|
|
|
CRRUCS Report
2001
A Better Kind of High: How Religious Commitment Reduces Drug Use Among Poor Urban Teens
Table 1. Estimated Models of Neighborhood Disorder, Individual Religious Commitment (Religiosity), and Illicit Drug Use for Total Sample (n = 1,087)
|
|
Marijuana Use
|
|
Fixed Effect
|
Model 1
|
Model 2
|
Model 3
|
Model 4
|
Model 5
|
|
Intercept,g 0,0
|
1.77 (1.56)
|
2.72* (1.56)
|
2.27(1.49)
|
2.39 (1.49)
|
2.13 (1.49)
|
|
Neighbor. disorder, g0,1
|
.48* (.18)
|
.35*(.17)
|
.33* (.13)
|
.30* (.13)
|
.54* (.18)
|
|
Underclass,g 0,2
|
-.03 (.18)
|
-.04 (.17)
|
.08 (.12)
|
.08 (.12)
|
.08 (.12)
|
|
Intact family,g 0,3
|
-.53* (.14)
|
-.46* (.13)
|
-.33* (.10)
|
-.32* (.10)
|
-.32* (.10)
|
|
Num. of children,g0,4
|
-.03 (.04)
|
-.02 (.04)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
|
Male,g 0,5
|
.39* (.11)
|
.32* (.11)
|
.23* (.08)
|
.22* (.08)
|
.21* (.08)
|
|
White,g 0,6
|
.29* (.15)
|
.23 (.15)
|
-.19 (.11)
|
-.18 (.11)
|
-.18 (.11)
|
|
Cohort 12,g 0,7
|
-.22 (1.73)
|
-.35 (1.73)
|
-.36 (1.65)
|
-.30 (1.65)
|
-.35 (1.65)
|
|
Cohort 13,g 0,8
|
.37 (1.57)
|
.43 (1.56)
|
.41 (1.49)
|
.54 (1.49)
|
.51 (1.49)
|
|
Cohort 14,g 0,9
|
.26 (1.54)
|
.26 (1.53)
|
.48 (1.46)
|
.59 (1.46)
|
.56 (1.46)
|
|
Cohort 15,g 0,10
|
.59 (1.54)
|
.52 (1.54)
|
.48 (1.46)
|
.58 (1.46)
|
.55 (1.46)
|
|
Cohort 16,g 0,11
|
.39 (1.54)
|
.36 (1.54)
|
.07 (1.47)
|
.19 (1.46)
|
.16 (1.46)
|
|
Cohort 17,g 0,12
|
.41 (1.69)
|
.50 (1.68)
|
-.04 (1.60)
|
.14 (1.60)
|
.09 (1.60)
|
|
Age, g1,0
|
.06 (.80)
|
.11 (.80)
|
-.26 (.77)
|
-.32 (.77)
|
-.30 (.77)
|
|
Cohort 12,g 1,1
|
-.30 (1.00)
|
-.38 (1.00)
|
-.38 (.95)
|
-.35 (.95)
|
-.39 (.95)
|
|
Cohort 13,g 1,2
|
.17 (.89)
|
.24 (.89)
|
.19 (.85)
|
.28 (.85)
|
.26 (.85)
|
|
Cohort 14,g 1,3
|
.13 (.83)
|
.10 (.83)
|
.23 (.79)
|
.29 (.79)
|
.28 (.79)
|
|
Cohort 15,g 1,4
|
.11 (.81)
|
.09 (.81)
|
.25 (.77)
|
.31 (.77)
|
.30 (.77)
|
|
Cohort 16,g 1,5
|
.33 (.86)
|
.20 (.86)
|
.60 (.82)
|
.63 (.82)
|
.63 (.82)
|
|
Cohort 17,g 1,6
|
.21 (1.09)
|
.18 (1.09)
|
.77 (1.04)
|
.81 (1.04)
|
.82 (1.04)
|
|
Age2,g 2,0
|
-.03 (.10)
|
-.06 (.10)
|
-.03 (.10)
|
-.06 (.10)
|
-.06 (.10)
|
|
Cohort 12,g 2,1
|
-.06 (.14)
|
-.07 (.14)
|
-.08 (.14)
|
-.08 (.14)
|
-.08 (.14)
|
|
Cohort 13,g 2,2
|
.03 (.14)
|
.05 (.14)
|
.00 (.14)
|
.02 (.14)
|
.02 (.14)
|
|
Cohort 14,g 2,3
|
.08 (.15)
|
.08 (.15)
|
.04 (.14)
|
.05 (.14)
|
.05 (.14)
|
|
Cohort 15, 2,4
|
-.07 (.15)
|
-.05 (.15)
|
-.06 (.15)
|
-.04 (.15)
|
-.04 (.15)
|
|
Cohort 16,g 2,5
|
-.12 (.17)
|
-.06 (.17)
|
-.12 (.16)
|
-.09 (.16)
|
-.10 (.16)
|
|
Cohort 17,g 2,6
|
-.05 (.20)
|
-.04 (.20)
|
-.10 (.19)
|
-.08 (.19)
|
-.08 (.19)
|
|
Religiosity,g 3,0
|
|
-.07* (.01)
|
|
-.02* (.01)
|
.01 (.02)
|
|
Neighbor. disorder,g3,1
|
|
|
|
|
-.02* (.01)
|
|
Age x Religiosity, g 4,0
|
|
-.01* (.00)
|
|
-.00 (.00)
|
-.00 (.00)
|
|
Age2 x Religiosity,g 5,0
|
|
.00* (.00)
|
|
.00* (.00)
|
.00* (.00)
|
|
Family bonding,g 6,0
|
|
|
-.04* (.02)
|
-.03 (.02)
|
-.03 (.02)
|
|
School bonding,g 7,0
|
|
|
-.05* (.02)
|
-.05* (.02)
|
-.04* (.02)
|
|
Drug-using peers, 8,0
|
|
|
.68* (.04)
|
.66* (.04)
|
.66* (.04)
|
|
Pro-drug attitude, g9,0
|
|
|
.76* (.05)
|
.73* (.06)
|
.73* (.06)
|
|
Random Effect
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intercept,u0,i
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance component
|
2.90
|
2.60
|
1.28
|
1.27
|
1.27
|
|
df
|
1074
|
1074
|
1074
|
1074
|
1074
|
|
2
|
8111.19
|
7395.15
|
4455.35
|
4465.10
|
4448.04
|
|
p-value
|
.00
|
.00
|
.00
|
.00
|
.00
|
|
Level-1 effect, ri,t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance component
|
1.33
|
1.32
|
1.21
|
1.21
|
1.21
|
|
Note. Standard errors of coefficients are presented in parentheses.
|
|
* p < .05 (one-tailed test)
|
|
|
Hard Drug Use
|
|
Fixed Effect
|
Model 1
|
Model 2
|
Model 3
|
Model 4
|
Model 5
|
|
Intercept,g 0,0
|
1.02* (.34)
|
1.14* (.34)
|
1.09* (.34)
|
1.10* (.34)
|
1.05*(.34)
|
|
Neighbor. disorder, g0,1
|
.06* (.03)
|
.04 (.03)
|
.05* (.03)
|
.04* (.02)
|
.09*(.04)
|
|
Underclass,g 0,2
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
|
Intact family,g 0,3
|
-.08* (.02)
|
-.07* (.02)
|
-.05* (.02)
|
-.05* (.02)
|
-.05*(.02)
|
|
Num. of children,g0,4
|
-.00 (.01)
|
.00 (.01)
|
-.00 (.01)
|
-.00 (.00)
|
-.00 (.00)
|
|
Male,g 0,5
|
.04* (.02)
|
.03* (.02)
|
.01 (.02)
|
.01 (.02)
|
.01 (.02)
|
|
White,g 0,6
|
.08* (.02)
|
.08* (.02)
|
.03 (.02)
|
.04 (.02)
|
.04 (.02)
|
|
Cohort 12,g 0,7
|
-.06 (.38)
|
-.07 (.38)
|
-.07 (.37)
|
-.05 (.37)
|
-.06 (.37)
|
|
Cohort 13,g 0,8
|
-.04 (.34)
|
-.04 (.34)
|
-.04 (.34)
|
-.02 (.34)
|
-.02 (.34)
|
|
Cohort 14,g 0,9
|
.01 (.34)
|
.01 (.33)
|
.03 (.33)
|
.05 (.33)
|
.05 (.33)
|
|
Cohort 15,g 0,10
|
.05 (.34)
|
.04 (.33)
|
.04 (.33)
|
.06 (.33)
|
.05 (.33)
|
|
Cohort 16,g 0,11
|
-.00 (.34)
|
-.01 (.34)
|
-.03 (.33)
|
-.01 (.33)
|
-.01 (.33)
|
|
Cohort 17,g 0,12
|
-.06 (.37)
|
-.05 (.37)
|
-.09 (.36)
|
-.06 (.36)
|
-.07 (.36)
|
|
Age, g1,0
|
-.01 (.18)
|
.01 (.18)
|
-.04 (.17)
|
-.03 (.17)
|
-.03 (.17)
|
|
Cohort 12,g 1,1
|
-.02 (.22)
|
-.02 (.22)
|
-.02 (.22)
|
-.02 (.22)
|
-.02 (.22)
|
|
Cohort 13,g 1,2
|
-.04 (.19)
|
-.04 (.19)
|
-.04 (.19)
|
-.03 (.19)
|
-.03 (.19)
|
|
Cohort 14,g 1,3
|
-.01 (.18)
|
-.01 (.18)
|
-.00 (.18)
|
.01 (.18)
|
.01 (.18)
|
|
Cohort 15,g 1,4
|
.09 (.18)
|
.09 (.18)
|
.10 (.18)
|
.12 (.17)
|
.11 (.17)
|
|
Cohort 16,g 1,5
|
.12 (.19)
|
.09 (.19)
|
.14 (.18)
|
.14 (.18)
|
.14 (.18)
|
|
Cohort 17,g 1,6
|
.10 (.24)
|
.10 (.24)
|
.14 (.24)
|
.16 (.24)
|
.16 (.24)
|
|
Age2,g 2,0
|
-.01 (.02)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
-.01 (.02)
|
|
Cohort 12,g 2,1
|
-.00 (.03)
|
-.00 (.03)
|
-.00 (.03)
|
-.00 (.03)
|
-.00 (.03)
|
|
Cohort 13,g 2,2
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.01 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
|
Cohort 14,g 2,3
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.03 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
-.02 (.03)
|
|
Cohort 15, 2,4
|
-.01 (.03)
|
-.01 (.03)
|
-.01 (.03)
|
-.01 (.03)
|
-.01 (.03)
|
|
Cohort 16,g 2,5
|
-.02 (.04)
|
-.02 (.04)
|
-.02 (.04)
|
-.02 (.04)
|
-.02 (.04)
|
|
Cohort 17,g 2,6
|
-.01 (.04)
|
-.01 (.04)
|
-.01 (.04)
|
-.01 (.04)
|
-.01 (.04)
|
|
Religiosity,g 3,0
|
|
-.01* (.00)
|
|
-.00* (.00)
|
.00(.00)
|
|
Neighbor. disorder,g3,1
|
|
|
|
|
-.00*(.00)
|
|
Age x Religiosity, g 4,0
|
|
-.00* (.00)
|
|
-.00* (.00)
|
-.00*(.00)
|
|
Age2 x Religiosity,g 5,0
|
|
-.00 (.00)
|
|
-.00 (.00)
|
-.00(.00)
|
|
Family bonding,g 6,0
|
|
|
.00 (.00)
|
.00 (.00)
|
.00 (.00)
|
|
School bonding,g 7,0
|
|
|
-.02* (.00)
|
-.02* (.00)
|
-.02*(.00)
|
|
Drug-using peers, 8,0
|
|
|
.07* (.01)
|
.06* (.01)
|
.06*(.01)
|
|
Pro-drug attitude, g9,0
|
|
|
.08* (.01)
|
.08* (.01)
|
.08*(.01)
|
|
Random Effect
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intercept,u0,i
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance component
|
.07
|
.07
|
.05
|
.05
|
.05
|
|
df
|
1074
|
1074
|
1074
|
1074
|
1074
|
|
2
|
4684.21
|
4498.93
|
3730.72
|
3736.11
|
3720.94
|
|
p-value
|
.00
|
.00
|
.00
|
.00
|
.00
|
|
Level-1 effect, ri,t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance component
|
.06
|
.06
|
.06
|
.06
|
.06
|
|
Note. Standard errors of coefficients are presented in parentheses.
|
|
* p < .05 (one-tailed test)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Center for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society
SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
John J. DiIulio, Jr., Founding Director |
|
|
|
EMAIL THIS | PRINTER FRIENDLY
|
|
WHAT THE PRESS SAID:
|
|
Keeping the Faith The Wall Street Journal, August 2, 2000
Faith-based organizations: A promise still untested by Jane Eisner, The Philadelphia Inquirer, August 1, 2000
Uncle Shrub's Cabin Black Church Backers Sing Hosannahs by James Ridgeway, The Village Voice, August 1, 2000
To combat drug use among teens, religion is a proven, powerful tool by Byron R. Johnson The Philadelphia Inquirer, July 30, 2000
|
|
|
|
SUMMARY:
Dr. Byron Johnson’s important analysis demonstrates that religious commitment among inner city teens dramatically reduces their likelihood to take illegal drugs. In fact, he finds that religious low-income urban teenagers are much less likely to use drugs than non-religious youths living in middle class neighborhoods.
|
|
|
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
|
|
Foreword
|
|
Report
|
|
Why Neighborhood Conditions Affect Teen Drug Use
|
|
Why Individual Religious Commitment Matters
|
|
Study Design
|
|
Key Study Variables
|
|
Analytic Strategy
|
|
Summary of Findings
|
|
Conclusion
|
|
Appendix A: Study Details
|
|
Appendix B: Variable Operationalization
|
|
Appendix C: Analytic Model
|
|
Appendix D: Table 1
|
|
Appendix D: Tables 2 & 3
|
|
Appendix E: Figures 1-2
|
|
Endnotes
|
|
About CRRUCS
|
|
|
|
