Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Peers on School-Based Prevention Programs Targeting Adolescent Substance Use

  • Adolescent / Young Adult Addiction (T Chung, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Addiction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Peers play an important role in the initiation and progression of substance use during adolescence. Consideration of peer influences is therefore a necessary factor to be included in prevention programs that aim to delay onset or minimise substance use amongst young people. The aim of this review was to examine how peer influences have been addressed by modern school-based substance use prevention programs.

Recent Findings

School-based interventions have addressed the role of peers in a variety of ways. These include designing programs based on social influence models, which target peer influence, peer pressure, and social norms, as well as including peers in the delivery of the intervention. More recently, informal peer-led interventions have been developed that utilise naturally occurring processes of information sharing between young people.

Summary

Interventions that take a social influence approach, particularly those that are peer-led, appear to be an effective means of preventing adolescent substance use. Future research should continue to explore the benefits of informal peer-led programs, as well as developing secondary and tertiary programs that intervene to reduce risky use and promote help-seeking for existing substance-related problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance, •• Of major importance

  1. Oxford M, Oxford ML, Harachi TW, Catalano RF, Abbott RD. Preadolescent predictors of substance initiation: a test of both the direct and mediated effect of family social control factors on deviant peer associations and substance initiation. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2001;27(4):599–616.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Spear LP. The adolescent brain and age-related behavioral manifestations. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2000;24(4):417–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Van Ryzin MJ, Fosco GM, Dishion TJ. Family and peer predictors of substance use from early adolescence to early adulthood: an 11-year prospective analysis. Addict Behav. 2012;37(12):1314–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Dishion TJ, Owen LD. A longitudinal analysis of friendships and substance use: bidirectional influence from adolescence to adulthood. Dev Psychol. 2002;38(4):480.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. D’Amico EJ, McCarthy DM. Escalation and initiation of younger adolescents’ substance use: the impact of perceived peer use. J Adolesc Health. 2006;39(4):481–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bauman KE, Ennett ST. On the importance of peer influence for adolescent drug use: commonly neglected considerations. Addiction. 1996;91(2):185–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Velleman RD, Templeton LJ, Copello AG. The role of the family in preventing and intervening with substance use and misuse: a comprehensive review of family interventions, with a focus on young people. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2005;24(2):93–109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kumar R, O’malley PM, Johnston LD, Schulenberg JE, Bachman JG. Effects of school-level norms on student substance use. Prev Sci. 2002;3(2):105–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gottfredson DC. Schools and delinquency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Botvin GJ, Griffin KW. School-based programmes to prevent alcohol, tobacco and other drug use. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2007;19(6):607–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van der Kreeft P, Wiborg G, Galanti MR, Siliquini R, Bohrn K, Scatigna M, et al. ‘Unplugged’: a new European school programme against substance abuse. Drugs: Educ Prev Policy. 2009;16(2):167–81.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hansen WB. School-based substance abuse prevention: a review of the state of the art in curriculum, 1980–1990. Health Educ Res. 1992;7(3):403–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tobler NS, Stratton HH. Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: a meta-analysis of the research. J Prim Prev. 1997;18(1):71–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lubman DI, Hides L, Jorm AF. Beliefs of young people and their parents about the harmfulness of alcohol, cannabis and tobacco for mental disorders. Med J Aust. 2007;187(5):266.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hennessy EA, Tanner-Smith EE. Effectiveness of brief school-based interventions for adolescents: a meta-analysis of alcohol use prevention programs. Prev Sci. 2015;16(3):463–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. • Strøm HK, Adolfsen F, Fossum S, Kaiser S, Martinussen M. Effectiveness of school-based preventive interventions on adolescent alcohol use: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2014;9(1):48. Recent meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of school-based preventative interventions targeting alcohol use .

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. • Onrust SA, Otten R, Lammers J, Smit F. School-based programmes to reduce and prevent substance use in different age groups: what works for whom? Systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2016;44:45–59. Review of school-based prevention programs that considers the adolescents’ developmental stage as an important factor in determining the effectiveness of the intervention. This is the only review that has examined the role of developmental stage in program effectiveness (including different components of the program).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Agabio R, Trincas G, Floris F, Mura G, Sancassiani F, Angermeyer MC. A systematic review of school-based alcohol and other drug prevention programs. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. 2015;11(1):102–112.

  19. Foxcroft DR, Tsertsvadze A. Universal alcohol misuse prevention programmes for children and adolescents: Cochrane systematic reviews. Perspect Public Health. 2012;132(3):128–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. McAlister A, Perry C, Killen J, Slinkard LA, Maccoby N. Pilot study of smoking, alcohol and drug abuse prevention. Am J Public Health. 1980;70(7):719–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Evans RI. Smoking in children: developing a social psychological strategy of deterrence. Prev Med. 1976;5(1):122–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ellickson PL, Bell RM. Drug prevention in junior high: a multi-site longitudinal test: Science. 1990; 247: 1299-1305.

  23. Evans RI, Rozelle RM, Mittelmark MB, Hansen WB, Bane AL, Havis J. Deterring the onset of smoking in children: knowledge of immediate physiological effects and coping with peer pressure, media pressure, and parent modeling. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1978;8(2):126–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Botvin GJ. Preventing drug abuse in schools: social and competence enhancement approaches targeting individual-level etiologic factors. Addict Behav. 2000;25(6):887–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hansen WB, O’Malley PM. Drug use. In: DiClemente RJ, Hansen WB, Ponton LE, editors. Handbook of Adolescent Health Risk Behauior, New York: Plenum Press; 1996. p.161–192.

  26. Sherman SJ, Presson CC, Chassin L, Corty E, Olshavsky R. The false consensus effect in estimates of smoking prevalence: underlying mechanisms. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 1983;9(2):197–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wolfson S. Students’ estimates of the prevalence of drug use: evidence for a false consensus effect. Psychol Addict Behav. 2000;14(3):295.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mäkelä K. Drinking, the majority fallacy, cognitive dissonance and social pressure. Addiction. 1997;92(6):729–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Botvin GJ, Griffin KW. Life skills training: empirical findings and future directions. J Prim Prev. 2004;25(2):211–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Teesson M, Newton NC, Barrett EL. Australian school-based prevention programs for alcohol and other drugs: a systematic review. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2012;31(6):731–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. • Champion KE, Newton NC, Barrett EL, Teesson M. A systematic review of school-based alcohol and other drug prevention programs facilitated by computers or the internet. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2013;32(2):115–23. This is the first review to focus on computer-based programs that have been designed specifically for adolescents and delivered in school-based settings.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Newton NC, Andrews G, Teesson M, Vogl LE. Delivering prevention for alcohol and cannabis using the internet: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Prev Med. 2009;48(6):579–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Newton NC, Teesson M, Vogl LE, Andrews G. Internet-based prevention for alcohol and cannabis use: final results of the climate schools course. Addiction. 2010;105(4):749–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Vogl L, Teesson M, Andrews G, Bird K, Steadman B, Dillon P. A computerized harm minimization prevention program for alcohol misuse and related harms: randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2009;104(4):564–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cuijpers P. Effective ingredients of school-based drug prevention programs: a systematic review. Addict Behav. 2002;27(6):1009–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Faggiano F, Vigna-Taglianti FD, Versino E, Zambon A, Borraccino A, Lemma P. School-based prevention for illicit drugs’ use. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;2: CD003020.

  37. Gottfredson DC, Wilson DB. Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse prevention. Prev Sci. 2003;4(1):27–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Strange V. Peer education. In: MacDowall W, Bonnell C, Davies M, editors. Health promotion practice. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Parkin S, McKeganey N. The rise and rise of peer education approaches. Drugs: Educ Prev Policy. 2000;7:293–310.

    Google Scholar 

  40. •• MacArthur GJ, Harrison S, Caldwell DM, Hickman M, Campbell R. Peer-led interventions to prevent tobacco, alcohol and/or drug use among young people aged 11–21 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Addiction. 2015;111:391–407. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides the most up-to-date review of the effectiveness of peer-based substance use prevention programs. It is also the first systematic review to focus on the impact of the intervention on actual substance use behaviour.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bobrowski K, Pisarska A, Staszewski K, Borucka A. Effectiveness of alcohol prevention program for pre-adolescents. Psychiatr Pol. 2014;48(3):527–39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lotrean L, Dijk F, Mesters I, Ionut C, De Vries H. Evaluation of a peer-led smoking prevention programme for Romanian adolescents. Health Educ Res. 2010;25(5):803–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rosenblum A, Magura S, Fong C, Curry P, Norwood C, Casella D. Effects of peer mentoring on HIV-affected youths’ substance use risk and association with substance using friends. J Soc Serv Res. 2006;32(2):45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Valente TW, Ritt-Olson A, Stacy A, Unger JB, Okamoto J, Sussman S. Peer acceleration: effects of a social network tailored substance abuse prevention program among high-risk adolescents. Addiction. 2007;102(11):1804–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. •• Campbell R, Starkey F, Holliday J, Audrey S, Bloor M, Parry-Langdon N, et al. An informal school-based peer-led intervention for smoking prevention in adolescence (ASSIST): a cluster randomised trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9624):1595–602. While not a recent paper, this study is significant in that it used informal and naturally occuring channels of communication between students as a means of preventing smoking (rather than taking a didactic approach). Only a small number of studies have taken this approach.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Simon and Schuster; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Orme J, Starkey F. Peer drug education: the way forward? Health Educ. 1999;99(1):8–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Audrey S, Holliday J, Campbell R. It’s good to talk: adolescent perspectives of an informal, peer-led intervention to reduce smoking. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63(2):320–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Sherman SG, Sutcliffe C, Srirojn B, Latkin CA, Aramratanna A, Celentano DD. Evaluation of a peer network intervention trial among young methamphetamine users in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(1):69–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lubman BBJ, Blee F, Jorm AF, Allen NB, Mckay-Brown L, et al. A school-based health promotion program to increase help-seeking for substance use and mental health problems: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2016;17:393.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Jorm AF, Wright A, Morgan AJ. Beliefs about appropriate first aid for young people with mental disorders: findings from an Australian national survey of youth and parents. Early Interv Psychiatry. 2007;1(1):61–70. doi:10.1111/j.1751-7893.2007.00012.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Jorm AF, Wright A, Morgan AJ. Where to seek help for a mental disorder? National survey of the beliefs of Australian youth and their parents. Med J Aust. 2007;187(10):556.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Berridge BJ, McCann T, Cheetham A, Lubman DI. Adolescent perceptions of the approachability of help sources for substance use problems: a qualitative study. Early Interv Psychiatry. In press.

  54. Jorm AF, Korten AE, Jacomb PA, Christensen H, Rodgers B, Pollitt P. Mental health literacy: a survey of the public’s ability to recognise mental disorders and their beliefs about the effectiveness of treatment. Med J Aust. 1997;166(4):182–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kelly CM, Jorm AF, Wright A. Improving mental health literacy as a strategy to facilitate early intervention for mental disorders. Med J Aust. 2007;187(7 Suppl):S26–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Gulliver A, Griffiths KM, Christensen H. Perceived barriers and facilitators to mental health help-seeking in young people: a systematic review. BMC Psychiatry. 2010;10(2010):113. doi:10.1186/1471-244X-10-113.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Lubman DI, Cheetham A, Berridge BJ, Jorm A, Wilson C, Blee F et al. Australian adolescents’ beliefs and help-seeking intentions towards peers experiencing symptoms of depression and alcohol misuse. BMC Public Health. In press.

  58. Kitchener BA, Jorm AF. Mental health first aid training in a workplace setting: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2004;4:23. 1471-244X/4/23

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. •• Lubman D, Cheetham A, Berridge BJ, McKay-Brown L. MAKINGtheLINK: A school-based intervention to improve help-seeking for substance use problems. Early Interv Psychiatry. In press. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of the MAKINGtheLINK program in facilitating help-seeking intentions and confidence to seek help amongst young people. It is one of only a small number of studies that have not taken a didactic approach to peer involvement.

  60. Evans W, Andrade E, Goldmeer S, Smith M, Snider J, Girardo G. The living the example social media substance use prevention program: a pilot evaluation. JMIR Ment Health. 2017;4(2):e24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Turning Point, Eastern Health, 54-62 Gertrude St, Fitzroy, VIC, 3065, Australia

    Ali Cheetham & Dan I. Lubman

  2. Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Box Hill, VIC, Australia

    Ali Cheetham & Dan I. Lubman

Authors
  1. Ali Cheetham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan I. Lubman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan I. Lubman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Ali Cheetham declares that she has no conflicts of interest. Dr. Dan I. Lubman reports consultancy work and honoraria for talks Lundbeck; honoraria for talks from Astra Zeneca, Servier, and Janssen; consultancy work from Indivior; grants from NHMRC, ARC, beyondblue, Movember, VicHealth, and Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, outside the submitted work.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Adolescent / Young Adult Addiction

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheetham, A., Lubman, D.I. The Role of Peers on School-Based Prevention Programs Targeting Adolescent Substance Use. Curr Addict Rep 4, 379–385 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-017-0165-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-017-0165-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation