (e.g., carrying weapons) than suburban and urban adolescents.…”

Trajectories of injecting behavior in the Amsterdam Cohort Study among drug users

“…This methodology was applied in multiple research areas and distinct trajectories were described in relation to http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.08.020 0376-8716/© 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. alcohol use Schulenberg et al, 1996), smoking (Brook et al, 2008(Brook et al, , 2007Hu et al, 2008;Ingvar Rosendahl et al, 2008;Lessov-Schlaggar et al, 2008), drug use in general and joint use of multiple drugs Martino et al, 2008;Orlando et al, 2005;Wanner et al, 2006), and aggression, delinquency or social withdrawal (Broidy et al, 2003;Cjte et al, 2002;Huang et al, 2011;Lacourse et al, 2002Lacourse et al, , 2003Oh et al, 2008;Prendergast et al, 2010;Tremblay et al, 2005).…”

Motivational interviewing integrated with social network counseling for female adolescents: A randomized pilot study in urban primary care

“…Although most adolescents' substance use does not progress to abuse or dependence, approximately 11% of U.S. adolescents meet the criteria for a substance use disorder (Winters, Leittne, Wagnger, & O'Leary Tevyaw, 2007). Urban youth are particularly vulnerable to early use and future abuse of illicit drugs and alcohol (Martino, Ellickson, McCaffrey, 2008). Adolescents who live in metropolitan areas are more likely than those in nonmetropolitan areas to use marijuana and alcohol during the past year (Johnston et al, 2009).…”