Misperceptions of Peer Pill-Popping: The Prevalence, Correlates, and Effects of Inaccurate Assumptions About Peer Pharmaceutical Misuse

Abstract

Peer behaviors may significantly influence personal behavior yet individuals may not accurately estimate their peers’ actions. Overestimations of peer substance use may encourage initiation or exacerbate extant problems. The present study examines misperceptions of peer pharmaceutical misuse and explores the relationship between reported misuse and perceptions of misuse for four categories of prescription drugs. Data collected from 2,349 college students in the Southeastern United States were analyzed and results indicated that overall perceptions of misuse were significantly higher than actual misuse. These findings suggest that intervention efforts may benefit from addressing misperceptions of pharmaceutical misuse. Study limitations and implications are addressed.

Keywords :

• pharmaceutical misuse
• prescription drugs
• social norms
• social norms interventions
• social norms campaigns
• social marketing campaigns
• false consensus effect
• stimulants
• painkillers
• sedatives
• antidepressants

THE AUTHORS

Amber Sanders is a graduate student in the Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. She received her undergraduate degree from Georgia Southern University where she studied psychology and criminal justice. Her research interests include substance use and peer influences on deviant behavior. Her most recent works have examined misperceptions of peer novel drug use, drug-based moral panics, and pharmaceutical diversion resulting from “doctor shopping.”

John Stogner is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He holds a Ph.D. in criminology, law, and society from the University of Florida as well as degrees in public health, criminal justice, psychology, and zoology. His teaching and research focuses on criminological theory, novel drug use, biosocial criminology, and the interplay between health and deviance. He has authored over 20 peer-reviewed research articles appearing in journals such as Addictive Behaviors, Justice Quarterly, the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, the Journal of Criminal Justice, Deviant Behavior, and the Journal of Drug Issues.

Jonathan Seibert is currently a third year medical student enrolled in the Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine at Marshall University. He earned a bachelor's degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2010.

Bryan Lee Miller is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Florida. His research interests are in drug use and policy, criminological theory, and offender reentry and reintegration. He has evaluated prescription drug abuse and regulations, drug panics, and restrictions on ex-offenders reintegrating into the community. His recent research has focused on novel drug use, perceptions of use, and the relationship between deviant peers and novel drug use. Recent publications have appeared in scholarly journals such as the Drug and Alcohol Review, Addictive Behaviors, and Journal of Substance Use.

Notes

1 The authors of the MTF report attribute the small but significant deviation in the perception of the harmfulness of prescription stimulants to the changing of the question's wording and not an underlying change in the population's beliefs. As such, we describe these perceptions as stable along with those that remained statistically stable.

2 As the present study is an extension of McCabe's (2008) work, it should be pointed out that he utilized a simple random sample of students with a 68% response rate, whereas this study uses the random stratified cluster sampling process described in the text with a response rate of over 80%. We cannot be certain that our cluster sampling method did not lead to oversampling of some types of individuals, but it appears that our data are representative of the university at least in measurable demographics. We expect that in-class surveys like ours are less likely to be affected by response bias than out of class surveys like McCabe's since class absences are likely the only thing separating participants from non-participants.

3 This estimate represents the number of completed surveys divided by the total number of students enrolled in the courses at the end of the enrollment period adjusted for students enrolled in multiple selected courses. This 80.4% response rate is viewed as a conservative estimate since a more accurate denominator would be the number of students enrolled in the courses on the day of administration. However, we did not have access to lists of students removed from courses due to non-payment, on medical or military leave, that were expelled mid-semester, or withdrawing from the course or university. The majority of missing cases are due to absences from class. Students were instructed to simply return the blank survey if they were unwilling to participate. Less than 50 students chose this option.