A multi-level analysis of the impact of neighborhood structural and social factors on adolescent substance use

Abstract

Background This paper examined the effects of neighborhood structural (i.e., economic disadvantage, immigrant concentration, residential stability) and social (e.g., collective efficacy, social network interactions, intolerance of drug use, legal cynicism) factors on the likelihood of any adolescent tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use. Methods Analyses drew upon information from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN). Data were obtained from a survey of adult residents of 79 Chicago neighborhoods, two waves of interviews with 1,657 to 1,664 care-givers and youth aged 8 to 16 years, and information from the 1990 U.S. Census Bureau. Hierarchical Bernoulli regression models estimated the impact of neighborhood factors on substance use controlling for individual-level demographic characteristics and psycho-social risk factors. Results Few neighborhood factors had statistically significant direct effects on adolescent tobacco, alcohol or marijuana use, although youth living in neighborhoods with greater levels of immigrant concentration were less likely to report any drinking. Conclusion Additional theorizing and more empirical research are needed to better understand the ways in which contextual influences affect adolescent substance use and delinquency.

The neighbourhood social environment and alcohol use among urban and rural Scottish adolescents

“…Consequently, it is important to understand the risk and protective factors associated with alcohol use in order to develop targeted public health policies (Bryden et al 2013). Evidence suggests adolescent alcohol use varies across neighbourhoods (Fagan et al 2015; Jackson et al 2016). However, which specific neighbourhood characteristics underlie this variation is not fully understood (Fagan et al 2015).…”

“…Evidence suggests adolescent alcohol use varies across neighbourhoods (Fagan et al 2015; Jackson et al 2016). However, which specific neighbourhood characteristics underlie this variation is not fully understood (Fagan et al 2015). …”

“…Many features of the neighbourhood have been theorised to be associated with adolescent alcohol use (Fagan et al 2015). Studies examining neighbourhood socio-economic factors have found mixed results (Bryden et al 2013; Jackson et al 2014), thus implying that more research is required to examine neighbourhood social factors.…”

Neighborhood Moderation of Sensation Seeking Effects on Adolescent Substance Use Initiation

“…However, empirically, the decades of work on neighborhood effects have failed to consistently support social disorganization theory in the relation between neighborhood disadvantage and substance use (Karriker-Jaffe 2011). Studies suggesting positive associations between neighborhood disadvantage and substance use (Abdelrahman et al 1998; Crum et al 1996; Hoffmann 2002; Smart et al 1994; Briggs 1997; Leventhal and Dupéré 2011) must be balanced by investigations that either fail to find the hypothesized disadvantage-substance use link (Brenner et al 2011; Buu et al 2009; Allison et al 1999; Esbensen and Huizinga 1990) or conclude that adolescents in the most advantaged neighborhoods are at increased risk for substance use (Ennett et al 1997; Snedker et al 2009; Luthar and D’Avanzano 1999; Fagan et al 2015). Luthar has posited two primary mechanisms for increased risk for substance use among affluent communities: stress from pressure to achieve and isolation from adults, which reduces support and adult supervision (Luthar and Latendresse 2005).…”

Assessing the psychometric and ecometric properties of neighborhood scales using adolescent survey data from urban and rural Scotland

“…Ecometric approaches were used to derive neighborhood scores and to test the reliability of the neighborhood measure using linear three-level models [5, 20, 38–40]. The question response is the dependent variable, level one is a categorical variable of the question/item, level two is the individual, and level three is the neighborhood.…”