The Role of Communication Networks in Adolescent Substance Abuse Prevention

Background: Although prevention programs targeting substance abuse have been studied and developed for decades, little attention has been paid to conversations among participants about prevention programs (i.e., social talk). This study provides a conceptualization of social talk in relation to prevention programs and operationalizes it through adolescents’ social networks. In addition, it focuses on adolescents’ social talk about prevention programs and how adolescents’ social talk may influence program-effects.

Method: Participants were eighth-grade students receiving keeping it Real (kiR), a middle school substance-abuse prevention program in one rural middle school (N =185). The sample was 49% female with a mean age of 12.3. 86% self-identified their racial/ethnic background as White. For positive social talk, adolescents were asked to indicate which of their classmates had talked with them about kiR positively. For negative social talk, youth were asked to indicate which of their classmates had made fun of KiR. Youth indegree and outdegree centralities were calculated for each network type. Alcohol refusal self-efficacy and personal anti-substance norms were included to examine the relationship between these and network centralities. Quadratic Assignment Procedures [QAP] correlation and hierarchical linear regression were conducted to answer research questions.

Results: The findings showed that students engaged in both positive and negative social talk about kiR. In addition, students’ social networks (e.g., friendship) were associated with social talk: Students with higher friendship centrality were more likely to have higher social-talk indegree centrality, indicating that youth who most classmates considered friends were reported as speakers of positive social talk on kiR. Also, social talk was associated with important program outcomes. Youth who talked positively about kiR tended to report anti-substance personal norms. On the other hand, those who engaged in negative social talk appeared to have pro-substance personal norms.

Conclusion: These findings support the idea that program participants actively process prevention interventions through their social channels. Both intervention and evaluation designs should include social talk about prevention programs.