Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A comparison of the behavioral and attitudinal effects resulting from a pharmacologically based drug… Ducklow, Patrick Joseph 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 D82_5.pdf [ 13.65MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0053763.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0053763-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0053763-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0053763-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0053763-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0053763-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0053763-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0053763-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0053763.ris

Full Text

A COMPARISON OF THE BEHAVIORAL AND ATTITUDINAL EFFECTS RESULTING FROM A PHARMACOLOGICALLY BASED DRUG EDUCATION PROGRAM AND A NON-PHARMACOLOGICALLY BASED HUMAN RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM by PATRICK JOSEPH DUCKLOW B.A., Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y , 1971 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d : THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1975 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t of the requirements fo r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of the Department of Counselling Psychol-ogy. It i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Counselling Psychology The University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date i ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OP THE BEHAVIORAL AND ATTITUDINAL OUTCOMES RESULTING PROM A PHARMACOLOGICALLY BASED DRUG EDUCATION PROGRAM AND A NON-PHARMACOLOGICALLY BASED HUMAN RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM The purpose of t h i s research was to determine e m p i r i c a l l y whether or not a pharmacologically based drug education program r e s u l t s i n a change i n the recipient's behavior and attitude with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. A further objective of t h i s research was to determine empirically whether or not a non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program res u l t s i n a change i n the recipient's behavior and attitude with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. A conceptual model for drug education u t i l i z -ing four components was also developed. The sample consisted of 284 grade eight boy-s^  and than one-half were experimental and more than one-haIf were c o n t r o l . Of the 117 students i n the experimental groups, f i f t y - f i v e students, i n two sexually segregated class groupings, were involved i n the pharmacologically based drug education program. Sixty-two students i n two sexually segregated class groupings were involved i n the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p g i r l s i n one Vancouver* i i program. The c o n t r o l group c o n s i s t i n g o f 167 students r e c e i v e d the normal guidance and study b l o c k programs which d i d not i n c l u d e any form o f drug e d u c a t i o n . A drug b e h a v i o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e and a drug a t t i t u d e semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l were developed f o r the p r e t e s t -p o s t e s t c o n t r o l group d e s i g n . An assumption c e n t r a l t o the use o f both instruments i s t h a t s c o r e s on the beh a v i o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e o r the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l e s which were c o n s i d e r e d t o be e v a l u a t i v e can be taken as i n d i c a n t s o f the respondent's a c t u a l b e h a v i o r and a t t i t u d e s w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o the concepts r e l a t i n g t o drugs. The p h a r m a c o l o g i c a l l y based drug e d u c a t i o n program c o n s i s t e d o f t h i r t e e n , one hour s e s s i o n s o f b a s i c p h armacological and l e g a l i n f o r m a t i o n t r a n s m i t t e d by v i d e o -tape pr o d u c t i o n s , paper and p e n c i l a c t i v i t i e s , l a r g e group d i s c u s s i o n s and pamphlets a p p l i c a b l e t o the b a s i c c o g n i t i v e d a t a . The n o n - p h a r m a c o l o g i c a l l y based human r e l a t i o n s h i p program c o n s i s t e d o f f i f t e e n , one hour s e s s i o n s o f s t r u c t u r e d e x p e r i e n c e s and c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g and was based on s e v e r a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l systems o f thought. T h i s program was prematurely terminated a t the end o f the f o u r t h s e s s i o n . In the a n a l y s i s o f data, the H o t e l l i n g r o u t i n e y i e l d e d the b a s i c data f o r the t h i r t y - e i g h t v a r i a b l e s o f the drug b e h a v i o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e and a student t s t a t i s t i c a t the .05 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e was employed i n determining i i i between-group equivalance and the n u l l hypotheses measured at postest. The Alberta General Factor Analysis Program yielded the basic data for the drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l and one-way analyses of variance were employed on emerging concept structures i n determining pretest between-group equivalence and the n u l l hypotheses measured at postest. Missing data from the instruments were not scored at pretest nor at postest and i t affected none of the computations. The pharmacologically based drug education program yielded n o n - s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences for the measured variables from the drug behavior questionnaire and a non-systematic mean difference e f f e c t as compared with the control group at postest. The non-pharmacologically based human rel a t i o n s h i p program yielded n o n - s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences f o r the measured variables from the drug behavior questionnaire and a systematic and negative (decrease) mean difference e f f e c t as compared with the control group at postest. There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the treatment r e c i p i e n t s ' drug-using and anti-establishment attitudes as measured by the postest drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l between the pharmacologically based drug education program, the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program and the control group. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 Pharmacologically Based Drug Education 2 Prog ram Non-Pharmacologically Based Human Rel-ationship Program 4 I I . REVIEW OF LITERATURE 7 Related Research 7 Descriptive Research 20 Toronto Drug Survey 20 London, Ontario Drug Survey 21 Halifax Drug Survey 22 Montreal Drug Survey 22 B r i t i s h Columbia Drug Survey 24 Ottawa Drug Survey 24 Vancouver Drug Survey 26 Research Hypotheses 28 I I I . RESEARCH DESIGN 29 Sample 29 Instruments 30 Administration of Programs 31 Pharmacologically Based Drug Education Program 32 Non-Pharmacologically Based Human Relationship Program 33 Administration of Instruments 35 S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures 37 IV. RESULTS 40 V. INTERPRETATIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICAT-IONS 62 V Hypothesis 1 62 Hypothesis 2 65 Hypothesis 3 66 Hypothesis 4 66 Rationale for Premature Termination of Treatment B, The Non-Pharmac-o l o g i c a l l y Based Human Relation-ship Program 69 Limitations of the Research 72 A Conceptual Model for Drug Education 75 BIBLIOGRAPHY 81 APPENDIX A: Pharmacologically Based Drug Education Program 89 APPENDIX B: Non-Pharmacologically Based Human Relationship Program 124 APPENDIX C: Drug Behavior Questionnaire 250 APPENDIX D: Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l 253 APPENDIX Et Tabulation of Variables from Drug Behavior Questionnaire 259 APPENDIX F: Tabulation of Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l 282 APPENDIX G: Instruction to Administrators of the Drug Behavior Questionnaire and the Drug Attitude Semantic Dif f e r e n t -i a l at Pretest and Postest 293 v i LIST OP TABLES TABLE PAGE I. Treatment Group A and Control group D i f f -erences Between Pretest Means on Selected Drug Variables 41 I I . Treatment Group B and Control group D i f f -erences Between Pretest Means on Selected Drug Variables 43 I I I . Treatment Group A and Treatment Group B Differences Between Pretest Means on Selected Drug Variables 45 IV. One-way Analysis of Variance from Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l Groups A, B and Control at Pretest for Concept Structure One (Drug-using Anti-establishment Cluster) 47 V. One-way Analysis of Variance from Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l f o r Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Pretest for Concept Structure Two (Non Drug-using, Establishment Cluster) 47 VI. Treatment Group A and Control group D i f f -erences Between Postest Means on Selected Drug Variables 49 VII. Treatment Group A Differences Between Pre-te s t and Postest Means on Selected Drug Variables 51 VIII. Treatment Group B and Control group D i f f -erences Between Postest Means on Selected Drug Variables 53 IX. Treatment Group B Differences Between Pre-te s t and Postest Means on Selected Drug Variables 55 X. Means, Standard Deviations and Numbers of Respondents From Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l for Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Pretest and Postest for Concept Structures One and Two 57 v i i TABLE PAGE XI. One-Way Analysis of Variance from Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l for Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Postest for Concept Structure One (Drug-using, Anti-establishment Cluster) 58 XII. One-Way Analysis of Variance from Drug A t t -itude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l f or Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Postest for Concept Structure Two (Non Drug-Using, Establishment Cluster) 60 v i i i LIST OP TABLES APPENDIX E TABLE PAGE I. Vancouver Drug Questionnaire Variable L i s t 259 I I . Sex D i s t r i b u t i o n (Variable 1) for Treatment Groups A,B and Control at Pretest and Postest 261 I I I . Age D i s t r i b u t i o n (Variable 2) for Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Pretest and Postest 262 IV. Drug Involvement Position Statements (Variable 3) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 263 V. Incidence of Alcohol (Variable 4) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 264 VI. Incidence of Amphetamines (Variable 5) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 265 VII. Incidence of Barbiturates (Variable 6) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 266 VIII. Incidence of Cocaine (Variable 7) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 267 IX. Incidence of Hallucinogens (Variable 8) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 268 X. Incidence of Inhalants (Variable 9) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 269 XI. Incidence of Marijuana or Hashish (Variable 10) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 270 XII. Incidence of Opiates (Variable 11) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 271 XIII. Incidence of Tobacco (Variable 12) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 272 ix TABLE PAGE XIV. Summary of Incidence of Drug Variables 4 to 12 f o r Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Pretest and Postest 273 XV. Presence of Drugs not Including Alcohol or Tobacco at So c i a l Gatherings i n Two Months Prior to Testing (Variable 14) at Pretest and Postest f o r Treatment Groups A, B and Control 274 XVI. A v a i l a b i l i t y of Drugs not Including Alcohol or Tobacco (Variable 15) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 275 XVII. Parental Awareness of Drug Use not Including Alcohol and Tobacco (Variable 16) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 276 XVIII. Rationale f o r Drug Use by Drug Users and Nort-Drug Users (Why They Believe Users Use Drugs) Not Including Alcohol and Tob-acco (Variable 17) at Pretest and Post-est for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 277 XIX. Rationale for Stopping Drug Use by Ex-Drug Users (Mark as Many as Apply) (Variable 20) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 278 XX. Drug Education Programs (Variable 21) at Pre-te s t and Postest f o r Treatment Groups A, B and Control 279 XXI. Evaluation of Drug Education Programs (Var-iable 22) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 280 XXII. Drug Information Desired (Variable 23) at Pretest and Postest for Treatment Groups A, B and Control 281 X LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE I. Concept Structure One (Drug-Using, A n t i -Establishment Cluster) Means From Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l for Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Pretest and Postest for Two Concept Structure of the Domain. 59 I I . Concept Structure Two (Non Drug-Using, Establishment Cluster ) Means from Drug Attitude Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l for Treatment Groups A, B and Control at Pretest and Postest for Two Concept Structure of the Domain. 61 xi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to express my appreciation to Dr. John Friesen for h i s unstinting help i n the devel-opment of the intervention programs and the coordin-ation of the research project; to Dr. John McNeill for h i s many hours i n creating the pharmacological intervention; to Dr. Stephen Foster for h i s pat-ient guidance i n the s t a t i s t i c a l and computer anal-yses; to Dr. Robert Tolsma for h i s c a r e f u l read-ings of the manuscripts; to Mr. Ian Franks for hi s communication expertise; to Mr. Mark Hoffman and Mr. E r i c Bojeson f o r t h e i r encouragementi«and ai d ; to the Vancouver School Board for t h e i r per-mission and support for the research intervention; to the s t a f f and students of the school involved; and f i n a l l y , to my wife Carole who believes i n me. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Survey research has indicated a marked increase i n youth involvement with p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs (Smart, 1969, 1970; Stennett and Peenstron, 1969; Whitehead, 1969; Laforest, 1969; Russell, 1970, 1971; Halpern and Mori, 1970). The response of society to the increased drug usage has been to teach "about drugs" as a preventative measure and t h i s has resulted i n a p r o l i f e r a t i o n of uneval-uated drug education programs. The value of these programs has been aptly questioned by Swisher (1971) i n h i s a r t i c l e , "Drug Education: Pushing or Preventing?" It i s the pur-pose of t h i s research to test e m p i r i c a l l y whether or not a pharmacologically based drug education program r e s u l t s i n a change of the recipient's behavior and attitude with r e f -erence to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. In addition, a fu r -ther purpose of t h i s research i s to test empirically whether or not a non-pharmacologically based human r e l a t i o n -ship program res u l t s i n a change of the rec i p i e n t ' s behav-i o r and attitude with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. There are many kinds of drug education programs, but a l l raise s i m i l a r questions; what i s the appropriate set-ting for drug education, what are the long- and short-term goals, what i s the target population for drug education, what should be taught, how should i t be taught, and who should do the teaching? Ordi n a r i l y , drug education i s ca r r i e d on i n high schools and occasionally i n elementary - 2 -schools. However, the mass media of t e l e v i s i o n and radio aimed at a home audience, as well as the formalized instruc-t i o n i n industry, make use of other types of s e t t i n g s . The long term goal for drug education i s , e x p l i c i t l y or i m p l i c i t l y , prevention of the abuse of p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. The short term goals often consist i n providing the basis for informed decision making or for increased understanding. The target population i s most often the high school adolescent but i s , on some occasions, the adult family or the pre-adolescent youth. The target populations may be drug abusers, p o t e n t i a l drug abusers who are users or occasional misusers, or pot e n t i a l drug users. Drug education content i s widely varied but usually consists of pharmacological and/or l e g a l information. On some occasions the basic content has nothing to do with drugs but includes problem solving, human re l a t i o n s h i p s k i l l s , value judgements and the l i k e . Richards (1970) summarizes some of the exi s t i n g drug education methods: scare t a c t i c s , l o g i c a l argument, peer persuasion, concept attainment, a t t i t u d i n a l confrontation and entertainment. The instru c t o r s are often pharmacologists, medical doctors, psychologists, lawyers, policemen/ regular high school tea-chers, or any number of para-professional instructors, i n -cluding ex-drug users and informed parents. A. Pharmacologically Based Drug Education Drug education has t r a d i t i o n a l l y consisted of the trans-f e r r a l of a large body of highly complex and reasonably accur ate pharmacological information, conveyed by a number of ed-- 3 -ucational models, with the objective of changing the re-cipient's knowledge, attitude or behavior i n a d i r e c t i o n previously determined by the educator (Richards, 1970). A commercial publishing house asked "How can you f i g h t drug abuse most e f f e c t i v e l y ? " and answered, "By giving students the facts (Guidance Associates, 1970, p.l) The LeDain Commission Interim Report (1970) stated: "The capa-c i t y of the society to l i v e wisely i n a world i n which chemicals and chemical change w i l l be increasingly s i g -n i f i c a n t w i l l depend on the understanding our c i t i z e n s have of both themselves and the e f f e c t s of an evergrowing l i s t of chemical compounds. In t h i s context, the necess-i t y for e f f e c t i v e drug education i s paramount." linger-i e ider stated, "we are just to present the kind of i n f o r -mation that i s available so that they (recipients) can figure out for themselves how they want to approach the problem of drugs (1968, p. 627)." The optimum anticipated outcome of t h i s kind of i n t e r -vention has been the elimination of abuse and misuse of po-t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. This may not be the case how-ever, and drug educators have often contented themselves with improved relationships between teacher and pupil, i n -creased knowledge on the part of the information rec i p i e n t , professions of s l i g h t l y altered attitudes against drugs, or enjoyment of the intervention methodology. Drug education of a pharmacological nature has not s i g n i f i c a n t l y altered the r e c i p i e n t ' s behavior and at t i t u d e with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. In fact, - 4 -Halleck (1970) concludes that drug educators are the perpe-trators*^ of "The Great Drug Education Hoax" and that pharm-acologically based drug education programs have had the oppo-site anticipated effect. In this regard, Stuart and Schuman (1972) reported that "the non-users of every type of drug were found to have lower drug information scores than did the users, the difference being s t a t i s t i c a l l y signif-icant (p. 139)." Russell (1971) concluded that "the drug programs that have been used seem to have l i t t l e effect on experimentation with drugs, more serious involvement with drugs, or with stopping use once i t started (p. 74)." Smart (1970) noted at 173 percent increase in marijuana involvement and a 235 percent increase in hallucinogenic in-volvement among youth "although considerable drug education was undertaken in the Toronto schools in the past two years (p. 47)." B. Non-Pharmacologically Based Human Relationship Program. A non-pharmacologically based human relationship pro-gram presupposes that youth involvement with potentially harmful drugs i s primarily a manifestation of an intra-personal and/or interpersonal problem and only secondarily a problem associated with the pharmacological qualities of drugs. Dohner (1972) observes that "overindulgence i s due to characteristics inherent in the individual and not due to some intr i n s i c function of . . . tobacco, alchol or drugs (p. 21)"" Those who advocate a non-pharmacolog-i c a l l y based prevention effort agree with Rado that drug involvement "begins with the recognition of the fact that not the toxic agent, but the impulse to use i t , makes an - 5 -addict (1933, p. 2)." E l l i o t t comments that "(pharmac-olo g i c a l ) facts are not enough . . . emphasis must be on the person understanding h i s needs, motivations and l i m i t -ations . . . i t must be emphasized that drug use i s only a symptom of i n t e r n a l turmoil (1970, p. 328)." The non-pharmacologically based human relat i o n s h i p program may deal with the underlying causes of drug abuse (Hare, 1973), or alte r n a t i v e s to drug use (Cohen, 1971), or a psychological framework to comprehend s e l f and r e l a t -edness. However, the non-pharmacologically based human rel a t i o n s h i p model has not been empirically tested as to the a t t i t u d i n a l and behavioral outcomes. Deitch and J a f f e (1970) warn that a human re l a t i o n s h i p program may be viewed by youth as playing an old game using new terminol-ogy, "The d e f i n i t i o n of winning remains the same: main-t a i n control, adult values, regardless of how questionable must p r e v a i l (p. 182)." It i s the fear that drug educa-t i o n recipients w i l l view the human re l a t i o n s h i p model i n t h i s way that resulted i n Fullmer's (1971) observation that "I do not cherish a naive hope that merely convening a group of persons w i l l create any change i n behavior (p. 178)." Nonetheless, " i f we want a crash (drug education) program . . . we must concern ourselves with s o c i a l i l l s , that of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n , alienation, overcompetitiveness, fee l i n g of f a i l u r e on the part of youth (HcDougal, 1971, p. 23)." It i s the purpose of t h i s research to answer some p r i -mary questions. What are the outcomes i n the intervention re c i p i e n t ' s attitudes and behavior with reference to potent-- 6 -i a l l y harmful drugs as a causal e f f e c t of the teaching of cognitive pharmacological data? What are the outcomes i n the intervention r e c i p i e n t ' s attitudes and behavior with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as a causal e f f e c t of a non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p pro-gram? The answer to these questions are important, not just i n the knowledge they can give, but i n the'potential change i n l i f e s t y l e of those students who par t i c i p a t e i n any one of the many drug education programs i n the school system. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE A, Related Research Many drug education programs have been i n i t i a t e d i n North America i n the past several years (Seabright, 1973; Richards, 1969). These programs have consisted of trans-f e r r i n g drug information, conveyed by a v a r i e t y of educ-a t i o n a l models, with the objective of changing an i n d i v i d -ual's knowledge, and/or attitude, and/or behavior with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. Evaluation of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between program objectives and these drug ed-ucation programs are sparse and inconclusive. A review of those programs evaluated consists of those studies ex-amining the r e l a t i o n s h i p between drug knowledge, attitudes and behavior and those studies examining the r e l a t i o n s h i p between program objectives and the program. The study by Swisher, Crawford, Goldstein and Yura (1971) e n t i t l e d "Drug Education: Pushing or Preventing?" examined the r e l a t i o n s h i p between an individual's knowledge about drugs and h i s attitudes towards the use of drugs, as well as the r e l a t i o n s h i p between h i s drug knowledge and h i s involvement with drugs. In a non-randomized sample of 993 high school and college students, a forty-four item a t t i t -ude, knowledge, and behavior questionnaire was completed. The results demonstrated that there was a "consistent neg-ativ e c o r r e l a t i o n ( p . 72)" between knowledge and attitude towards drugs. In other words, the more knowledge the respondents had about drugs, the more pro-drug use they - 8 -were i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s . It was also demonstrated that drug users were more knowledgable about drugs than were non-drug users. These re s u l t s led the researchers to speculate on three possible i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s : drug involve-ment has led to increased drug knowledge? drug involvement has led to attitudes sympathetic to the use of drugs; drug education that presents factu.al .al pharmacological i n -formation may desensitize an ind i v i d u a l ' s fear of using drugs and increase h i s c u r i o s i t y , consequently leading to greater experimentation and use (p. 74). The research c i t e d above raises a primary question i n drug education: what i s the outcome (knowledge, a t t i t -ude and behavior) of presenting fa c t u a l and accurate i n f o r -mation about drugs? Similar conclusions as to those spec-ulated above were found i n a study (Fejer and Smart, 1972) conducted among students i n Orangeville and Shelburne, Ontario. Close p o s i t i v e relationships were found among marijuana use, intent to use marijuana, attitudes towards l e g a l i z a t i o n of marijuana and knowledge about drugs. Both users and nonusers expressing intentions to use marijuana knew more about drugs, and had more permissible attitudes towards l e g a l i z a t i o n of marijuana than nonusers not intend-ing to use marijuana. This would seem to indicate that drug knowledge i s not a s u f f i c i e n t deterrant to drug involve-ment . Stuart (1974), i n evaluating a ten session fact o r i e n t -ed drug education program, concluded that "subjects receiving drug education s i g n i f i c a n t l y increased t h e i r knowledge about - 9 -drugs, t h e i r use of alcohol, marijuana and LSD, and t h e i r sale of the l a t t e r two drugs, while t h e i r worry about drugs decreased ( p . l ) . " The researcher:suggested that h i s findings supported the notion that drug education of an informational nature may have a negative e f f e c t and advocates precise measurement of intervention outcome. A study by Grant (1971) also investigated the r e l a t i o n -ship between knowledge about drugs and attitudes and behav-i o r with reference to drugs. His population consisted of forty-eight male high school seniors and h i s instrument was a twelve item questionnaire measuring drug knowledge, attitude and "suspect" behavior characterized as such on the basis of l i b e r a l attitudes towards marijuana and assoc-i a t i o n with known marijuana users. He found these suspect marijuana users had a s i m i l a r d i s t r i b u t i o n of drug knowledge to the group as a whole. From t h i s . Grant speculated, as did Fejer and Smart (1972), that drug knowledge i s not a s u f f i c i e n t deterrant to drug involvement. A few studies have looked at the r e l a t i o n s h i p between knowledge of drugs, attitudes and behavior with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs i n non-school populations. Hanlon, Wiener and Kurland (1960) found that a doctor's knowledge of phenothiazines did not a f f e c t the doctor's attitude towards that drug as manifest by how he prescribed the drug. Appelton and Chein (1967) concluded that a p s y c h i a t r i s t ' s knowledge about c e r t a i n medications did not influence the frequence with which he - 10 -prescribed them, but h i s attitudes toward them did. Spelman and Lay (1966), i n a comparative study of non-smokers, l i g h t smokers, and heavy smokers, found no d i f f -erence i n knowledge of causes, symptoms and treatment of lung cancer. The only difference found was that heavy smokers were less able to indicate the correct prognosis of lung cancer than non-smokers. Overstreet (1967) observed that drug addiction among physicians and nurses i s ten f o l d greater than the general population. One possible conclusion to such research would be that a knowledge of p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs i s not a s u f f i c i e n t deterrant i n i t s e l f to involvement with these drugs. The re s u l t s of Pejer and Smart's (1973) drug knowledge, attitude, and behavior questionnaire to 4,693 Metropolitan Toronto high school students agreed with much of the f i n d -ings c i t e d above. Knowledge about drugs was found to increase with grade l e v e l , and senior high school students tended to have more permissive attitudes towards drugs than those i n junior high school. Students with the high-est s c h o l a s t i c averages knew more about drugs than those with lower averages but also tended to be more non-per-missive i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s . However, the largest d i f f e r -ences i n knowledge and attitude were found between drug users and non-users. Users of drugs (with the exclusion of the inhalant drugs) tended to know more about drugs than non-users. Furthermore, for each of the twelve drugs investigated, users had more permissive attitudes - 11 -towards drugs than nonusers. These relationships were p a r t i c u l a r l y noticable f o r i l l i c i t drugs such as amphet-amines, opiates, and hallucinogens. The researchers speculated that providing accurate pharmacological i n f o r -mation may result i n permissive attitudes towards drug use, and an increase i n drug use among students. Research has suggested a re l a t i o n s h i p between know-ledge of p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs and attitudes with r e f -erence to drugs and drug use, and from t h i s , much specul-ation has emanated. However, to know that drug users have high drug knowledge and permissive attitude with r e f -erence to drugs does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that drug education programs intent on providing accurate pharmacological information necessitates higher drug use with substantiating a t t i t u d e s . In fact, Fejer and Smart (1973) found that those nonusers with high s c h o l a s t i c aver-ages also had high drug knowledge and a non-permissive a t t -itude towards drugs. In the Orangeville and Shelborne study (Fejer and Smart, 1972) students who had not used marijuana responded as to t h e i r anticipated involvement with marijuana and t h e i r responses were cross-tabulated with t h e i r knowledge scores and a t t i t u d e s . Those intend-ing to t r y marijuana had more favourable attitudes towards i t s l e g a l i z a t i o n and higher knowledge scores than those i n -tending not to t r y i t . This would suggest that permissive attitudes with reference to drugs, and an above average knowledge about drugs, preceeded drug involvement. How-ever, non-users intending to use marijuana were s t i l l less - 12 -i n favor of l e g a l i z a t i o n and had less knowledge about drugs than users. This would suggest that some changes do occur i n both attitude and a c q u i s i t i o n of knowledge a f t e r i n i t i a t i o n of use. Speculation i n t h i s type of research i s appropriate but needs the substantiation of evaluated drug education programs. For those drug education programs that have been ev-aluated according to the c r i t e r i o n variables of drug know-ledge, attitude and behavior, the re s u l t s are inconclusive. Swisher, Warner and Herr (1972) investigated the e f f e c t s of four approaches to drug abuse prevention and concluded that although a l l four s i g n i f i c a n t l y increased the student's knowledge about p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs, none of the treats ments had a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on student attitudes with reference to drugs or the extent of drug involvement. S i m i l a r i t i e s were reported i n a parent drug education program (Thomas, Frison, Lipson, 1971) which was designed to p o s i t i v e l y a l t e r drug knowledge, attitudes and behavior i n the children of the parents involved. Factual pharmacol-ogy was transferred from an authority to the parents of eighteen families assuming that they would communicate i n -formation and anti-drug attitudes to t h e i r c h i l d r e n . It was hypothesized that students would integrate t h i s i n f o r -mation and a l t e r t h e i r attitudes and behavior accordingly, thus res u l t i n g i n decreased drug usage. Although exper-imental parents had acquired s i g n i f i c a n t l y more pharmacol-o g i c a l knowledge that control parents, the attitudes of ex-perimental parents was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t than - 13 -those of control parents. Furthermore, there was no measured increase i n communication between experimental parents and children, and experimental children reported no difference i n drug knowledge, attitude with reference to drugs or involvement*with drugs. The researchers con-cluded "that no changes at a l l were found i n the childr e n (p. 459)" as a result of the treatment with the parents. The 1973 Weaver and Tennant study involved a c o s t l y and intensive commercially prepared program consisting of programmed texts, films and value c l a r i f i c a t i o n exercises. On the sixty-eight item questionnaire measuring drug know-ledge and drug use, the experimental group (n=452) demon-strated s i g n i f i c a n t l y superior drug knowledge and s i g n i f -i c a n t l y higher casual or experimental drug usage. In add i t i o n , there was a non-significant increase i n drug abuse (five or more times per week) between the experimental and control (n=380) group. Weaver and Tennant concluded "that despite an intensive and c o s t l y drug education program that u t i l i z e d advanced technological methods of communication, role playing and d i d a c t i c learning, i t could not be demon-strated that the program reduced drug use or prevented ex-perimentation with drugs (1973, p. 813)." Mason (1972) conducting a research project that measured the e f f e c t s of a d i d a c t i c , pharmacological model on the a t t -itudes of grades eight and twelve students towards the use of psychoactive drugs, concured with Weaver and Tennant (1973). Analysis of the pretest-postest data indicated that experimental students gained knowledge to a s i g n i f i e -- 14 -ant degree, while t h e i r c u r i o s i t y about the e f f e c t s of psychoactive drugs was increased and they exhibited an increased tendency to deal with psychological discomfort through the use of drugs. At the same time they reacted more favourably toward the l e g a l i z a t i o n of marijuana and a reduction of penalties for drug use, and less favourably towards present emphasis on a l e g a l approach to the use of drugs. Mason's primary conclusion was that drug education i s not an e f f e c t i v e means of suppressing the use of drugs. At f i r s t glance, the research by Amendolara (1973) seems to c o n f l i c t with the findings of Mason (1972) and Weaver and Tennant (1973). Using a pretest-postest design meas-ured by the t h i r t y - e i g h t item Chein questionnaire (Chein, Lee* Rosenfeld, 1965)* the author measured a s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n p o s i t i v e attitude change with reference to drugs between the experimental and control groups. How-ever, Amendolara comments that the Chein questionnaire com-bines attitude and knowledge and "that the E group gains were better than chance but that the gains were related more c l o s e l y to information items than to t h e i r attitudes (p. 71)." In other words, the measured attitude gain was i n part a gain i n knowledge. Amendolara does not give the breakdown of knowledge gain and attitude change, but from t h i s , inconclusive research advocates the adoption of a pharmacological education model for the school system. The previously c i t e d Swisher, Warner and Herr research of 1972 introduced other educational models i n addition to - 15 -the d i d a c t i c , pharmacological model. S p e c i f i c a l l y , the programs consisted of an ex-drug abusing role-model, a non-drug using role model, and a so-called placebo or Rogerian client-centered group, i n addition to the t r a d i t -i onal approach. Previous research with l i k e models y i e l d -ed inconsistent r e s u l t s (Swisher and Warner, 1971) and i n the 1972 study had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on any of the three c r i t e r i o n variables namely knowledge, attitude and behavior. The authors (Horan, Swisher, 1972) had a s i g n i f -icant e f f e c t i n changing drug attitudes i n college students v i a induced cognitive dissonance and the researchers con-cluded that t h i s method had future p o s s i b i l i t i e s . In 1973 Warner, Swisher and Horan employed a behavior modification program and hypothesized that i t s participants would exhibit h e a l t h i e r attitudes towards the use of drugs than students who were to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a cognitive dissonance group, a client-centered placebo group and a control group. The researchers concluded that although the behavior modification group "was f a r more e f f e c t i v e than the other counselling procedures i t was only d i r e c t i o n a l l y better than nothing at a l l (p. 52)." In other words, the placebo group resulted i n a negative attitude change, the cognitive dissonance group had a non-significant p o s i t i v e attitude change and the control group had greater pos i t i v e attitude change than the other methods, while there was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the control and the behavior modification groups. Tennant, Weaver and Lewis (1973) investigated drug programs i n one elementary and three secondary schools. - 16 -Results demonstrated that at the secondary school l e v e l the cognitive model could not be shown to decrease i l l e -g a l 1 . drug use among the students. Following two of the three programs "available evidence indicates that some students experimented with i l l e g a l drugs (p. 246)." One program tabulated that 33 percent of the students believed the program had encouraged the i l l e g a l use of drugs. However, i n a group of seventy f i f t h and s i x t h grade students, a cognitive, lecture-discussion program led by a s p e c i a l l y trained teacher and physician evoked a posi t i v e change i n attitude i n students expressing i n -tent to smoke cigarettes and use i l l i c i t drugs. The re-searchers observe that the s p e c i a l l y trained ins t r u c t o r s and the age of the students may be the factors that allow for some cautious encouragement. A multi-media drug education program (Kline, 1972) used audio-visual communication techniques to present pharmacological information to 650 junior high school students. The emphasis of the program was on preventing experimentation, with l i t t l e attention given to discourag-ing drug use among those who had already begun experiment-ation or regular use. Kline reports that 25 percent of the 107 students who had indicated p r i o r drug use stopped as a resu l t of treatment. As well, of those who claimed to have a pre-program desire to experiment with drugs (n=82), 49 percent reported that they decided not to t r y drugs because of the program. The res u l t s are i n t e r e s t -- 17 -ing and encouraging but possibly i n f l a t e d . A pretest measure providing baseline data was not taken. A three week posttest asking the following questions provided the information: 1. If you did use drugs before the program, did the information you got i n the program make you dec-ide to quit using drugs? and 2. I f you did not use drugs before the program, but were thinking of t r y i n g one or more drugs, did the program make you decide not to t r y any drugs? (p.236). There i s a possible reactive e f f e c t i n these questions and resu l t s must be considered as dubious. In an evaluation of a college course on psychoactive drugs (Korn and Goldstein, 1973) i t was demonstrated that the course s u c c e s s f u l l y taught cognitive information with a high r e c a l l . Although a marginal and nonsignificant decrease i n intent to use drugs was observed, a nonsignif-icant increase i n drug involvement was also reported. It was noted that some students increased t h e i r concern for drug-using friends for a l l drugs except marijuana which led the researchers to conclude that a pharmacological program could p o s i t i v e l y a f f e c t students' a t t i t u d e s . However, Korn and Goldstein did not conclusively demonstrate that drug attitudes or drug behavior could be changed by drug knowledge. Dearden and Jekel (1971) u t i l i z e d non-directive tech-niques and s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g i n a p i l o t program for - 18 -drug education that yielded some posit i v e outcomes. The program's overt objective was to enable students to devel-op a drug abuse questionnaire and administer i t to the stu-dent body of the school. The covert goal was the develop-ment of a method of drug education based upon the group process that took place among the students as they devel-oped and administered the questionnaire. Each student group was comprised of one-half drug users and one-half non-drug users. In one student group (n=12) three of the s i x drug users had discontinued t h e i r use of drugs once they f e l t accepted and i d e n t i f i e d with the other group members. The other drug users claimed to have re-duced t h e i r consumption of drugs. The s i g n i f i c a n t factor i n t h i s type of drug education was the teacher's w i l l i n g -ness to be s e l f - d i s c l o s i n g and modeling that kind of trans-i parent behavior. The researchers advise that "the l i t e r -ature i s strewn with the bodies of dead programs that seemed i n i t i a l l y to hold promise, but which did not f u l -f i l l that promise when studied o b j e c t i v e l y over an extended period of time (p. 124)." In conclusion, i t seems apparent that drug education programs of any type have been l a r g e l y i n e f f e c t i v e i n t h e i r intended task of changing attitudes and behavior of post-elementary school individuals i n an anti-drug d i r -e c t i o n . Smoking programs designed to discourage ci g a r -ette smoking among secondary school students have not been shown to decrease smoking behavior (Reid and Stove, - 19 -1971; Monk, Tanback and Gordon, 1970). A study conducted at the Unive r s i t y of Michigan showed that 600 high school students s i g n i f i c a n t l y increased drug involvement following a drug education program (American Medical News, 1972). S u g g e s t i b i l i t y and experimentation with hashish have been demonstrated following drug education classes given to U.S. Army so l d i e r s (Tennant, Mohler and Silsby, 1973). However, some small success has been re a l i z e d (Tennant, Weaver and Lewis, 1973; Dearden and Jekel, 1971) s u f f i c -ient to encourage a d d i t i o n a l research. - 20 -B. Descriptive Research There have been several major descriptive surveys of drug use among Canadian secondary students to date. A b r i e f overview of eight of them i s presented here. 1. Torontot The Toronto survey (Smart et a l . , 1969) was the f i r s t of the Canadian c i t y surveys on the incidence of drug use among high school students and served as the model for the Montreal and H a l i f a x surveys that followed. The object-ives for both the 1968 and 1970 Toronto surveys were the same: 1. Determine the incidence of use of various drugs by students i n grades 6, 7, 9, 11 and 13. 2. Measure changes i n the rates of drug use and the determinants of drug use which have occurred between 1968 and 1970; 3. Obtain information regarding: demograph-i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of students and par-ents; student knowledge about and a t t i t -udes toward drug use; parental drug hab-i t s ; student a l i e n a t i o n ; 4. Identify the determinants of drug use by r e l a t i n g these patterns to personal, par-ental, and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (p. 2). The researchers employed two types of parental consent forms whereby the parents gave written permission to allow t h e i r children to complete the questionnaire, or where the parents were asked to n o t i f y the school i f they did not wish t h e i r c h i l d to p a r t i c i p a t e . In assessing the e f f e c t of t h i s procedure the Toronto researchers noted "that over h a l f of the students i n schools where a signed parental consent form was required did not p a r t i c i p a t e makes assump-- 21 -tions of representativeness untenable (p. 11)." The second Toronto survey (Smart et a l . , 1970) proposed to measure changes i n the rates of drug use from the f i r s t survey i n 1968 to the second survey i n 1970. The basic design i s i d e n t i c a l to the previous survey u t i l i z i n g the same parental consent forms. The o v e r a l l completion rate for 1970 was 72 percent compared with 66 percent i n 1968. It would appear that the use of parental consent forms may r e s t r i c t the percentage of student responses. In comparing the two Toronto studies, the researchers noted that "although considerable drug education was under-taken i n Toronto schools i n the past two years, i t has not reduced i l l i c i t drug use (p. 47)." In fact, marijuana use increased by 173 percent, the use of hallucinogens increased by 235 percent, and the number of heavy users or abusers of i l l i c i t drugs increased considerably accord-ing to the questionnaire respondents. The researchers advocate experimentation i n new methods of drug education as the factor i n stemming the ti d e of drug use. In part i c -ular© ;r they conclude that adolescent drug use i s fi r m l y rooted i n adult society and that e f f o r t s to prevent drug use among young persons, while ignoring the rest of society w i l l be i n e f f e c t i v e . 2. London. Ontario: The London survey (Stennett and Feenstron, 1969) was ca r r i e d out at approximately the same time as the f i r s t Toronto survey and had as i t s main objectives to determine the incidence of student drug use and to i d e n t i f y the factors associated with drug use among - 22 -London high school students. This survey did not use parental consent forms and, as a result, there was only a minor re f u s a l rate from students desiring not to comp-lete the questionnaire. The London survey, as the Ottawa survey which followed, employed teachers as administrators of the questionnaires. The l i m i t a t i o n i s that students may give exaggerated or dishonest responses or refuse to pa r t i c i p a t e , believing that the teachers may examine t h e i r questionnaires. 3. H a l i f a x : The Halifax survey (Whitehead, 1969) followed the f i r s t Toronto survey and was modeled a f t e r i t i n format. According to the researchers, "this sur-vey i s designed to determine i n a r e l i a b l e manner the rates of drug use and factors associated with drug use among adolescent students i n Ha l i f a x (p. 1)" In t h i s survey the students received the questionnaires over a period of three days as opposed to previous surveys that were completed at one s i t t i n g . This may allow for some contamination. The researchers administered the question-naire ? ^  promising anonymity and c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y to a l l students. No teachers were present i n the classroom while the students completed the questionnaires. 4. Montreal: The Montreal survey (Laforest, 1969) outlined the following objectives: 1. To measure the incidence of use of cer-t a i n drugs among high school and college students of the Island of Montrealt 2. To obtain knowledge on information and attitudes possessed by students related to drugs; 3. To relate the information, attitudes and - 23 -main demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; 4. To measure the usefulness of data ob-tained i n the f i e l d of prevention (p. 14). The Montreal survey was i d e n t i c a l i n format to the Toronto survey with the exception of parental consent. Because of lack of uniformity i n the Montreal school system, the researchers were unable to make a systematic sampling based on uniform c r i t e r i a . To solve the problem, they made an intentional sampling that respected the r a t i o of major r e l i g i o u s and l i n g u i s t i c groups on the Island of Montreal. In addition to t h i s apparent l i m i t a t i o n , the Montreal researchers noted that they were unable to reach the desired number of English-speaking grade 14 students. Of the 4,509 students who answered the Laforest questionnaire, about 48 percent reported using alcohol at least once i n the preceeding s i x month period and almost 46 percent used at least one cigarette per week. This indicated that alcohol and tobacco were the most used drugs at that time i n Montreal for every grade l e v e l . Following these two drugs, marijuana, t r a n q u i l i z e r s and stimulants were the most favored drugs i n terms of i n c i -dence of use. For the Montreal study, drug use generally increased by grade. For example, marijuana use at the grade fourteen l e v e l was 12.0 percent, 11.6 percent at grade twelve, 10.9 percent at grade ten, and 3.3 percent at grade eight. The deviations from t h i s pattern are i n the use of stimulants, barbituates, hallucinogens and inhalants. Montreal's grade ten students use more stimu-lants barbituates and inhalants than do other grade students; - 24 -grade twelve students use the most hallucinogens. 5. B r i t i s h Columbia: The B. C. survey (Russell, 1970) which was conducted i n s i x B. C. school d i s t r i c t s repre-senting 40, 000 secondary students, had as i t s main object-ive to e s t a b l i s h a v a l i d estimate of the incidence of drug use at one point i n time i n B. C. high schools. The Toronto, Montreal, and Halifax surveys used the more typ-i c a l class samples, London and Ottawa used census, but the B. C. study used a 10 percent sampling technique employing a complete r o l l c a l l l i s t from each school d i s t r i c t . The fact that students were randomly sampled from a class l i s t and i d e n t i f i e d by the teacher or other authority as being that student, allows f o r the p o s s i b i l i t y that the students would disbelieve claims of anonymity. Part of the 16 percent incompletion rate may be attributed to t h i s pro-cedure. According to the 1971 Vancouver study by the same researcher, the fact that data was not re a l i z e d from the C i t y of Vancouver made the B. C. survey not as complete as i t ; t would have been with Vancouver included. Russell concluded that a minority of students are involved i n drug use but that the incidence i s far from n e g l i g i b l e . He also observes that while for many t h e i r use of drugs may be b r i e f and experimental, there are others who have used drugs (such as LSD) many times or use some drugs (such as marijuana) regularly. 6. Ottawa: The Ottawa survey (Halpern and Mori, 1970) - 25 -had s i x main objectives: 1. To determine the extent to which drugs are used by Ottawa students i n grades 7-13; 2. To obtain information on the accessib-i l i t y of drugs and about c e r t a i n a t t i -tudes related to drugs; 3. To discover student opinion with respect to preferred location f o r type of and media for drug-related information; 4. To r e l a t e the information obtained to c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the students; 5. To t e s t hypothesis r e l a t i n g drug usage and attitudes with usage by other family members and with a l i e n a t i o n ; 6. To compare the findings with those obtain-ed i n other school systems (p. 6). The Ottawa drug survey employed a questionnaire of 105 questions divided into sections primarily concerned with tobacco, alcohol and i l l e g a l drugs. The t o t a l survey would have taken over one hour to complete, therefore, the researchers f e a r f u l of losing students' interest, random-l y .I/ administered sections of the survey rather than the ent i r e survey. The administration procedures although done by the regular teachers were c a r e f u l l y designed to maintain the anonymity of the students, to maximize the c r e d i b i l i t y of the anonymity precautions, and to carry out the systematic representative t h i r d s sampling plan. Halpern and Mori concluded that the use of alcohol, to-r bacco, amphetamines, barbituates and opiates i s s i m i l a r as i n the other Canadian surveys, but that marijuana and LSD use i s increasing and the use of t r a n q u i l i z e r s and i n h a l -ants i s decreasing. Students perceived alcohol as the - 26 -least harmful drug, marijuana and cigarettes somewhat more harmful and LSD and amphetamines as the most harmful. The consensus among the Ottawa students was that drug education should be started i n elementary school, empha^ s i z i n g the e f f e c t s of drugs and, to a lesser extent, the laws concerning drugs. 7. Vancouver: The Vancouver drug survey (Russell, 1971) intended to measure "the incidence of drug use i n Vancouver" and to "examine the factors associated with various pat-terns of drug use, and the consequences for the i n d i v i d u a l (p. 1)." In one p a r t i c u l a r section dealing with "Drugs i n the Schools" the researchers observed that a drug edu-cation program "that aims at some of the basic factors that may underlie serious involvement with drugs (p. 74)," may be more successful than a drug education program that i s based e x c l u s i v e l y on information about drugs. Implicit i n the statement i s the assumption that present informat-ion-giving drug education models may not be achieving the expected outcomes. Although the Vancouver study i s lim-i t e d i n empirically examining t h i s assumption, Russell observes that "there are factors involved i n drug use that go beyond the drugs themselves which must be d i s -cussed and understood i f we are to comprehend drug use (p. 72)." In summarising the extent of drug involvement by Canadian high school students, drug use as reported i n the descriptive research c i t e d i s on the increase although i t i s of a transient nature. Alcohol and tobacco were re-- 27 -ported to be the most extensively used drugs among t h i s population with between 40 percent and 60 percent using one and/or the other of these drugs. Marijuana, tran-q u i l i z e r s and hallucinogens were used less extensively and whereas t r a n q u i l i z e r s were used decreasingly, mari-juana and hallucinogens were receiving greater use. Inhalants were being abused less and the opiates were s t i l l used l e a s t . Drug users did not use one drug and ignore the others but were involved i n multi-drug use. Some drug users used drugs only on occasion ("users"), others used drugs extensively ("abusers"), while others occasionally abused drugs ("misusers"). Generally, drug education seems to have been i n e f f e c t i v e i n stopping people from using drugs and stopping users from using more drugs. Survey research provides descriptive information. However, as Russell i n the introduction to the Vancouver study notes, " i t i s one matter to know how many students are using what drugs, i t i s quite another to . . . determine what would be a reasonable response to i t (1971, p. 1)." - 28 -C. Research Hyphotheses. It i s the purpose of this research to test empiric-a l l y whether or not a pharmacologically based drug edu-cation program and a non-pharmacologically based human re-lationship prog ram result in a change of the recipient's behavior and attitude with reference to potentially harm-f u l drugs. The specific hypotheses tested in this analysis were: 1. There w i l l be no significant difference in the recipients' involvement with potentially harmful drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a result of the pharm-acologically based drug education program. 2. There w i l l be no significant difference in the recipients' involvement with potentially harmful drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a result of the non-pharmacologically based human relationship program. 3. There w i l l be no significant difference in the recipients' attitude with reference to potentially harm-f u l drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a re-sult of the pharmacologically based drug education program. 4. There w i l l be no significant difference in the recipients' attitude with reference to potentially harm-ful drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a result of the non-pharmacologically based human relation-ship program. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN A. Sample The sample consisted of 284 grade eight boys and g i r l s i n one Vancouver high school of whom less than one-half were experimental and more than one-half were c o n t r o l . Of the 117 students i n the experimental groups, f i f t y -f i v e students, i n two sexually segregated groupings, were involved i n the pharmacologically based drug education program. Sixty-two students i n two sexually segregated class groupings, were involved i n the non-pharmacologic-a l l y based human re l a t i o n s h i p program. Instruction took place i n the regu l a r l y scheduled guidance and study blocks. The school had assigned students to the regularly scheduled cl a s s blocks according to a p p l i c a t i o n f o r admission from the feeder elementary schools but randomization could not be assumed. Two classes, one boys' class and one g i r l s ' c l a s s were randomly assigned to each experimental program. The control group, which consisted of 167 students, rec-eived the normal guidance and study block programs which did not include any form of drug education. - 30 -B. Instrument Two instruments were developed for t h i s research, the f i r s t to measure the drug behavior variable and the second to measure the drug attitude v a r i a b l e . Both instruments were completed at the same time by students at one s i t t i n g i n both pretest and postest* the drug behavior question-naire being completed f i r s t . The drug behavior questionnaire appears i n the appendix as Appendix C. It consisted of twenty-three questions and was two pages i n length. Questions 1-3 c l a s s i f i e d the respondents into sex, age and the extent of t h e i r involve-ment with drugs. Questions 4-13 measured drug incidence for two months preceeding the administration of the quest-ionnaire. Students responded to questions concerning alcohol, amphetamines, barbiturates* cocaine, hallucinogens, inhalants* marijuana or hashish, opiates, tobacco and oth-ers. Questions 18-19 measured the incidence of cigarettes and c i g a r s . Questions 14-15 measured the a v a i l a b i l i t y of drugs, not including alcohol or tobacco. Question 16 measured parental awareness of the c h i l d ' s drug involve-ment, not including alcohol or tobacco. Question 17 s o l -i c i t e d information as to the reasons people use drugs, not including alcohol or tobacco. Question 20 s o l i c i t e d re-sponses as to the reasons people stop using drugs. Quest-ions 21-23 evaluated drug education i n the school system. The drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l appears i n the appendix as Appendix O. It consisted of a semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l technique whereby the students rated twenty - 31 -concepts concerning drugs on a set of twelve bip o l a r ad-j e c t i v e scales. The development of t h i s instrument con-s i s t e d of i d e n t i f y i n g b i p o l a r adjective scares which were used as evaluative for the treatment and control groups. This was done by asking sixty-four grade eight school stu-dents to respond to a stimulus question r e l a t i n g to drugs. The descriptive terms appear i n Appendix F. Secondly, cl u s t e r s of concepts were i d e n t i f i e d for which withi n - c l u s t -er responses were s i m i l a r . The same school students prov-ided the concepts that appear i n Appendix F. The object-ive was to obtain f o r each respondent a p r o f i l e of a t t i t -ude scores on a set of concept c l u s t e r s . An assumption c e n t r a l to the use of both instruments i s that scores on the behavior questionnaire or the seman-t i c d i f f e r e n t i a l scales which were considered to be evalu-ative can be taken as indicants of the respondent's actual behavior and attitudes with reference to the concepts r e -l a t i n g to drugs. C. Administration of Programs Both programs began on Monday, February 4, 1974, and the pharmacologically based drug education program termin-ated on Friday, March 22, 1974. The non-pharmacologic-a l l y based human re l a t i o n s h i p program was prematurely term-inated on Thursday, February 21, 1974, having completed four of the proposed f i f t e e n one-hour sessions. Both pro-grams for a l l classes were instructed by Mr. Patrick Ducklow and Mr. Mark Hoffman, graduate students i n counsel1-- 32 -ing psychology. 1. Pharmacologically Based Drug Eduction Program  (Treatment A) The pharmacologically based drug education program (referred to as Treatment A) consisted of th i r t e e n one-hour sessions and was primarily a d i d a c t i c presentation of cognitive data. Dr. John McNeill, i n a ten to f i f t e e n minute d i d a c t i c video tape presentation for each session, provided the basic pharmacological information. The pro-gram i s included i n the appendix as Appendix A. The pro-gram included: 1. Introduction to Pharmacology: Part One. 2. Introduction to Pharmacology: Part Two. 3. A Perspective on the Drug Problem: Two Probation O f f i c e r s . 4. Opiate Drugs. 5. Central Nervous System Depressent Drugs. 6. Central Nervous System Stimulant Drugs. 7. Physical Aspects of Drugs on the Nervous System. 8. Cannabis Drugs. 9. Hallucinogenic Drugs: Part One. 10. Hallucinogenic Drugs: Part Two. 11. A Perspective on Drugs and Canadian Law: An R .C .M. p. cNarcot i c s" • 0 f f ice r & 12. Solvent Drugs. 13. Tobacco Drugs. The program i s based on the supposition that accurate cognitive data transmitted by an authoritative person w i l l - 33 -e f f e c t acceptance, understanding and change i n the rec i p -ient with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs. One boys' class with twenty-six students and one g i r l s ' c l a s s with twenty-nine students were involved i n the pharmacologically based program twice per week for seven weeks. Tne program took the place of the students' regular guidance and study blocks. Each one-hour class consisted of an introductory "interest-hooking" a c t i v i t y , a ten to f i f t e e n minute video-tape, d i d a c t i c presentation of pharmacological information, i l l u s t r a t i v e paper and pe n c i l a c t i v i t i e s , large group discussions and a Narcotic Addiction Foundation pamphlet applicable to the basic cognitive data. Each student received the data as a learning packet f o r each session. 2. Non-pharmacologically Based Human Relationship Pro- gram (Treatment B) The non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program (referred to as Treatment B) consisted of f i f t e e n one-hour sessions and was based on several psychological systems of thought. The program i s included i n the app-endix as Appendix B. The program included: 1. Behavior Modification: Introduction and Contract Formation. 2. E x i s t e n t i a l : Past and Future Time Dimensions Pertaining to the Present. 3. Transactional Analysis (T.A.): Structural Anal-y s i s of Ego States. 4. T.A.: Transactional Analysis of Communications. 5. Gestalt: Power to Decide and Implement Change. - 34 -6. T.A.: Basic Psychological Positions and Rein-forcements . 7. T.A.: Stamp C o l l e c t i n g and Psychological Rackets. 8. T.A.: Script Analysis (Definition and Overview). 9. T.A.: Script Analysis (Cultural, Family and Peer). 10. G e s t a l t : Power to Decide and Implement Change. 11. T.A.: Game Analysis. 12. T.A.: Problem Solving (Introduction). 13. T.A.: Problem Solving. 14. T.A.: Time Structuring (Intimacy, Withdrawl, Ritual, A c t i v i t y , Pastime). 15. Conclusion. The structured experiences were based on three thera-peutic techniques: 1. Increasing insight as to i m p l i c i t assumptions of past, present and future decisions emphasizing the e x i s t -e n t i a l moment (Van Kaam, 1962; Dreyfus, 1966; Arbuckle, 1965); 2. Understanding, analyzing and implementing the behavioral dynamics of relatedness using the Transactional Analysis system of psychotherapy (Berne, 1961, 1968; James and Jongeward, 1971); 3. Applying learning by experimentation i n reward-ing behavior, the setting of contracts and the develop-ment of reinforcement contingencies to strengthen appropri: a t e b e h a v i o r s (Wenrich, 1971; Sulzer, 1972; Wolpe and Lazarus, 1966). - 35 -The non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program i s based on the assumption that drug behavior i s a manifestation of an intra-personal arid/or inter-person-a l d i f f i c u l t y and that e x i s t e n t i a l insight, i n t e l l e c t u a l understanding and behavioral implementation of change would a l t e r the underlying and root cause of drug involve-ment. The model did not contain pharmacological i n f o r -mation i n i t s format. It was intended that the boys 1 class with twenty-nine students and the g i r l s ' c lass with t h i r t y - t h r e e stu-dents would be involved i n the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program twice per week u n t i l the completion of the f i f t e e n hour treatment intervention. The program was to take the place of the students' regular guidance and study blocks. Each one hour session, with the exception of sessions f i v e and ten, was to include an "interest-hooking" a c t i v i t y , a ten to f i f t e e n minute i n s t r u c t i o n a l period, an insight experience and a "session evaluation" period. Homework assignments emphasized ap p l i c a t i o n of learned p r i n c i p l e s i n the home environment. The program was prematurely terminated at the end of the fourth session. The rationale for termination i s included i n the f i f t h chapter. D. Administration of Instruments The two instruments were administered to approximately 285 grade eight students i n one Vancouver high school on Friday, February 1, 1974, at 2 p.m. and Tuesday, A p r i l 9, 1974, at 2 p.m. The drug behavior questionnaire and the - 3 6 -drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l were administered by s p e c i a l l y trained u n i v e r s i t y students and were admin-istered i n the regular high school classes. Pr i o r notice for the regular high school teachers of the admin-i s t r a t i o n of the instruments was provided by the high school administration. The instrument administrators were not associated with the regular high school f a c u l t y nor with the experimental treatment i n s t r u c t o r s . Teachers were permitted to remain i n the classroom but the admin-i s t r a t i o n and c o l l e c t i o n of the instruments was e n t i r e l y the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the administrative team. The questionnaire and semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l required approximately t h i r t y to f o r t y - f i v e minutes to complete although s i x t y minutes was available for both the pretest and the postest administrations. The administration of the instruments was designed to encourage honest answers, protect the anonymity of the respondents and to permit the completion of the questionnaire i n the one school i n one hour. Anonymity and c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y were guaranteed by asking the students not to write t h e i r own name on the questionnaire. To i d e n t i f y and compare the pretest and the postest instruments the mother's maiden name and the f i r s t i n i t i a l was recorded on the questionnaire. An exam-like atmosphere was enforced i n each classroom. When a l l students had completed the questionnaires and semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l s , the administrative team co l l e c t e d the instruments without undue attention to the written res-- 37 -ponses o t h e r than t o ensure t h a t the mother's maiden name and f i r s t i n i t i a l was recorded, brought them t o a p r e -arranged classroom and immediately l e f t the s c h o o l . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n s appear i n the appendix as Appendix G. E. S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures, In the a n a l y s i s o f the data the p r e l i m i n a r y s t a t i s t i c a l t a s k was t o determine the e q u i v a l e n c e o r non-equivalence o f treatment group A, B and c o n t r o l a t the p r e t e s t measure-ment on the drug b e h a v i o r and a t t i t u d e v a r i a b l e s . T h i s was due t o the non-randomization o f students t o treatment groupings and the r e s u l t i n g i n a b i l i t y t o assume e q u i v a l -ence. The H o t e l l i n g T s t a t i s t i c (Hotel) was employed ( B j e r r i n g and Seagraves, 1974) f o r the t h i r t y - e i g h t v a r i a b l e s o f the drug b e h a v i o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e and t h i s y i e l d e d a cor-r e l a t i o n m a t r i x f o r a l l the v a r i a b l e s and provided l e f t and r i g h t l i m i t s and d i f f e r e n c e s between means. In determining p r e t e s t e q u i v a l e n c e f o r the drug b e h a v i o r v a r i a b l e s a Student t s t a t i s t i c a t the .05 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e was employed on the t h r e e drug b e h a v i o r v a r i a b l e s (from v a r i a b l e s f o u r t o twelve on the p r e t e s t drug b e h a v i o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e ) w i t h the g r e a t e s t d i f f e r e n c e between the means between treatment group A and c o n t r o l , B and c o n t r o l , and treatment groups A and B. I f the r e s u l t was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i t was assumed t h a t the measured v a r i a b l e s w i t h s m a l l e r d i f f e r e n c e s betweenOthe p r e t e s t means were a l s o not s t a t -i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (Kerlinger? 1973, pp. 285-288). - 38 -In determining between-group eguivalance on the drug attitude variables from the drug attitude semantic d i f f -e r e n t i a l the Alberta General Factor Analysis Program (AGFAP) was employed whereby a persons by concept matrix of evaluative scores from the semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l was determined (Osgood, et a l . , 1957). To t h i s matrix a maximum-li k e l i h o o d f a c t o r - a n a l y t i c technique using orthogonal rotation with varimax procedures was applied. This yielded a p r o f i l e of evaluative scores for each respondent on two emerg-ing concept structures (McKie and Foster, 1972). These emerg-ing concept structures represent 93.52 percent of the t o t a l variance. See pages 289 and 290 for the rotated p r i n c i p a l component loadings for matrix of correlations between concepts. Between-group equivalence was tested between treatment groups A,B and control on the two concept structures by one-way analyses of variance. The second step i n the procedure employed the Hotel and AGFAP routines, as had been done to test pretest between-group eguivalance, to test the n u l l hypotheses at the postest measurement (Cronbach and Furby, 1970) as opposed to te s t i n g over time between pretest and postest. For the drug behavior variable with the largest difference between postest means, a Student t s t a t i s t i c at the .05 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e was employed to t e s t the n u l l hypotheses of equal means between vectors. The same procedure was employed for each treatment between pretest and postest measures for addi t i o n a l comparison. For the drug attitude variables the analyses of variance for the two concept structures with a F t e s t at the .05 l e v e l of sig n i f i c a n c e was employed to test the n u l l hypotheses. - 39 -Missing data on the drug behavior questionnaire and the drug a t t i t u d e semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l were not scored at pretest nor at postest and i t affected none of the computations. Responses to p a r t i a l l y completed questionn-ai r e s and semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l s were scored while the missing data was not scored. Variables t h i r t e e n ("other drugs"), eighteen ("cigarette use") and nineteen ("cigar use") of the drug behavior questionnaire were not scored because of i n s u f f i c i e n t and misleading responses. Res-ponses for these variables were not tabulated. See Appendix E f o r a complete tabulation of a l l t h i r t y -eight variables from the drug behavior questionnaire and Appendix F for a l i s t i n g of attitude domain concepts, ev-aluative b i p o l a r adjective scales transformed matrices and c o r r e l a t i o n matrices f o r concept structures from AGFAP. CHAPTER IV RESULTS The i n i t i a l s t a t i s t i c a l task of the research was to determine the equivalence or non-equivalence of treatment groups A, B, and control at the pretest measurement on the drug behavior and drug attitude variables. On the drug behavior variable, a two-tailed Student t s t a t i s t i c at the .05 l e v e l of sig n i f i c a n c e was employed on the drug variable between treatment groups A and control, groups B and control and groups A and B that had the greatest difference between the two means. If the result was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i t was assumed that the measured variables with a smaller difference between the pretest means were also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . Table I outlines the sample sizes (N), the treatment group means (X) and standard deviations (s.d.), the differences between means and the rank difference scores for the selected drug behavior variables between treatment grbups A and control at pretest. TABLE I TREATMENT GROUP A AND CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRETEST MEANS ON SELECTED DRUG VARIABLES. VARIABLES TREATMENT GROUP A CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES RANK BETWEEN X S . d . N X S.d. N MEANS DIFFERENCE 12. Tobacco 2.325 1.639 40 2.039 1.579 130 0.286 1 4. Alcohol 2.190 1.215 42 2.410 1.367 134 -0.220 2 5. Amphetamines 1.000 0.000 36 1.091 0.500 121 -0.091 3 11. Opiates 1.000 0.000 35 1.060 0.421 117 -0.060 4 6. Barbiturates 1.000 0.000 37 1.050 0.384 121 -0.050 5 8. Hallucinogens 1.054 0.229 37 1.100 0.475 120 -0.046 6 9. Inhalants 1.000 0.000 37 1.042 0.376 120 -0.042 7 7. Cocaine 1.081 0.277 37 1.092 0.537 119 -0.011 8.5 10. Marijuana 1.385 0.935 39 1.374 0.970 123 0.011 8.5 and hashish - 42 -According to the t p r o b a b i l i t y s t a t i s t i c there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c e n t difference for the tobacco variable at pretest between treatment groups A and co n t r o l . The tobacco variable yielded a v t value of 0.991 associated with a p r o b a b i l i t y of 0.325. Therefore, equivalance can be assumed between treatment groups A and control on a l l variables measured since i t i s also assumed that a l l var-iables with smaller mean differences than the tobacco variable on the pretest means were also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . Table II gives the sample sizes (N), the treatment group means (X) and standard deviations (s.d.), the d i f f -erences between means and the rank difference scores for the selected drug behavior variables between treatment groups B and control at pretest. TABLE II TREATMENT GROUP B AND CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRETEST MEANS ON SELECTED DRUG VARIABLES VARIABLES TREATMENT GROUP X s.d. B N CONTROL GROUP X s.d. N DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEANS RANK DIFFERENCE 4. Alcohol 2.021 1.246 48 2.410 1.367 134 -0.390 1 10. Marijuana and hashish 1.463 1.206 46 1.374 0.970 123 0.089 2 8. Hallucinogens 1.171 0.588 41 1.100 0.475 120 0.071 3 12. Tobacco 1.978 1.530 45 2,039 1.579 130 -0.061 4.5 7. Cocaine 1.154 0.670 39 1.092 0.537 119 0.061 4.5 11. Opiates 1.000 0.000 40 1.060 0.421 117 -0.060 6 9. Inhalants 1.000 0.000 40 1.042 0.376 120 -0.042 7 5. Amphetamines 1.122 0.557 41 1.091 0.500 121 0.031 8 6. Barbiturates 1.026 0.160 39 1.050 0.384 121 -0.024 9 _ 44 -There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference for the alcohol variable at pretest between treatment groups B and c o n t r o l . The alcohol variable yielded a t value of 1.733 associated with a p r o b a b i l i t y of 0.081. Since i t i s assumed that a l l variables with smaller mean differences than the alcohol variable on the pretest means were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , equivalence between treatment groups B and control can be assumed. Table III gives the sample sizes (N), the treatment group means (X) and standard deviations (s.d.), the d i f f -erences between means and the rank difference scores for the selected drug behavior variables between treatment groups A and B. TABLE III TREATMENT GROUP A AND TREATMENT GROUP B DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRETEST MEANS ON SELECTED DRUG VARIABLES VARIABLES TREATMENT GROUP A TREATMENT GROUP B DIFFERENCES RANK BETWEEN X S.d. N X s.d. N MEANS DIFFERENCE 12 . Tobacco 2 .325 1. 639 40 4. Alcohol 2 .190 1. 215 42 5. Amphetamines 1 .000 0. 000 36 8. Hallucinogens 1 .054 0. 229 37 10. Marijuana and Hashish 1 .385 0. 935 39 7. Cocaine 1 .081 0. 277 37 6. Barbiturates 1 .000 0. 000 37 9. Inhalants 1 .000 0. 000 37 11 . Opiates 1 .000 0. 000 35 1.978 1.530 45 0.347 1 2.021 1.246 48 0.169 2 1.122 0.557 41 -0.122 3 1.171 0.588 41 -0.117 4 1.463 1.206 46 -0.078 5 1.154 0.670 39 -0.073 6 1.026 0.160 39 -0.026 7 1.000 0.000 40 0.000 8. 5 1.000 0.000 40 0.000 8. 5 - 46 -There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference for the tobacco variable at pretest between treatment groups A and B. The tobacco variable yielded a t value of 1.010 associated with a p r o b a b i l i t y of 0.317. Since i t i s assumed that a l l variables with smaller mean differences than the tobacco variable on the pretest means were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , equivalance between treatment groups A and B can be assumed. It can be concluded from the three Student t st a t -i s t i c s that there was pretest equivalence i n the non-systematically grouped treatments f o r the drug behavior variables as measured by the drug behavior questionnaire. Pretest equivalence on the drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l was determined by two one-way analyses of variance s t a t i s t i c s for the two r e s u l t i n g concept structures. A one-way ANOVA for treatment groups A, B and control for concept structure one (Table IV) yielded an P value of 0.27 which was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t when computed with df of 2 and 234 at the .05 l e v e l . - 47 -TABLE IV ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST FOR CONCEPT STRUCTURE ONE (DRUG-USING, ANTI ESTABLISHMENT CLUSTER) SOURCE SS df ms F p Total 19,269.86 236 Between groups 44.08 2 22.04 0.27 N.S. Within groups 19,225.78 234 82.16 A second one-way analysis of variance for concept structure two (Table V) yielded an F value of 0.05 which was not s i g -n i f i c a n t when computed with df of 2 and 234 at the .05 l e v e l . TABLE V ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST POR CONCEPT STRUCTURE TWO (NON DRUG-USING, ESTABLISHMENT CLUSTER). SOURCE SS df ms F p Total 23,690.76 236 Between groups 10.33 2 5.16 0.05 N.S. Within groups 23,680.43 234 101.20 - 48 -I t can be concluded from the two one-way a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e t h a t t h e r e was p r e t e s t e q u i v a l e n c e i n the non-s y s t e m a t i c a l l y grouped treatments f o r concept s t r u c t u r e s one and two i n a two concept s t r u c t u r e schema as measured by the drug a t t i t u d e semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l . In the second s t e p o f the a n a l y s i s the h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e r e w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the treatment r e c i p i e n t ' s involvement w i t h p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the p o s t e s t drug b e h a v i o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e as a r e s u l t o f the p h a r m a c o l o g i c a l l y based drug e d u c a t i o n program (treatment A) was determined. As a method o f t e s t i n g the hy p o t h e s i s , a two t a i l e d Student t j s t a t i s t i c a t the .05 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e was used on the v a r i a b l e t h a t had the g r e a t e s t d i f f e r e n c e between the two means between treatment group A and c o n t r o l group a t the p o s t e s t measurement. Ta b l e VI o u t l i n e s the sample s i z e (N), the treatment group means (X) and standard d e v i a t i o n s (s.d.), the d i f f e r e n c e s between means and the rank d i f f e r -ence s c o r e s f o r the s e l e c t e d drug b e h a v i o r v a r i a b l e s be-tween treatment groups A and c o n t r o l a t p o s t e s t . TABLE VI TREATMENT GROUP A AND CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN POSTEST MEANS ON SELECTED DRUG VARIABLES VARIABLES TREATMENT GROUP A CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES RANK BETWEEN DIFFERENCE X s.d. N X S.d. N MEANS SCORE 1. Cocaine 1.120 0.440 25 1.231 0.803 148 -0.111 1 9. Inhalants 1.231 0.815 26 1.222 0.594 149 0.109 2 11 . Opiates 1.000 0.000 24 1.070 0.484 144 -0.070 3 4. Alcohol 2.548 1.567 31 2.604 1.510 160 -0.056 4 5. Amphetamines 1.154 0.785 26 1.102 0.520 148 0.052 5 8. Ha1luc inogehs 1.115 0.588 26 1.161 0.648 150 -0.046 6 12 . Tobacco 2.233 1.696 30 2.190 1.629 154 0.043 7. 5 10 . Marijuana or hashish 1.414 0.825 29 1.457 1.094 152 -0.043 7. 5 6. Barbiturates 1.115 0.588 26 1.116 0.568 148 -0.001 9 - 50 -According to the t s t a t i s t i c there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g -n i f i c a n t difference for the cocaine variable at postest between treatment groups A and c o n t r o l . The cocaine variable yielded a t value of 0.999 associated with a pr o b a b i l i t y of 0.324. Since i t i s assumed that a l l var-iables with smaller mean differences than the cocaine var-iable on the postest measurement were also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , the n u l l hypothesis r e l a t i n g to the pharmacol-o g i c a l l y based drug education program (treatment A) i s supported. As can be seen i n Table VI the cocaine mean increased by 0.111 while the inhalant drugs mean decreased by . < ; approximately the same amount. Throughout comparison of the variables there i s no pattern of difference, s i x drug variables decreasing i n mean score and three drug variables increasing i n mean score. The treatment group A res u l t s point to a higher mean use with inhalants, amphetamines and tobacco than do the control group r e s u l t s . The control group re s u l t s point to a higher mean use of cocaine, opiates, alcohol, hallucinogens, marijuana or hashish and barbiturates than does treatment group A at postest. In other words, treatment group A did not have a systematic mean difference e f f e c t as compared with the control group at postest. Acceptance of the n u l l hypothesis i s further substan-t i a t e d by the s t a t i s t i c for the drug behavior variable with the largest difference between means for treatment group A between pretest and postest measures. Table VII gives the treatment group sample siz e (N), the treatment group - 51 -means (X) and standard deviations (s.d.), the differences between means and the rank difference scores for the select-ed drug behavior variables between treatment group A on the pretest and postest measures. H H > CQ to CO 2 m Ol H tc i B CQ Q CO Q w w w w b CO 04 § CD E-i CO . ^ " W 53 EH T3 EH CO CQ 3 06 rH CM ro in vO CO cn CD rH in CN rH as o m ro m rH cn VO CO CN o CO CN rH rH O o o o o o i O I o i O 1 O o 1 o o 1 o •-I VO VO O VO in as CN CN CN ro CN CN CN CN in in 00 VO 00 o in O vo iH 00 00 CT> 00 CN o in 00 in VO in 00 o rH o o o rH o o o o 00 rH m ro in O o ro in rH ro rH CN rH o m CN rH rH CN rH rH o . . • . • • • • CN rH rH rH CN rH rH rH rH CN i> VO O r» r> o\ m ro ro ro ro ro ro ro m o o o cn 0> r- in o rH o o o ro CN •> CO o CN o o o vO CN CN as o • • • • t • • • • rH o o o rH O o o o O o o o m <* rH in o o o o CN in 00 00 o rH o o o ro o o ro o CN rH rH rH CN rH rH rH rH TJ to c CQ CO c id © <D <u a +» id CO -rl (0 o c 4J R U 0 c Id ,£3 m rH (3 io 3 CJ •rl 3 0) cu 0 id -P -M o 0 c •r-i-H •P r3 rH 0) •H id •rH A id 0 <tt -5 XI rH id U CO •H 0 U rl 0 rH o id id CU rH ^ a id Ha 0 S A o «c H •55 CQ Ha o • • • t • • » CN • • o rH <* CT> in VO rH 00 •> rH rH - 52 -According to the t s t a t i s t i c there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference for the alcohol variable for t r e a t -ment group A between pretest and postest measures. The alcohol variable yielded a t value of 1.100 associated with a p r o b a b i l i t y of 0.275. It i s assumed that drug behavior variables with smaller differences between means are also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . The hypothesis that there w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the treatment recipient's involve-u ment with p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the post-est drug behavior questionnaire as a result of the non-pharm-a c o l o g i c a l l y based human r e l a t i o n s h i p program (treatment B) was then determined. As a method of t e s t i n g the hypothesis, a two t a i l e d t s t a t i s t i c at the .05 l e v e l of si g n i f i c a n c e was used on the variable that had the greater difference between the two means between treatment group B and control group at the postest measurement. Table VIII outlines the sample sizes (N), the treatment group means (X) and standard deviations (s.d.), the differences between means and the rank difference scores for the selected drug behavior variables between treatment group B and control at postest. TABLE VIII TREATMENT GROUP B AND CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN POSTEST MEANS ON SELECTED DRUG VARIABLES VARIABLES TREATMENT GROUP B CONTROL GROUP DIFFERENCES RANK BETWEEN DIFFERENCE X s.d. N X s.d. N MEANS SCORE 12. Tobacco 1.971 1.446 34 2.190 1.629 154 -0. 219 1 7. Cocaine 1.061 0.242 33 1.231 0.803 148 -0. 170 2 4. Alcohol 2.471 1.354 34 2.604 1.510 160 -0. 133 3 10. Marijuana and hashish 1.353 1.012 34 1.457 1.094 152 -0. 104 4 5. Amphetamines 1.000 0.000 33 1.102 0.520 148 -0. 102 5 8. Hallucinogens 1.061 0.242 33 1.161 0.648 150 -0. 100 6 9. Inhalants 1.030 0.174 33 1.122 0.544 149 -0. 092 7 6. Barbiturates 1.062 0.354 32 1.116 0.568 148 -0. 054 8 11. Opiates 1.030 0.174 33 1.078 0.484 144 -0. 040 9 - 54 -According to the t s t a t i s t i c there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference for the tobacco variable at post-est between treatment group B and co n t r o l . The tobacco variable yielded a t value of 0.698 associated with a pr o b a b i l i t y of 0.493. Since i t i s assumed that a l l var-iables with smaller mean differences than the tobacco var-iable on the postest measurement were also not s t a t i s t i c -a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , the n u l l hypothesis r e l a t i n g to the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program (treat-ment B) i s not c a l l e d into question. As can be seen i n Table VIII, treatment group B rep-orted a systematic and negative (decrease) mean difference e f f e c t at the postest measurement. In other words, the means fo r a l l nine drug variables were smaller for the group that had received the non-pharmacologically based human re-lat i o n s h i p program than the control group that received no drug program intervention. N on^rejectiohof theihull«hypothesis i s further substan-t i a t e d by the t s t a t i s t i c for the drug behavior variable with the largest difference between means for treatment group B between pretest and postest measures. Table IX gives the treatment group sample s i z e (N), the treatment group means (X) and standard deviations (s.d.), the d i f f e r -ence between means and the rank difference scores for the selected drug behavior variables between treatment group B on the pretest and postest measures. TABLE IX TREATMENT GROUP B DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRETEST AND POSTEST MEANS ON SELECTED DRUG VARIABLES VARIABLES TREATMENT GROUP B TREATMENT GROUP B DIFFERENCES RANK PRETEST POSTEST BETWEEN DIFFERENCE X s . d . N X S . d . N MEANS SCORE 4. Alcohol 2.021 1.246 48 2.471 1.354 34 -0.450 1 5. Amphetamines 1.222 0.557 41 1.000 0.000 33 0.122 2 8. Ha 1 lu c inog en s 1.171 0.588 41 1.061 0.242 33 0.110 3. 5 10 . Marijuana and Hashish 1.463 1.206 46 1.353 1.012 34 0.110 3. 5 7. Cocaine 1.154 0.670 39 1.061 0.242 33 0.093 5 6. Barbiturates 1.026 0.160 39 1.062 0.354 32 -0.037 6 9. Inhalants 1.000 0.000 40 1.030 0.174 33 -0.030 7. 5 11 . Opiates 1.000 0.000 40 1.030 0.174 33 -0.030 7. 5 12 . Tobacco 1.978 1.530 45 1.971 1.446 34 0.007 9 - 56 -According to the t s t a t i s t i c there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference f o r the alcohol variable for t r e a t -ment group B between pretest and postest measures. The alcohol variable yielded a t value 1.554 associated with a p r o b a b i l i t y of 0.120. It i s assumed that the drug be-havior variables with smaller differences between means are also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . In the t h i r d stage of the analysis, the n u l l hypoth-eses that there w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f -erence i n the treatment r e c i p i e n t s ' attitude with reference to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the postest drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l between the pharmacol-o g i c a l l y based drug education program (treatment A) and the non-pharmacologically based human rel a t i o n s h i p program (treatment B), was tested. The means (X), standard dev-iat i o n s (s.d.) and number of respondents (N) for treatment groups A, B and control at pretest and postest measurements for concept structures one (drug-using, anti-establishment cluster) and two (non drug-using, establishment cluster) are shown i n Table X. - 57 -TABLE X MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND NUMBERS OF RESPONDENTS FROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR CONCEPT STRUCTURES ONE AND TWO TREATMENT GROUPS MEASUREMENT CONCEPT STRUCTURE N X s.d. A Pretest 1 45 49.36 9.69 B Pretest 1 47 50.70 10.64 Control Pretest 1 145 49.97 9.94 A Pretest 2 45 50.02 8.43 B Pretest 2 47 50.31 10.97 Control Pretest 2 145 49.84 10.21 A Postest 1 33 47.87 12.33 B Postest 1 39 49.62 9.43 Control Postest 1 158 50.47 9.64 A Postest 2 33 47.24 9.13 B Postest 2 39 50.36 9.58 Control Postest 2 158 50.55 10.30 As a method of testing the hypotheses as above, a one-way analysis of variance was performed for treatment groups A, B and control f o r concept structures one and two at post-est. Table XI gives the res u l t s for the drug-using, a n t i -establishment attitude c l u s t e r (concept structure one) at postest and Figure I gives the res u l t s diagramatieally. - 58 -TABLE XI ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT POSTEST FOR CONCEPT STRUCTURE ONE (DRUG-USING, ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT CLUSTER) SOURCE S.S. d.f. m.s. F p Total 20,643.87 229 Between groups 239.32 2 119.66 1.33 N.S. Within groups 20,404.55 227 89.89 The ANOVA yielded an F value of 1.33 which was not s i g n i f -icant when computed with df of 2 and 227 at the .05 l e v e l . On the basis of t h i s s t a t i s t i c , the n u l l hypotheses as outlined above, as pertaining to concept structure one, cannot be rejected. In other words, there i s no s t a t -i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the treatment r e c i p i e n t s ' drug-using and anti-establishment attitudes as measured by the postest drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l between the pharmacologically based drug education program (treatment A), and the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program (treatment B). Table XII gives the re s u l t s for the non drug-using, establishment attitude c l u s t e r (concept structure two) at postest and Figure II gives the r e s u l t s diagramatically. - 59 -FIGURE I CONCEPT STRUCTURE ONE (DRUG-USING, ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT CLUSTER) MEANS FROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST POR TWO CONCEPT STRUCTURE OF THE DOMAIN. 51. G 50.0 49.0 48.0 47.0 50.70 49.36 47.87 Treatment A Treatment B Control .Pretest (N-237) .Postest (N=230) _ 60 -TABLE XII ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT POSTEST FOR CONCEPT STRUCTURE TWO (NON DRUG-USING, ESTABLISHMENT CLUSTER). SOURCE S.S. d.f. m.s. F p Total 13,230.90 229 Between groups 360.75 2 180.37 3.18 0.05 Within groups 12,870.15 227 56.70 The ANOVA yielded an F value of 3.18 which was s i g n i f i c a n t when computed with d.f. of 2 and 227 at the .05 l e v e l . On the basis of t h i s s t a t i s t i c , the n u l l hypotheses as outlined above, as pertaining to concept structure two, are rejected. In other words, there i s a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the treatment r e c i p i e n t s ' non drug-using and establishment attitudes as measured by the postest drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l between the pharmacologically based drug education program (treatment A), and the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program (treatment B). - 61 -CONCEPT STRUCTURE TWO (NON DRUG-USING, ESTABLISHMENT CLUSTER) MEANS PROM DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TWO CONCEPT STRUCTURE OF THE DOMAIN. 51. Q 50.0 49.01; 48.0 47.0 4 50.02 50.36 " 47.24 50.55 49.84 Treatment A Treatment B Control PRETEST (N= 237) POSTEST (N= 230) FIGURE II CHAPTER V INTERPRETATIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS In t h i s chapter, interpretations, conclusions and applications of the results as reported i n the previous chapter w i l l be given. The rationale f o r the premature termination of treatment B and the l i m i t a t i o n s and weak-nesses of t h i s study w i l l be discussed. In addition a conceptual model for drug education w i l l be provided. Interpretations, conclusions and applications of the re s u l t s as they relate to the experimental hypotheses w i l l be discussed f i r s t . Hypothesis 1: There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f -erence i n the r e c i p i e n t s ' involve-ment with p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the postest i n s t r u -ment as a re s u l t of the pharmacol-o g i c a l l y based drug education pro-gram (treatment A). On the basis of the t s t a t i s t i c between treatment groups A and control at the postest measurement, the above hypothesis cannot he ^ rejected. As isi shown i n Table VI, the cocaine variable had the largest difference between means and t h i s difference was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f -icant. It i s assumed that those variables with smaller differences between means are also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g -n i f i c a n t . In other words, the drug behavior variables measured following the intervention of the pharmacolog-i c a l l y based drug education program (treatment A) were - 63 -not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t than those drug variables from an otherwise comparable population that received no drug education. This r e s u l t i s further sub-stantiated by cross-time t - t e s t s for the drug behavior variables for treatment A as i s evident i n Table VII. Along with there not being a s i g n i f i c a n t difference between treatment A and control at postest, there was no systematic mean difference e f f e c t (Table VI). Following treatment intervention the experimental group reported no n - s i g n i f i c a n t l y though d i r e c t i o n a l l y higher mean drug involvement with inhalants, amphetamines and tobacco than the control group. The control group reported higher mean involvement with cocaine, opiates, alcohol, hallucinogens, marijuana or hashish and barbiturates than did the exper-imental group following treatment intervention. Pharmacologically based drug educators have oper-ated under the assumption that the dispensing of accurate information about drugs would r e s u l t i n a change of l i f e s t y l e i n r e l a t i o n s h i p to drugs. This hypothesis has not been v e r i f i e d by t h i s research and these re s u l t s concur with the re s u l t s of most others (Stuart, 1974; Swisher, Crawford, Goldstein and Yura, 1971? Swisher and Horan, 1974; Grant, 1971; Feger and Smart, 1972). In some instances, there has been an inverse r e l a t i o n s h i p between increased knowledge about drugs and anti-drug behavior decisions (Horan, 1974) that goes beyond the n u l l hypoth-e s i s accepted i n t h i s research. - 64 -There are several explanations that account f o r t h i s seeming paradox. The f i r s t i s that although drug knowledge covaries with drug involvement, c a u s a l i t y i s not necessarily concluded. The speculation that drug use leads to an increased knowledge about drugs i s as tenuous as the conclusion that increased drug knowledge fosters a decrease i n involvement with p o t e n t i a l l y harm-f u l drugs. Drug use decision-making i s a l i f e - s t y l e choice and i t i s not determined by pharmacological knowledge alone, but by intra-personal and inter-personal variables as w e l l . As reported i n Appendix E, Table XVIII, approx-imately thirty-two percent of the 469 respondents at pre-t e s t and postest reported that people used drugs for "fun, kicks and t h r i l l s " while approximately twenty percent reported " c u r i o s i t y " as the r a t i o n a l e . Ex-drug users reported (Appendix E, Table XIX), that they stopped using drugs for inter-personal reasons: they "saw the harm i t had done to friends" and they were "influenced by parents or f r i e n d s " to stop. Providing pharmacological informa-t i o n as an i s o l a t e d preventative intervention i s an empir-i c a l l y unsubstantiated e f f o r t . A second factor i n explaining the e f f e c t may be. that teaching about drugs increases cognitive understand-ing while decreasing fear about drugs, increases c u r i o s i t y about drugs while decreasing prohibitions about drugs. The i n t r u s i o n of an "intervention team" into the normally proceeding school day may draw attention not to the implic-i t l y persuasive message but to the d e s i r a b i l i t y and a t t r a c t -iveness of the unobtainable and i l l i c i t . As well, the - 65 -student now able to c o g n i t i v e l y understand the e f f e c t s of a drug or determine the puri t y of a "street drug", may be desensitized to the r e a l p o s s i b i l i t y of a d e b i l i t a t i n g psychological habituation although he knows that he i s not p h y s i c a l l y an addict. Hypothesis 2: There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the r e c i p i e n t s ' involvement with pot-e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a resu l t of the non-pharmacologically based human rel a t i o n s h i p program (treatment B). On the basis of the t - s t a t i s t i c between treatment groups B and control at the postest measurement, the above hypothesis .cannot be-rejected. As i s shown i n Table VIII, the tobacco variable had the largest, though not s t a t i s t -i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , difference between means. It i s assumed that the remaining variables with smaller d i f f e r -ences between means are also not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c -ant. The drug behavior variables measured following the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program (treatment B) were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f -erent than those drug variables from an otherwise compar-able population that received no drug education. This resu l t i s further substantiated by a cross-time t tes t for the drug behavior variable that had the largest d i f f -erence between means (Table IX). Treatment B did re s u l t i n a systematic though not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t mean difference e f f e c t as i s shown i n Table VIII. The treatment group B postest means - 66 -were smaller than the control postest means for a l l nine variables measured. However, t h i s systematic and negat-ive mean difference e f f e c t must be viewed cautiously since i t i s possible that the e f f e c t was due to the pre-mature termination of treatment B rather than due to the f i v e treatment sessions completed. Hypothesis 3: There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the r e c i p i e n t s ' attitude with r e f e r -ence to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a res u l t of the pharmacologically based drug education program (treatment A ) . Hypothesis 4 : There w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the r e c i p i e n t s ' attitude with r e f e r -ence to p o t e n t i a l l y harmful drugs as measured by the postest instrument as a resul t of the non-pharmacologically based human re l a t i o n s h i p program (treat-ment B) . On the basis of the one-way analysis of variance des-ign between treatment groups A , B and control on concept structure one (drug-using, anti-establishment values) at postest, the n u l l hypotheses cannot be rejected. : v Following treatment interventions there was reported attitude equiv-alence between the pharmacologically based drug education program, the non-pharmacologically based human r e l a t i o n s h i p program and the control group which received the regular high school curriculum not including drug education. It i s concluded that neither treatment A nor treatment B had any s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t i n a l t e r i n g the drug-using, a n t i -establishment attitudes of experimental students. - 67 -However, a one-way analysis of variance yielded a s i g n i f i c a n t difference for concept structure two, the non drug-using, establishment c l u s t e r . As can be seen i n Figure II the post-test analysis spans 3.31 points. Although the drug-using anti-establishment attitude c l u s t -er did not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y , attitudes representing the non drug-using, establishment c l u s t e r d i f f e r e d to a s i g n i f i c a n t degree. As diagramed i n Figure II, the greatest difference f o r concept ;two l i e s between pretest and postest for t r e a t -ment A, the pharmacologically based drug program. There i s v i r t u a l l y no difference between cross-time measurements of treatment B, and very l i t t l e difference over time for the c o n t r o l . Treatment A r e s u l t s yielded a decrease i n attitudes with reference to the non drug-using e s t a b l i s h -ment c l u s t e r that constituted the greatest proportion y i e l d -ing a s i g n i f i c a n t change between treatments A, B and c o n t r o l . It i s concluded that the pharmacologically based drug educ-ation program negatively influenced the attitudes of the treatment r e c i p i e n t s with reference to non drug-using est-ablishment values. The conclusion c i t e d above i s consistent with the drug attitude research of Swisher, Crawford, Goldstein and Yura (1971), Fejer and Smart (1972, 1973), Mason (1972), Weaver and Tennant (i973) and Warner, Swisher and Horan (i973). Pharmacologically based drug education programs - 68 -have been measured to have no e f f e c t or a negative e f f e c t on the students' attitudes with reference to drugs. This research demonstrated that the pharmacological program had a n u l l e f f e c t on students' attitudes with reference to the drug-using, anti-establishment c l u s t e r , had a s i g n i f i c a n t negative e f f e c t on students' attitudes with reference to the non drug-using, establishment c l u s t e r , while the human rel a t i o n s h i p program and the control group had no s i g n i f i c -ant e f f e c t s on the two measured concept structures. - 69 -Rationale for Premature Termination of Treatment B, The Non-Pharmacologically Based Human Relationship Program. The i n i t i a l purpose of the present research was to measure the drug behavioral e f f e c t of a dida c t i c , pharmac-o l o g i c a l intervention. At a l a t e r time i t was decided to measure a drug attitude variable i n addition to the drug behavior v a r i a b l e . Some time l a t e r i t seemed appropriate to develop a non-pharmacologically based, human r e l a t i o n -ship program and to measure the drug behavioral e f f e c t and the drug a t t i t u d i n a l e f f e c t of t h i s invervention. Treat-ment B was an adjunct to the o r i g i n a l research. Having completed four of the f i f t e e n one-hour sessions, treatment B was prematurely terminated. There are many reasons for t h i s decision, not the least of which was the conceptual d i f f i c u l t y of the Transactional Analysis system for the grade eight school population instructed. The students reported t h e i r i n a b i l i t y to conceptualize the ego state schema as theorized. A common ret o r t was, "I don't have a Parent ego state and I don't have an Adult ego state, I'm just a k i d . " The student's f r u s t r a t i o n to non-compreh-ension was manifest i n overt h o s t i l i t y or passive resistance to the instructors and to the treatment. It became necess-ary that a member of the permanent teaching s t a f f be pres-ent for d i s c i p l i n e purposes during a l l i n s t r u c t i o n a l periods. Secondly, since the content of the in s t r u c t i o n and the experimental and a p p l i c a t i o n a l methods of learning were un-fa m i l i a r at the junior high school l e v e l , the students judged - 70 -the intervention as inappropriate. Having a p r i o r determination that the treatment was not relevant and that i t was non-examinable, the students avoided class attendance, refused to complete assignments and acted out i n h o s t i l i t y toward the instructors and the treatment. Although a minority of the students attempted to under-stand the psychological theory and completed the a p p l i c -a t i o n a l assignments, the majority of the students were openly defiant. Third, i n addition to the u n f a m i l i a r i t y of the i n -tervention to the established high school curriculum, the treatment instructors were unaware of the subcultural dynamics of the classes. It was assumed that the inform-ation was inherantly a t t r a c t i v e and that students would be i e a s i l y motivated to apply themselves to the task of learn-ing. However, i t became evident that the non-acceptance by the student leaders of the treatment was a powerful stimulus for i n t e n s i f i e d non-acceptance by the group. Seemingly acceptant and industrious students increasingly rejected instructions urging them to apply themselves to the tasks. Fourth, contamination between treatments A and B became evident. Although treatment B was a non-pharmac-o l o g i c a l program, students associated the program with a drug education program because the instructors of the pro-grams were the same. It was important that treatment B r e t a i n i t s non-pharmacological intent to comply with the - 71 -model. F i f t h , the on-going r e l a t i o n s h i p with the Depart-ment of Counselling Psychology and the School Board could possibly be hampered as a res u l t of student complaints. The instructors were aware that they did not function i n i s o l a t i o n but were representatives of the u n i v e r s i t y and under authority of the school system. Student reported parental complaints and school administration doubts as to the e f f i c a c y of the program added further pressure to possible strained r e l a t i o n s . Sixth, the emotional resources of the instructors, both f u l l time graduate students, was strained from the exhaustion of academic studies and the research project. There was a sense i n which i t was doubtful whether the instructors could continue the i n s t r u c t i o n of both pro-grams and maintain t h e i r other r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Addit-ional i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t a f f would have been necessary. - 72 -Limitations of the Research A research project i s i n e v i t a b l y a compromise between what would be i d e a l and what i s possible given the circum-stances of finances, manpower, expertise, and the l i k e . When the ideal d i f f e r s from the r e a l , caveats become evid-ent as l i m i t a t i o n s of the study. Limitations of the study w i l l be outlined here to further enable accurate int e r p r e t -ation of the information. F i r s t , anonymous and c o n f i d e n t i a l s e l f - r e p o r t quest-ionnaires were the source of the information. It was assumed that the respondents 1 scores on the drug behavior questionnaire and the drug attitude semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l were accurate indicants of t h e i r actual behaviors and a t t -itudes concerning drugs. This assumption was not tested. Self-report instruments with the guarantee of anonymity and c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y were decided upon as more p r a c t i c a l than peer or police reports, blood or urine analyses, or face-to-face interviews. Second, the non-randomization of treatments required that a pretest be taken to determine the equivalance or non-equivalence of treatments and c o n t r o l . Since the pre-tes t needed to be i d e n t i c a l to the postest, the pretest may have had a s e n s i t i z i n g e f f e c t on the postest that had nothing to do with treatment intervention. This could possibly p r e c i p i t a t e misleading responses. Third, the period of time between pretest and postest - 73 -measures involved sixty-eight days thereby introducing the p o s s i b i l i t y of problems r e l a t i n g to intrasession h i s t o r y . The experimental treatments are one factor that may have attributed to change. However, the high school spring break and scattered school closures due to union s t r i k e s are intrasession h i s t o r y factors that may have contributed to change irr e s p e c t i v e of treatment grouping. Fourth, these findings cannot be generalized beyond the intervention given by the two instructors to an almost e n t i r e l y white, protestant, academic, middle class, grade eight school population. Replication i n d i f f e r e n t commun-i t i e s with other instructors would add to the g e n e r a l i z e a b i l i t y of the research. The measurement instruments also l i m i t the degree to which one can generalize the findings. Other types of behavior and attitude measures may have resulted i n other findings. As well, these two intervention programs are not the only types of drug education and conclusions i n t h i s research cannot be generalized to other kinds of programs. For example, results from research on a fear induction model of drug education cannot generalize to a concept a t t a i n -ment model. F i f t h , the findings of treatment B must be treated with extreme caution as the intervention prematurely terminated. It i s questionable whether the treatment, or the disruptive termination of the treatment, produced the resultant e f f e c t . As well, the d i r e c t i o n of e f f e c t must be suspect. - 74 -Sixth, students i d e n t i f i e d themselves on the anony-mous questionnaires by t h e i r mother's maiden name and f i r s t i n i t i a l . Evidently some students d i d not know or did not remember between pretest and postest t h i s piece of i n f o r -mation. This would account for the response recidivism, beyond normal absenteeism, i n the postest. Unidentifiable questionnaires were grouped with the control responses and may have effected change i n the c o n t r o l . Seventh, there has been no follow-up survey a f t e r the postest to determine the s t a b i l i t y of any reported change or whether or not change reported at a l a t e r time could be attributed to treatment intervention. - 75 -A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR DRUG EDUCATION The purpose, of t h i s aspect of the present chapter i s to generate hypotheses regarding the motives for drug usage, review some of the more promising and emerging methods of preventative drug education and propose some broad guide-l i n e s which could be considered i n planning future programs. What are the i n i t i a l motives to experimentation or taking i l l i c i t drugs? The present research indicates that "fun, kicks or t h r i l l s " are the primary i n i t i a l motives to drug usage. The secondary motives are "curiosity, peer pressure and escaping worries and tension.". These motives are b a s i c a l l y i n t e r r e l a t e d and have a common adaptive value. They r e f l e c t a common s o c i e t a l perspective, namely that i t i s easier to cope with l i f e ' s problems by a l t e r i n g the i n t e r n a l environment, than by struggling with external s i t u a t i o n s . Recourse to chemicals, may be a misdirected route toward experiencing s o c i a l i n t e r e s t . In l i n e with t h i s view, Goodman (1972) observed that peer pressure, c u r i o s i t y and a v a i l a b i l i t y are the leading contingents to drug use. None of t h i s information i s new (Lipinsky and Lipinsky, 1967; Keniston, 1969; Davis and Munoz, 1968). Keniston (1969) has suggested that the i n i t i a l motives for drug usage does not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from other forms of human behavior i n that a great v a r i e t y of d i s t i n c t motives can cooperate to produce i t . As L i p i n s k i (i972) has outlined, there are agent, environment and host factors - 76 -that are contributing motivations to drug use. However even the knowledge of the drug user's i n i t i a l motives needs to be suspect, unless the concepts of drug education are c l e a r l y understood. One can agree with Blum, et. a l . (1969) that "what men say they seek with drugs i s also what they seek without them." Thus drug usage i s not primarily a pharma-c o l o g i c a l problem, but a problem associated with l i v i n g i n society. A l l people have a need to give expression to t h e i r s o c i a l i n t e r e s t s . Drug usage i s a way of handling boredom, loneliness, despair and the f r u s t r a t i o n s of d a i l y l i v i n g . The "drug problem" viewed as a " l i f e problem" necess-i t a t e s a d i f f e r e n t approach to drug education. There are at least four components to such an approach. The f i r s t component i n such an approach i s to focus in on the interpersonal relationships of people. In the f i n a l report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs, the Commission concluded that the most promising methods of drug education offered an e f f e c t -ive program of l i v i n g where understanding intra-personal and inter-personal relationships received the focus of attention. Programs as outlined by Conger (1973) and Low (1973) include the inter-personal l i f e s k i l l concepts. Others (Dohner, 1972; Gordon, 1972; Cornacchia, Bental and Smith, 1973) have advocated viable a l t e r n a t i v e s to drug use that i n t e l l e c t u a l l y explore both the intra-personal and inter-personal dimensions. Explorations into the constructs of fear, love and anger have been suggested - 77 -( E l l i o t , 1970) as person-oriented avenues for drug educ-at i o n . Problem-solving, time structuring, decision-making, awareness of physical, emotional,;,spiritual and i n t e l l e c t u a l experiences are add i t i o n a l avenues. As i s evident from the above discussion, preventat-ive drug education i s most e f f e c t i v e when programs are devised which help to resolve intra-personal c o n f l i c t s and d i f f i c u l t i e s and which are designed to actualize soc-i a l i n t e r e s t . Behavior anomalies are e s s e n t i a l l y char-acterized by an i n a b i l i t y to deal with s o c i a l r e a l i t y , a lack of cooperative relationships and an unpreparedness for s o c i a l l i v i n g . Tne second component of a " l i f e " approach to drug education has to do with the methods of communicating the course content. The lecture format i s the most common channel of communication i n drug education, (Seabright, 1973). This channel permits the t r a n s f e r r a l of large amounts of accurate information making e f f i c i e n t use of time and the professional resources of the teacher. t This method may also de-emphasize the thoughts, b e l i e f s and feelings of the student and resu l t i n fragmented learn-ing that avoids integration of the cognitive material into human experience. Kitzinger (1970, p. 383) has pointed out that the school system systematically destroys stud-ents ' self-esteem by "discouraging them through the grad-ing system, depreciating them through the stress on a c o l l -ege education and disparaging them through the tracking - 78 -system . . . a young person who values himself i s not l i k e l y to destroy himself (on drugs)." An e x p e r i e n t i a l l y based method of learning may enhance self-esteem and prove to be more successful than the lecture method i n develop-ing appropriate drug attitudes and behaviors. As was reported i n chapter two, Oearden and Jekel (1971) u t i l i z e d non-directive techniques and s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g i n an e x p e r i e n t i a l l y based teacher-lead student project that produced some positive r e s u l t s . Bland (1971) and others have advocated a non-threatening and non-prejudical discussion of b e l i e f s and thoughts as well as feelings about drugs and the subcultural l i f e -s t y l e . In a recently conducted p o l l , students asked that educational content and communication methods be r e l -evant to the contemporary world (Kitzinger, 1970). They expressed the need for experiences that would enhance appreciation for a r t , music, drama, and nature and for an appreciation of l i f e i n general. "That i s what drugs are a l l about, they f i n a l l y r e a l i z e d - destroying your l i f e because you do not value or appreciate i t (p.385)." The t h i r d component of t h i s type of preventative drug education program i s that the thrust must be s u f f i c -i e n t l y comprehensive to include the family and community. The program must be h o l i s t i c and deal with the entire com-munity . • system. The teacher must convey e f f e c t i v e l y the attitude that, "we are a l l i n t h i s together, that having created s o c i a l r e a l i t y we are capable of changing - 79 -i t . " E f f o r t s need to be made to help students perceive themselves as s o c i a l l y useful and able to change t h e i r environment. An assumption i m p l i c i t i n the drug users rationale for using drugs emmanates from the s o c i a l system with which the i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r a c t s . "No man i s an island." A program of drug education must focus i n on the t o t a l community,! system, on the multi-person, m u l t i - r e l a t i o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n i n which the i n d i v i d u a l i s embedded. There i s a growing r e a l i z a t i o n that the interlocking systems and s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s s i g n i f i c a n t l y influence drug usage among students. This r e a l i z a t i o n c a l l s for new ways i n preventative drug education. A " l i f e " approach to drug education i s to focus f i r s t on the student, then to the student's family and f i n a l l y to the family's comm-unity. The fourth component of t h i s approach to preventat-ive drug education involves the commitment of time, energy and f i n a n c i a l resources to the task. There i s an obvious p a r a l l e l between the instant hedonism of the adolescent drug user and the drug educator who responds to complex problems with s i m p l i s t i c programs of ten easy lessons. Gordon (1972) advocates a comprehensive program involving c r i s i s care and treatment, vocational and academic rehab-i l i t a t i o n , preventative intervention and preventative a l t e r n a t i v e s . Weimar (1972) views preventative education as an aspect of an encompassing health program beginning i n the elementary school. Donner (1972) has suggested a - 80 -mental health approach centered on such factors as personal awareness, interpersonal r e l a t i o n s , vocational s k i l l s , a v a r i e t y of personal experiences and s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l involvement. It i s cl e a r from t h i s and other research that drug education intervention needs to be a long-term process that i n e v i t a b l y involves high cost, time and energy. 0 B I B L I O G R A P H Y - 81 -BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Amende-lara, Pilomena R. "Modifying Attitudes Toward Drugs i n Seventh Grade Students", Journal of  Drug Education, 1973, 3:1, 71 - 78. 2. American Medical News, December 11, 1971, p. 2. 3. Appleton, W.S. and Che i n , C P . "The E f f e c t of the Doctor's Attitude and Knowledge On His Use of Psychiatric Drugs," Journal of Nervous and  Mental Disease, 1967, 145, 284 - 291. 4. Arbuckle, DugaId S. "Existentialism i n Counselling: the Humanist View," Personnel and Guidance  Journal, February,; 1965, 558 - 567. 5. Berger, F.M. and P o t t e r f i e l d , J . "Drug Abuse and Society," i n Wittenborn, J.R., Smith, J.P. and Wittenborn, S.A. (eds.), Drugs and Youth: Proceedings of the Rutgers Symposium on Drug  Abuse, Springfield, I l l i n o i s : Charles C. Thomas, 1970. 6. Berne, E r i c . Transactional Analysis i n Psychother-apy. New York: Grove Press, 1961. 7. Berne, E r i c . A Layman's Guide to Psychiatry and Psychoanalysis. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1968. 8. Bjerring, James H. and Seagreaves, Paul. U.B.C. T.R.I.P.: Triangular Regression Package. Vancouver: University of B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre, 1974. 9. Bland, E.B. "A New Approach To Teaching About Drugs," C l i n i c a l Pediatrics, 1971, 10:11, 632 - 636. 10. Blum, Richard H. Society and Drugs, San Fran-c i s c o : Jossey - Bass, 1919. 11. Boe, S. "Philosophy and Objectives for a Drug Education Program," Journal of School Health, 1971, 41, 11 - 16. 12. Cambpell, D.T. and Stanley, J.C. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1967. - 82 -Cornacchia, Harold J . , Bental, David J . and Smith, David E. Drugs i n the Classroom: A Concept- ual Model for School Programs. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, 1973. Davis, Roy L. "Status of Smoking Education Research," Journal of School Health, 1968, 38:6, 323 - 332. Dearden, M.H. "A P i l o t Program i n High School U t i l i z -ing Non-directive Techniques and S e n s i t i v i t y Training," Journal of School Health, 1971, 41, 310 - 313. Deitch, David and J a f f e , Jerome H. "Problems i n Drug Abuse Education: Two Hypotheses," i n Wittenborn, J.R., Smith, J.P. and Wittenborn, S.A. (eds.). Communication and Drug Abuse. Sp r i n g f i e l d , I l l i n o i s : Charles J . Thomas, 1970. Dohner, Alton V. "Alternatives to Drugs - A New Approach to Drug Education," Journal of Drug  Education," 1972, 2:1, 3-22. Dreyfus, Edward A. "An E x i s t e n t i a l Approach to Counselling," i n Beck, Carleton E. (ed) Guidelines For Guidance: Readings i n the Philos- ophy of Guidance. Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Co. 1966. E l l i o t t , Robert. "Narcotics: A C r u c i a l Area of Secondary School Responsibility," North  Central Association Quarterly, 1970, 44, 28 - 37. Fejer, D. and Smart, R.D. Knowledge About Drugs, Attitude Toward Legalization of Marijuana and  Drug Using Behavior. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation, 1970. Fejer, D. and Smart, R.G. "The Know/ledge About Drugs, Attitudes Towards Them and Drug Use Rates of High School Students," Journal of Drug Educ-ation, V o l . 3 (4), Winter, 1973. Foster, Stephen F. and Bashook, P h i l i p G. How Many  Es Are There? - A C r i t i c a l Analysis of Prob- lems Concerning Determination of Evaluative  Factors of Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l Scales. A.E.R.A., 1973 Annual Meeting, New Orleans, 17:11, D. Gordon, Paula D. "Alternatives to Drugs As a Part of a Comprehensive E f f o r t to Ameliorate the Drug Abuse Problem," Journal of Drug Education, 1972, 2:3, 289 - 296. - 83 -Goodman, J . Knight. "Preventing the Causes of Drug Abuse," Journal of Drug Education, 1972, 2:3, 263 - 268. Gossett, J . , Lewis, J . and P h i l l i p s , V. "Extent and Prevalence of I l l i c i t Drug Use As Reported By 56,745 Students," J.A.M.A., 1971, 216, 1464 - 1470. Grant, J.A. "Drug Addiction Based on a Knowledge, Attitude and Experience Study," Journal of  School Health, 1971, 383 - 386. Guidance Associates, How Can You Fight Drug Abuse Most E f f e c t i v e l y , By Giving Students the Facts. New York: Guidance Associates, 1970. Halle.ck, S. "The Great Drug Education Hoax," The  Progressive, 1970, 34, 30 - 33. Halpern, G. and Mori, G. The Ottawa Drug Survey Univariate Results. Ottawa: Ottawa Board of Education, 1970. HanIon, T.E., Weiner, G., and Kurland, A.A. "The Psychiatric Physician and the Phenothiazine T r a n q u i l l i z e r s , " Journal of Nervous and Mental  Disease, 1960, 130, 6 7 - 7 1 . Hare, A.C. The Drug Problem: A S i g n i f i c a n t A r t i c l e  and Bibliography. Vancouver, B.C. Teachers' Federation, 1973. Horan, J . J . and Swisher, J.D. "Effecting Drug A t t i t -ude Change i n College Students Via Induced Cog-n i t i v e Dissonance," as reported i n E r i c Ab- str a c t s for Search. 1972, A p r i l . Horan, J . J . "Outcome D i f f i c u l t i e s i n Drug Education," Review of Education Research, 1974, 44:2, 203 - 211. Horan, J . J . , Shute, R.G., Swisher, J.D. and Westcott, T.B. "A Training Model for Drug Abuse Prevention, Journal of Drug Education, 1973, 3:2, 121 - 126. J a f f e , D. and Clark, T. "Unpublished Drug Education Evaluation Study," reported i n Behavior Today, 1972, 3:46, 2. James, Muriel and Jongeward, Dorothy. Born to Win: Transactional Analysis With Gestatt Experiments. Reading, Mass.: Addison - Wesley, 1971. - 84 -37. Janis, I. and King, B. "The Influence of Role Play-ing on Opinion Change," Journal of Abnormal  and S o c i a l Psychology, 1954, 49, 211 - 218. 38. Johnson, B.B. "A Junior High School Seminar on Dangerous Drugs and Narcotics," Journal of  School Health, 1968, 38, 84 - 87. 39. Keniston, K. "Heads and Seekers: Drugs on Campus, Countercultures and American Society," American  Scholar, 1969, 38, 97 - 112. 40. Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Res-earch, Second E d i t i o n . New York: Holt, Rine-hart and Winston, 1973. 41. Kitzinger, Angela. "Changing Approaches to Drug Abuse Education," i n Wittenborn, J.R., Smith, J.P. and Wittenborn, S.A. (Eds.), Communication  and Drug Abuse. Sp r i n g f i e l d , I l l i n o i s : Charles J . Thomas, 1970. 42. Kline, J.A. "Evaluation of a Multimedia Drug Education Program," Journal of Drug Education, 1972, 2:3, 229 - 239. 43. Korn, James H. and Goldstein, J o e l W. "Psychoactive Drugs: a Course Evaluation," Journal of Drug  Education, 1973, 3:4, 353 - 368. 44. La Combe, M. "High School Drug Education, an Interim Measure," J.A.M.A., 1971, 214, 1327 - 1328. 45. Laforest, Lucien. The Incidence of Drug Use Among High School and College Students of the Montreal  Island Area. Quebec: O.P.T.A.T., 1969. 46. Lawler, J.T. "Peer Group Approach to Drug Education," Journal of Drug Education, 1:63, 1971. 47. LeDain, Gerald. Interim Report on the Commission of Inquiry Into the Non-medical Use of Drugs. Ottawa: Queen's Printer for Canada, 1970. 48. Lewis, J . , Gossett, J . and P h i l l i p s , V. "Evaluation of a Drug Prevention Program," Hospital and  Community Psychiatry, 1972, 23, 36 - 38. 49. L i p i n s k i , E. "Motivation i n Drug Misuse: Some Comm-ents on Agent, Environment, Host," J.A.M.A., 1972, 219:2, 171 - 175. 50. L i p i n s k i , E. and L i p i n s k i , B.G. "Motivational Factors i n Psychadelic Drug Use By Male College Students," Journal of the American College  Health Association, 1967, 16, 145 - 149. - 85 -51. Macro Systems Inc., "Unpublished Drug Education Evaluation Study," reported i n Behavior  Today, 1972, 3:46, 2. 52. Mason, Michael L. "Drug Education E f f e c t s : F i n a l Report" as reported i n E r i c Abstracts for Search, 1972, March. 53. McDougal, David. "Crash Education Programs W i l l Not Eliminate Drug Use," Alberta School Trustee, 1971, 41:1, 18 - 19. 54. McGuire, W.J. "Designing Communication to Change Attitudes Regarding Drug Abuse," i n Witten-born, J.R., Smith, J.P. and Wittenborn, S.A. (eds.) Communication and Drug Abuse. Spring-f i e l d , I l l i n o i s : Charles J . Thomas, 1970. 55. McKie, Douglas and Foster, Stephen F. A General Model for Multidimensional Analysis of Semantic  D i f f e r e n t i a l Attitude Data, Unpublished paper, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1972. 56. Monk, M., Tayback, M. and Gordon, J . "Evaluation of an Antismoking Program Among High School Stud-ents," i n Schulberg, H.C, Sheldon, A. and Baker, F. (eds.), Program Evaluation i n the  Health F i e l d s . New York: Behavioral Public-ations, 1970, 345 - 359. 57. Osgood, C.E., Snei, G.F. and Tannonbaum, B. The Meas-urement of Meaning. Urbana: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1957. 58. Overstreet, S.A. "Addiction Among Physicians," Journal of the Kansas Medical Association, 1967, 65, 683 - 684. 59. Radin, S.S. "Psychosocial Aspects of Drug Addiction," Journal of School Health, 1966, 36, 481 - 487. 60. Reid, E.L., and Stove, D.B. "Smoking Behavior Change Among Junior High School Youth," Journal of  Drug Education. 1971, 1, 223 - 234. 61. Richards, Louise G. "Psychological Sophistication in Current Drug Abuse Education," i n Witten-born, J.R., Smith J.P., and Wittenborn, S.A. (eds.), Communication and Drug Abuse. Spring-f i e l d , I l l i n o i s : Charles J . Thomas, 1970. 62. Richards, Louise G. "Evaluation i n Drug Education," School Health Review. 1971, 2, 2 2 - 2 7 . - 86 -63. Russell, John. Survey of Drug Use i n Selected B r i t i s h Columbia School D i s t r i c t s . Vancouver: Narcotic Addiction Foundation of B r i t i s h Columbia, L970. 64. Russell, John. Drug Use Among Vancouver Secondary School Students, Vancouver: Narcotic Addiction Foundation of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1971. 65. Sarmanian, Jack. "An Interactional Approach to Prev-enting Drug Abuse," N.A.S.S.P. B u l l e t i n , 1973, 66 - 76. 66. Seabright, Carol L. "A Look at Some Current Programs," Journal of Drug Education, 1973, 3:2, 127 - 140. 67. Smart, R.G., Fejer, D., and White, J . The Extent of Drug Use i n Metropolitan Toronto Schools: a  Study of Changes from 1968 to 1970. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation, 1970. 68. Smart, R.G. and Jackson, D. A Preliminary Report on the Attitudes and Behavior of Toronto Students  i n Relation to Drugs. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation, 1969. 69. Spelman, M.S. and Ley, P. "Knowledge and Lung Cancer and Smoking Habits," B r i t i s h Journal of So c i a l and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1966, 5, 207 - 210. 70. Stennet, R.G. Tobacco, Alcohol and Drug Use Reported by London Secondary Students. London, Ontario: Addiction Research Foundation and Board of Ed-ucation, 1969. 71. Stuart, Richard B. "Teaching Facts About Drugs: Push-ing or Preventing?" Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, i n press. 72. Stuart, R.B. and Schuman, M.C. Tripping and Toking i n Mid-America: A Survey of Teenage Drug Abuse  i n Four Michigan Communities. Lansing, Mich-igan: O f f i c e of Drug Abuse and Alcoholism, 1972. 73. Swisher, J.D. and Crawford, J.A. "An Evaluation of a Short-term Drug Education Program," The School  Counselor, 1971, 18, 205 - 212. 74. Swisher, J.D. and Crawford, J.A. "Evaluation of a Short Term Drug Education Program," The School  Counsellor, 1971, 18, 265 - 272. 75. Swisher, J.D., Crawford, J . , Goldstein, R., and Yura, M. "Drug Education: Pushing or Preventing?" Peabody Journal of Education, 1971, 44, 68 - 75. - 87 -76. Swisher, J.D. and Warner, R.W. "A Study of Four Approaches to Drug Abuse Prevention: F i n a l Report," as reported i n E r i c Abstracts f o r  Search, 1971, J u l y . 77. Swisher, J.D., Warner, R.W. and Herr, E.L. "Experim-ental Comparison of Four Approaches to Drug Abuse Prevention Among Ninth and Eleventh Graders," Journal of Counselling Psychology, 1972, 19:4, 328 - 332. o 78. Swisher, J.D. and Horan, J . J . "The Pennsylvania State University Drug Education Evaluation Scales Part III A: Drug Use Inventory," i n Abrams, A., G a r f i e l d , E. and Swisher, J.D. (eds.), Accountability i n Drug Education: A  Model fo r Evaluation. Washington, D.C.: Drug Abuse Council, 1974. 79. Tennant, F.S., Weaver, S.C. and Lewis, C E . "Outcomes of Drug Education: Four Case Studies," Pediatrics, 52:2, August, 1973. 80. Thomas, Peter, Frisone, Giovanni and Lipson, David, "An Evaluation of Parent Drug Education," Mental Hygiene, 1971, 55:4, 456 - 460. 81. Tracy, George C. "Some S t a t i s t i c a l Considerations i n Student Drug Surveys," In Wittenborn, J.R., Smith, J.P. and Wittenborn, S.A. (eds.), Communication and Drug Abuse. Spri n g f i e l d , I l l i n o i s : Charles J . Thomas, 1970. 82. Ungerleider, Thomas, "Drugs and the Educational Process," The American Biology Teacher, 1968, 30, 627. 83. VanKaam, Adrian. "Counselling from the Viewpoint of E x i s t e n t i a l Psychology," Harvard Educational  Review, Vo l . 32, No. 4, F a l l , 1962. 84. Van Patten, James. "Education i n Relation to Drug Use and Abuse," School and Society, 1972, 100, 2340. 85. Warner, R.W., Swisher, J.D. and Horan, J . J . "Drug Abuse Prevention: a Behavioral Approach," N.A.S.S.P. B u l l e t i n , 1973, A p r i l , 49 - 54. 86. Weaver, S.C. and Tennant, F.S. "Effectiveness of Drug Education Programs for Secondary School Students," American Journal of Psychiatry, 1973, 130:7, 812 - 814. - 88 -Weimar, Robert H. "Toward a Model of Primary Prev-ention of Drug Abuse i n Elementary Schools," B r i t i s h Journal of Addiction, 1972, 68, 57 - 63. Whitehead, Paul C. Drug Use Among Adolescent Students i n H alifax. H a l i f a x : Youth/Agency, Province of Nova Scotia, 1969. APPENDIX A: PHARMACOLOGICALLY BASED DRUG EDUCATION PROGRAM 89 -OUTLINE FOR PART I INTRODUCTION TO DRUGS Dr. McNeill defines a drug as any substance that produces an ef f e c t on l i v i n g c e l l s . Addiction has several c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , i n c l u d i n g : a) psychological dependence - a person thinks he has to have the drug, or the e f f e c t s of the drug, i n order to function b) physical dependence - the body cannot function normally i f the drug i s removed f c) tolerance - decrease i n the drug response with time. Dr. McNeill describes the abstinence syndrome, or the withdrawal syndrome as tension which i s produced when people stop taking drugs, This tension sometimes sends them back to drugs. The reasons for people beginning to take drugs are: 1) c u r i o s i t y 4) a v a i l a b i l i t y 7) escapism 2) peer pressure 5) chance 8) unhappiness 3) status 6) boredom 9) part of a group The reasons people continue to take drugs are: 1) f o r the e f f e c t they produce 2) because of rtheirdependence on them 3) because society encourages drug-taking i n general as a r e l i e f from tension , \ There are d i f f e r e n t kinds of drug users. They include: 1) Heads - people who are not making i t , who resent authority, who have a low tolerance for anxiety, and who search for magical cures to problems. 2) So c i a l users - people who use drugs only sometimes. This i s hard to do with some drugs. 3) Tasters - people who t r y drugs only once or twice. - 90 -7. Dr. McNeill says that a l l drugs a f f e c t the c e n t r a l nervous system, but that there are d i f f e r e n t kinds of drugs. They are: 1) Narcotics 2) Depressants 3) Stimulants 4) Hallucinogens 5) Marijuana 6) Miscellaneous - solvents, tobacco and others After having seen the video-tape and reading the o u t l i n e , there may be facts i n t h i s section which are unclear to you. L i s t them below: - 91 -You have just received some chocolate, l i c o r i c e and a j e l l y bean. Which one of these foods contain a drug? I t seems to me that contains a drug . The drug i s . Drugs are part of our everyday l i f e . You know that we are surrounded by numerous types of drugs. Also, many things we eat and drink contain a c e r t a i n drug. For example, coffee and tea contain a drug. Keeping the above comments i n mind} l i s t as many drugs and substances that contain a drug. A drug i s any substance that produces an e f f e c t on l i v i n g c e l l s . State by a YES or NO which of the following substances are or are not drugs. Some of the substances contain a c e r t a i n drug. Heroin F i n g e r n a i l p o l i A s p i r i n Methadone Coffee Cocaine L.S.D. P e n i c i l l i n Coke Tea Vitamin C. Sleeping p i l l s Chewing gum Cough drops Marijuana Contact - C Sugar cubes Sominex Poppy seeds Compoze Cigars Cough syrup Chocolate Cocoa Aeroplane glue Sinutab Right Guard Carrots Tooth paste Glucose t a b l e t s Resdan Menthol drops Hair shampoo Ghewing gum _ 92 "Better living through Chemistry". It i s suggested by T.V. commercials that we can solve most of our discomfort by taking some sort of commercial drug product. Solutions w i l l occur in minutes or comfort w i l l last for hours. Think about some commercials and l i s t them i.e. Contact C: relieves cold discomfort for hours. Millions of l i t t l e are working for you. Make up some of your own drugs and their effects. i.e. Vitapoze: for immediate r e l i e f of mental and physical r e l i e f take Vitapoze, i t w i l l give V i t a l i t y to your l i f e today. - 93 -THINGS TO THINK AND DO 1. What do you think of pop-rock music as a cause of drug abuse? 2. Can you distinguish between drugs and medicines? Is there a difference? 3 . Where can you c a l l for help or drug information In Vancouver? 4. Is i t possible to Id e n t i f y someone near you as a drug abuser? How do>you know for sure? 5. Count how many T.V. commercials are about drugs? I f you spend an evening watching T.V., count the number of drugs advertised. 6. Everyone has drugs at home. What kind do you have at home? Do you have 10, 20 ? REASONS WHY PEOPLE BEGIN TAKING DRUGS ARE HIDDEN BELOW. HOW MANY CAN YOU FIND? E U Y 0 0 C M C E s Y P E s C R S 0 P K T P M s R G R R 0 A A l A 0 T T E S E P C P S \A D A B E e E S S 0 N E G R 0 U p E e R \ U R E A B P s R B E R 0 0 S T A T u S A E U T B 0 P U 0 R G £ C A 1 C P 0 o R G U P A V A i L A B L E C i r c l e the following words, which are the i n i t i a l reasons f o r introduction to drug use. They may he forward, backward, horizontal, v e r t i c a l or diagonal. The words used most often are the two major reasons. CURIOSITY CHANCE ESCAPE PEERS UNHAPPY AVAILABLE STATUS GROUP BOREDOM The two major reasons that people begin taking drugs a r e s 1. - 95 _ OUTLINE FOR PART II INTRODUCTION TO DRUGS 1. Dr. McNeill outlines the various factors affecting the way a person responds to drugs. The main ones are: 1) Drug - there i s no one effect for one drug 2) Dose - increased dosage brings increased effects, including desired effects, side effects and toxicity 3) Age 4) Weight 5) Sex - i s the person man or woman? 6) Route of administration - how the person takes the drug 2. The "set" or setting affects drug response. This includes: 1) where? 2) when? 3) who with? 4) How? 5) mood, personality? 3. Drug response i s often affected by a person's expectations. Some responses occur because people anticipate them. 4. Several factors affect the way people react to drugs. People react differently to the same drug because of: 1) Individual variation - no two people are exactly alike 2) Presence of other drugs - some drugs, when taken together, w i l l add effects (addition), while other drugs taken together w i l l antagonize each other (antagonism). 5. It i s impossible to predict entirely how a drug w i l l act i n any given individual. When a person takes a drug, i t ' s always the risk versus the benefit that he must consider. After having seen the video-tape and reading the outline, there may be facts i n this section which are unclear to you. List them below: - 96 -Fantasize that you are going to take a c e r t a i n drug. Complete t h i s sheet. What i s the name of the drug? How much are you taking? Where w i l l you take the drug? Describe the place. Who w i l l you take the drug with? Why? Do you have a reason? How i s your mood before taking the drug? What happens to you a f t e r taking the drug? WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS? Have you ever seen someone faking or pretending that he was stoned or drunk? C i r c l e YES or NO. How do you know he was pretending? Are drugs abused i n your school? YES or NO. I f - s o , which drugs are abused? Where does one get Chem? Check the box: Gastown Home Friends Older brother or s i s t e r McDonalds • Other places Do you know someone who i s a drug abuser? YES or NO How do you know he i s a drug abuser? - 98 -FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS AND FIND THE HIDDEN ANSWER TO THE RIDDLE: TAKING DRUGS IS A GAMBLE, THE BET IS T E N u V 3 s B X O L s D s o 2 I Y Y z E F A T E S h A c K E R H 1 S s I X R P Q E N H A S H I S H R E K U 0 Y S Y U 0 P X Z 0 4 u 0 0 I I S u Y X s U Y N T 1. C i r c l e the names of various drugs: HASHISH, SPEED, LSD, HEROIN, GRASS, POT, SMACK. 2. C i r c l e the word YOU f i v e times. 3. C i r c l e a l l the numbers, including words and fig u r e s . 4 . C i r c l e every X, Y and Z which remains. 5. Using the uncir c l e d l e t t e r s , f i l l l n the blanks above and complete the r i d d l e . HIDDEN BELOW ARE THE SIX FACTORS WHICH AFFECT DRUG RESPONSE. CAN YOU FIND THEM ALL? H 0 R T O M E T A c D E P G P I 0 L Y U A G O S E B R T R I R E E D 0 D L E A X A L O M Z W F a U S G H 1 L A R E E T U 0 R The words appear once each, and they may be forward, backward, horizontal, v e r t i c a l or diagonal. ANSWERS: - 100 QUESTIONS ASKED IN INTERVIEW WITH PROBATION OFFICERS 1. Would the Probation O f f i ce r s descr ibe t h e i r job and the things they do? 2. What i s the average age of the youths that come to the a t tent ion of the two probation o f f i c e r s ? 3. What kinds of laws are the youths breaking that bring them before the court? 4. Are some of the laws that are broken, drug offenses? 5. What are the types of drugs that are involved in these offenses? 6. Is there some kind of r e l a t i o n s h i p between drug use and drug offenses? 7. Why do juven i le s use drugs? 8. What i s the re l a t i on sh ip between drug use and school dropouts? Do students take drugs and drop out or drop out of schoo l , then begin to take drugs? 9. Do the juven i l e s under your custody come from homes where drugs are abused? 10. Are some laws broken while under the in f luence of drugs? 11. How does the judge look upon juven i l e s using drugs as an excuse fo r t h e i r behavior? 12. What are your opinions on the so - ca l l ed drug problem in Vancouver? To what extent i s i t a problem today? 13. What can be done and what has been done in Vancouver in respect to the drug problem? - 101 -Almost everyone i s cur ious about the drugs people are using and experimenting with today to change the way they fee l and ac t . This i s a natural and healthy c u r i o s i t y . There i s no question that almost every teenager i s confronted with the issue of drugs at one time or another. You probably already know something about drugs. The fo l lowing sessions and lessons w i l l add to your knowledge. You w i l l f i nd that some of your knowledge i s quite accurate and some of i t i s not. It i s important that you be well informed so that you can make dec i s ions fo r your se l f . Riddles D i rect ions - L i s ted below are a group of words. Putt ing the words in a cor rec t order w i l l g ive you some key questions about drugs. Use every word. 1. "drugs you on on you w i l l or w i l l they turn turn?" "Wi l l 2. "Whether or to or not when, drugs use?" 3. "Handle to drugs can learn we how?" Riddle Find out the important issue in making dec is ions about drug use by rearranging the l e t t e r s to form three words. EACRUCAT GRUD NTIAOORMINF - 102 -OUTLINE FOR NARCOTICS 1. N a r c o t i c drugs are drugs that are u s u a l l y used to r e l i e v e p a i n . They i n c l u d e : 1) Heroin ("smack", "scag") 2) Morphine 3) Codeine 4) Demerol 5) Others, such as N a l l i n e , Narcan. 2. There are two b a s i c sources of n a r c o t i c drugs: 1) Opium poppy (e.g., morphine and codeine) 2) S y n t h e t i c , t h a t i s , made by man (e.g., Demerol, Methadone) 3; Heroin i s made from morphine. I t i s more potent, and t h e r e f o r e , not as l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s are needed to produce a giyen effect'. 4. The e f f e c t s of n a r c o t i c s on the body are d i v i d e d i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s : 1) Stimulant e f f e c t s (a) vomiting (b) pleasure (c) heart slows (d) p u p i l s c o n t r a c t (e) stomach muscles contract 2) Depressant e f f e c t s (a) s e n s i t i v i t y to p a i n i s lowered (b) lowered anxiety (c) r e s p i r a t i o n , coughing suppressed (d) blood- pressure depressed 5. Ways i n which n a r c o t i c s enter the body: 1) through the mouth 2) s n i f f e d or smoked 3) i n j e c t e d i n t o a blood v e i n 6. A f t e r i n j e c t i o n i n t o a v e i n , h e r o i n and other n a r c o t i c s cause s e v e r a l changes: 1) "Rush" stage - warm f e e l i n g and gut muscles co n t r a c t 2) Euphoria - lasts.,-344 hours - 103 -Show the difference between the e f f e c t s of stimulation and depression on the eyes. Draw i n the p u p i l s . If you have coloured p e n c i l s or crayons, use them to i l l u s t r a t e how the e f f e c t s are d i f f e r e n t on the eyes. There are about three ways of taking n a r c o t i c s . Draw a pi c t u r e i n the space below of a na r c o t i c user who i s taking drugs. How i s he taking the drug? _ 104 -WHAT'S YOUR OPINION Direct ions - C i r c l e A i f you agree and D i f you disagree with the statement. 1. Juven i les as def ined by law are boys and g i r l s 17 years of age and under. 2. In Vancouver j uven i l e s charged by the p o l i c e , w i l l appear at the Family and Ch i l d ren ' s court . 3. Some offenses committed by juven i l e s are s h o p l i f t i n g , t h e f t , and breaking and enter ing . A.D. 4. Possession of alcohol by a j uven i l e i s l e g a l . A.D. 5. . Possession of Marijuana or Hashish i s a cr iminal o f fense. A.D. 6. Most of the juven i le s who come before the court are heavy users of drugs. A.D. 7. Juven i les turn to drug use and abuse as a way to solve t h e i r personal problems. A.D. 8. Juven i les who are regular drug users end up dropping out of school . A.D. 9. Judges tend to be l en ien t to juven i l e s who committed a crime while under the in f luence of a l c o h o l . A.D. 10. A high percentage of i l l e g a l acts committed by juven i l e s are done while they are under the in f luence of some drug. - 105 -There are many "slang expressions" used by people on the n a r c o t i c scene. L i s t e d below are a number of slang terms. Put an N to terms r e f e r r i n g to the n a r c o t i c drug. Cross out the words that have nothing to do w i t h n a r c o t i c drugs. Some of the expressions r e f e r to he r o i n ; put an H beside those terms. And some expressions r e f e r to Morphine, so put an M beside those terms. Smack Heat Scag Hophead Horse Joy powder H Li p t o n Tea Candy Ma j o Junk Pack Smut C Smeck Chippy Monkey Pock Deck Peach Harry Q u i l l M Stash B i n d l e K i t s Boy Sugar Hype S t i c k Cake White S t u f f C o t i c s Bernice Goods Cokie Hard s t u f f Miss Emma Mop ho Ukie Buzz Blanks Boxed Fuzz Hooked Junkie Hash Dope Drano S t u f f Dame Check them over now. Some are p r e t t y t r i c k y ! - 106 ~ A tolerance develops i n several weeks of drug-taking: 1) Need more of the drug to get same e f f e c t ( e f f e c t of the drug gets less) . 2) If tolerant to one na r c o t i c drug, then tolerant to a l l n a r c o t i c drugs. Physical dependence sets i n about the same time as tolerance. Then the person f e e l s he must get the drug every day. 1) Drive and ambition lowered. 2) Hard to stay on a job. 3) Women\may turn to p r o s t i t u t i o n to make jnoney. 4) Stealing, p r o s t i t u t i o n lead to problems with the p o l i c e and the law. Withdrawal symptoms begin to occur when a person can't get the drug: 1) within 9 - 1 2 hours - tears, runny nose, yawning, p e r s p i r a t i o n . 2) within 12 - 14 hours - tossing sleep (yen) which i s not r e s t f u l . 3) by 14 hours, and a f t e r - loss of appetite, d i l a t e d p u p i l s , gooseflesh, . restlessness, i r r i t a b i l i t y , tremor (shaking). 4) by 48 - 72 hours (the peak of withdrawal) - weakness, depression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal cramps, pain i n the back, muscle spasms and k i c k i n g movements, spontaneous e j a c u l a t i o n or orgasm. 5) 7 - 1 0 days - above symptoms continue, l i f e i s not i n danger, symptoms can be interrupted by drug. Aft e r withdrawal symptoms cease, a person i s : 1) No longer p h y s i c a l l y dependent (he doesn't need the drug for h i s body) 2) No longer tolerant of the drug (a r e l a t i v e l y small dosage w i l l have a large e f f e c t ) . 3) Psychologically dependent (his mind t e l l s him that he needs to have a drug). Some of the medical, s o c i a l and l e g a l problems that a r i s e are: 1) Overdose 5) Decreased drive 2) Infections 6) Family problems 3) Ma l n u t r i t i o n 7) Work problems 4) Venereal disease 8) Legal problems - 107 -2, The r a t i o n a l e f o r using methadone, a synthetic n a r c o t i c drug, i s : 1) Prevents withdrawal as the person stops using the drug 2) Decreases "hunger" for the drug 3) Taken o r a l l y (mouth) and so i t does not have to be i n j e c t e d or smoked 4) E f f e c t l a s t s longer than other narcotics 3. There are side e f f e c t s when using methadone: somnolence, constipation, decreased sex drive, drowsiness, "cheap" way out. - 108 -THINGS TO THINK ABOUT AND DO 1. Pretend that you wanted to be addicted to a n a r c o t i c drug. Would you choose heroin? Why or why not? 2. Which drug would you choose i f you d i d not choose heroin? ( t h i s i s j u s t imaginary, remember.) 3. Why would you not choose any drug to abuse? 4. Should n a r c o t i c s be c o n t r o l l e d and able to be obtained by a p r e s c r i p t i o n ? State reasons f o r or ag a i n s t . 5. What are the j a i l sentences f o r t r a f f i c i n g i n heroin? 6. Write a b r i e f s t o r y : T i t l e "Ride a Deadly Horse". 7. Write a poem about n a r c o t i c drugs using slang words. _ 109 -FIND OUT WHY SEVEN OUT OF EIGHT NARCOTIC ADDICTS PREFER HEROIN INSTEAD OF MORPHINE. z 7 S N A I c I Q A M G w 2 E L E Y E N 0 p t G 8 9 7 5 G A L U I G N 0 R E 4 T E N G H O F 1 V E P 4- E T P E M X 0 M E 0 • • Ni A L R E 1 £ tsl 0 w 8 0 i A P A S T G 7 e E R N Y — 1 • • Q U Y R 9 — S N E E T R I W T X I s M A G I C I A N s 7 8 1. C i r c l e the opposite of "lower". 2. C i r c l e a l l numbers greater than f i v e (figures and words). 3. A policeman i s sometimes c a l l e d a . C i r c l e i t twice. 4. C i r c l e the word gnome, which means dwarf. 5. If someone doesn't pay attention to you, she G S you. C i r c l e the word. 6. These men do t r i c k y and mysterious things: M S. C i r c l e the word twice. ~* 7. When you were a kid, you used to L . C i r c l e i t . 8. A g i r l i s sometimes c a l l e d a . C i r c l e her. 9. B r i t i s h Columbia has many along the coast. C i r c l e . 10. C i r c l e a l l the arithmetic signs except"~the one used i n multIpllcatlor 11. A fast car has _P . C i r c l e the word. 12. C i r c l e the word and the number one, as often as you can f i n d i t . 13. Another word for a boy i s a . C i r c l e him. 14. C i r c l e a l l the f i v e s . 15. NOW, USING THE UNCIRCLED LETTERS AND NUMBERS AND SIGNS, FILL IN THE ANSWER: HEROIN IS1.: - 110 -HIDDEN BELOW ARE SOME PROBLEMS WHICH MAY RESULT FROM ABUSING -NARCOTICS. THEY MAY BE FORWARD, BACKWARD, HORIZONTAL, VERTICAL OR DIAGONAL. CAN YOU FIND ALL SIX? 1 . _ _ _ _ _ [ H _ 2 . _ _ F 3. _ _ _ _ _ U _ _ N ^. _ _ £ _ _ _ 6. B Y V o G 0 L A w A S T I T I R E E P 0 L. T \ S H S A U Z A v J R F N F A N N E k 0 R B A (a I M B E b \ Y Y L I M A F B Y G A D 0 R E V A L A U T \ 0 Kl L G R E E S T & P 0 N A C A D N R vi e R A L A & E L I N G 0 O W W E A L T H G O E 1 D u T l D L Y C 0 D E V A C T R Q u 1 F fc l W E Y S r T I N F E C T \ O N S N O P H E T W U Y S Y 0 0 L E I J S R 1 A T e» P C D E F G H A C I 0 1 P R 0 & U E R 0 A T s A S N L £ c 0 N F R A N C A 1 E - I l l -OUTLINE FOR CNS DEPRESSANTS The C e n t r a l Nervous System depressants, or "downers" are drugs which depress the b r a i n : 1) B a r b i t u r a t e s 2) B a r b i t u r a t e - l i k e drugs :.. . 3) A l c o h o l 4) A l c o h o l - l i k e drugs i , ' 3 . ? . . : 5) Minor t r a n q u i l i z e r s U'-g- . The higher the dosage of a drug the greater the e f f e c t of the drug: i f a s m a l l amount of the drug i s taken then the e f f e c t i s r e l a x a t i o n , i f a l a r g e amount of the drug i s taken then hypnosis, coma and death could r e s u l t . The C e n t r a l Nervous System depressant group i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r most drug problems, even more than h e r o i n . A l c o h o l i s the biggest problem: homicides, t r a f f i c f a t a l i t i e s , broken homes, and the l i k e r e s u l t when a l c o h o l i s abused. The e f f e c t of the depressant drug on the body i s dependent on the type of drug, dose, route, t o l e r a n c e , s e t , other drugs. Good uses i n medicine ( u s u a l l y taken o r a l l y ) : 1) Calming 2) Sleeping p i l l s 3) Treat e p i l e p s y 4) Relax muscles Problems w i t h these drugs: 1) Overdose ( s u i c i d e ) 2) P h y s i c a l dependence 3) I n j e c t i o n s , i r r i t a t i o n s on the s k i n 4) Depressant users are i n a non-functioning or p a r t i a l l y - f u n c t i o n i n g s t a t e ( a l c o h o l ) •5) A l c o h o l has c a l o r i e s , but no n u t r i t i o n ( m a l n u t r i t i o n ) 6) A c c i d e n t s , v i o l e n c e as a r e s u l t of poor f u n c t i o n i n g . Withdrawal syndrome, s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t from h e r o i n : 1) Can r e s u l t i n death 2) 12 - 16 hours - r e s t l e s s , weak vom i t i n g , hypertension, f a i n t i n g 3) 24 hours - tremor, delerium, "D.T.'s" 4) 2 - 3 days - convulsions - 112 -5) 4 - 7 days - delerium, a g i t a t i o n , high body temperature 6) Symptoms can be r e l i e v e d by drugs. What does t h i s mean? Problems i n t h i s category are usually problems of a "s t r a i g h t s o c i e t y . " (sometimes c a l l e d "the establishment") 1) Older, middle-aged society, rather than youth. 2) Greater problem than we sometimes think - 113 -INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITY Magazines c o n t a i n numerous advertisements f o r a l c o h o l . This drug i s part nf the depressant drug type along w i t h the b a r b i t u r a t e s and minor t r a n q u i l i z e r s . "Jith your magazines, f l i p through the pages and l i s t the a l c o h o l advertisements. 3arbiturates are the best known droup of seep-producing or sedative drugs, suggest s e v e r a l slang names to describe b a r b i t u r a t e s or depressant l i k e i r u g s . - 114 -Slang names for drugs usually are d e s c r i p t i v e . Although you probably do not enow the meaning of these drug names, make up a slang name for each one. Amytal ( s o l i d blue capsule) Seconal (bright red capsule) Tueinal (orange and blue capsule) Nembutal ( s o l i d yellow capsule) Phenobarbital (various coloured tablets) - 115 -Here are 5 l e v e l s of e f f e c t s of b a r b i t u r a t e s , according to the amount taken: Death A n t i - a n x i e t y Hypnosis Sedation Coma Put them i n the c o r r e c t order. rhere aremany problems r e s u l t i n g from the misuse and abuse of the depressant type drugs. Write a short t r a g i c s t o r y about a person's experience w i t h depressants. Give the f a c t s of the problem and the consequences. - 116;, -R 0 L L I D E L E R \ U K A D w E A A N l F S r C E W G E R 0 A 0 R 0 P S R R S E N A U S E A y T X f E E A U A 1 K A E W P l U I A L A K T R E u L 0 U 1 r U P N S M E S R p u M 0 N s L S B vJ I S u 0 \ A s 0 T E 6. L L. O A T A S L B o A R 1 R U A A L F L N A 0 S E A R N X S N E U S E F A 1 N r I N G P X X S M E S P M A R c O A H I s 1 u IT S S e L T S E R A 0 X 0 A R H A u S E A O R U X S E U fl r S S p M A R C S S E L T S E R HIDDEN ABOVE ARE THE SYMPTOMS OP WITHDRAWAL PROM BARBITUATES. THE WORDS MAY BE FOUND HORIZONTALLY, VERTICALLY, DIAGONALLY, FORWARD AND BACKWARD. THE WORD WHICH IS FOUND ONLY ONCE IS NOT A SYMPTOM. WHAT IS IT? HERE ARE THE WORDS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR: NAUSEA TREMULOUS ANXIOUS RESTLESS WEAK CRAMPS FAINTING DELERIUM - 117 -OUTLINE FOR .CNS' STIMULANTS The C e n t r a l Nervous System s t i m u l a n t s , o r " u p p e r s , " s t i m u l a t e the b r a i n : 1) C o c a i n e ( " C o k e , " " Snow, " " B l ow" ) 2) Amphetamines ( B e n z e d r i n e , M e t h e d r i n e , D e x e d r i n e , Me th , Speed, C r y s t a l ) A l l have the same s t i m u l a n t a c t i o n on the b r a i n , though c o c a i n e i s c l a s s i f i e d under the law as a n a r c o t i c - t y p e d r u g . E f f e c t s o f amphetamines a t low d o s e s : 1) A r o u s a l , a l e r t n e s s , w a k e f u l n e s s 2) I n c r e a s e d energy 3) D e c r e a s e d a p p e t i t e 4) Boredom and f a t i g u e overcome 5) A n x i e t y , n e r v o u s n e s s , h e a r t b e a t i n g q u i c k l y E f f e c t s a t h i g h d o s e s , t a k e n o r a l l y , i n j e c t e d or- s n i f f e d : 1) F e e l i n g s o f power, p l e a s u r e 2) " R u s h , " r e p e t i t i o u s b e h a v i o u r T o x i c i t y o c c u r s when doses a r e h i g h : . 1) H a l l u c i n a t i o n s - v i v i d f e e l i n g s 2) P s y c h o t i c b e h a v i o u r , d e l u s i o n s , p a r a n o i a , v i o l e n c e 3) B l o o d v e s s e l d i s e a s e T o l e r a n c e d e v e l o p s , p h y s i c a l dependence i s q u e s t i o n a b l e , p s y c h o l o g i c a l dependence i s v e r y g r e a t . P rob lems w i t h amphetamines: 1) Lo s s o f a p p e t i t e 2) P s y c h o l o g i c a l p rob lems 3) D i s e a s e s due to n e e d l e s 4) I n j e c t i o n o f i n s o l u b l e m a t e r i a l Laws i n Canada have t i g h t e n e d s i n c e J a n u a r y 1, 1973 and t h e r e f o r e , CNS s t i m u l a n t s a r e g e n e r a l l y h a r d to g e t . Amphetamines can no l o n g e r be p u r c h a s e d f o r we i gh t c o n t r o l s i n c e i t i s now a g a i n s t t he law. - 118 -). Some medical uses: 1) People who need to stay awake 2) Over-active c h i l d r e n 3) Mental r e t a r d a t i o n 4) E p i l e p s y 5) Parkinsonism 6) Low blood pressure L . P r e v i o u s l y used as l o c a l a n a e s t h e t i c s , but today we have b e t t e r ones. - 119 -FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS AND FIND THE HIDDEN ANSWER. c 0 P I L 0 T s D E X t E S 8 N s L E E W w T R A C j E ? B A & E N E s • s 0 U e E L M S T R A E rt E o E S N M L — E ? A N P p R i Z A T s ? R i 8 i c E E R S b M \ U M L K A W b T T M A A L 0 C L rt C E 6 R 0 E L T A T A & s u rt P H l 0 M E T T R A A A p 0 T H S L D L S G s s E E £ p Y> E L B P R O S £ s Y M R J A G S C o c A 1 N e A C 0 A S r T 0 c o A S T 7 1. C i r c l e a l l numbers greater than four 2. C i r c l e the following names: JOE, DICK, SUE, CAROL, LAURA, BRAD and TIM. 3 . C i r c l e a l l the arithmetic signs. 4. C i r c l e the following words (forward, backward, horizontal, v e r t i c a l or diagonal): PEP PILLS SPLASH FOOTBALL PEACHES COAST TO COAST HEARTS METH METHEDRINE UPS BENNIES BENZEDRINE COCAINE EYE OPENER BOTTLE DEXIES CRYSTAL JAG ROSES CO PILOTS CftRftWHEELS What do these a l l have i n common? Fi-11 i n the answer with the u n c i r c l e d l e t t e r s and numbers: ANSWER: n n - 120 -PLEASE FOLLOW THE.DIRECTIONS TO FIND THE HIDDEN MESSAGE ABOUT AMPHETAMINES• Y H r A K H P L A R Q u s 0 P E E D I & E R \ E 3 A 4 T F \ R S E A K M S A % Q 0 T Q U U L Q U N H N 0 R S T 0 R E E T E P 8 -r- • O X — V E S P K 1 N P N Y E E N A T N U S 4 4 S N A R 0 N T E N 1. C i r c l e 18. 2. C i r c l e the hoys' names: ERNIE, NORMAN, RALPH. 3. C i r c l e the g i r l s ' names: RITA, KATHY. 4. C i r c l e every box which i s four from the l e f t . 5 . C i r c l e Kamloops. 6. If you l i e on the teeach i n the summer, you might get a . C i r c l e I t . 7. C i r c l e a l l numbers, including words and figures. 8. C i r c l e the f i r s t two l e t t e r s of QUEEN wherever they appear, either together or separate. 9. C i r c l e the word that t e l l s where you buy things. 10. C i r c l e a l l the arithmetic signs. Remember, words may be forward, backward, horizontal, v e r t i c a l or diagonal. NOW, USE THE UN@IRCLED LETTERS TO FIND THE ANSWER: ANSWER: - 121 -OUTLINE FOR L.S.D. PART 1 1. Dr. McNeil def ines some terms r e l a t i n g to ha l luc inogenic drugs: (a) Psychotomimetic - mimicking psychosis (b) Hal luc inogenic - producing ha l luc ina t ions (something t h a t ' s not r e a l l y there) (c) I l l u s i ons - the mistaking of something fo r what i t i s not (d) Delusions - a f i xed f a l s e b e l i e f that cannot be changed, even by l o g i ca l argument (e) Psychedel ic - mind manifest ing or s o - ca l l ed mind expanding. 2. LSD i s the most potent ha l luc inogenic drug. Very, very small amounts are needed to produce e f f e c t s . 3. Most of the e f f e c t s are in the bra in . A person's perception of the world around him i s changed: (a) time sense changes (b) c o l o r s , patterns, distances change (c) v i sua l i l l u s i o n s occur (d) non- log ica l th ink ing (e) loss o f boundaries — f e e l i n g outs ide onese l f ( f ) cross ing over of senses - - hearing and ta s t ing a c o l o r , f o r example. 4. An LSD t r i p l a s t s 1 - 4 hours, and i s usua l ly over in 12 hours. (a) A pleasant experience i s c a l l e d a "good t r i p " - - i t depends on qua l i t y of drug, se t , s e t t i n g , presence of a guide. (b) a "bad t r i p " happens when there i s anx iety, f ea r , impure drug. 5. A bad t r i p can cause a person to become psychot ic . Often another person can provide necessary comfort and help. - 122 -OUTLINE FOR L.S.D. PART 2 1. Tolerance to the e f f ec t s of L.S.D. develops very q u i c k l y , and d i s s ipa tes qu ick ly . (a) There ' s cross to lerance between L.S.D. and mescal ine. (b) There ' s no cross to lerance between L.S.D. and marijuana. 2. T o x i c i t y : What does L.S.D. do to a person? (a) Most problems are psychological - - bad t r i p s . (b) Flashbacks. (c) B i r th defects are pos s ib le . (d) Epi lepsy in a few i n d i v i d u a l s , (f) Problems while in a de lus ion. 3. Uses of L.S.D.: There are none at present. (a) Alcohol ism treatment - - no. (b) Mental health treatment - - no. 4. There i s no physical dependence on L.S.D., and no withdrawal e f f e c t s . 5. The e f f e c t s are so big that people l i m i t t h e i r use. 6. Other drugs l i k e L.S.D.: Mescal ine, p s i l o c y b i n , S .T.P. , D.O.E.T. 7. Other ha l luc inogenic drugs unl ike L.S.D.: Bel ladonna, n i t rons ox ide, phencycl id ine ( ca l l ed Hog, Angel Dust, Peace P i l l - - i t i s an anaesthet ic , but small doses cause ha l l uc ina t i on s . ) -123 -Individual A c t i v i t y Write a s to ry , short episode, or poem about a bad t r i p . Make i t h o r r i b l e , scary and even sad. Include behavior and inc idents that you have heard, seen or even experienced that have resu l ted from bad t r i p s . Things to Think About and Do 1. Recal l a f r i gh ten ing dream or nightmare. Did th i s cause physical symptoms? Yes or No What would they? How i s a dream or nightmare d i f f e r e n t from a drug t r i p ? 2. Can ha l luc ina to ry experiences be induced without drugs? Yes or No . I f yes - - How? 3. What are the " cond i t ions " that a f f e c t the e f f ec t s of drugs? Why should there be a "guide" fo r " t r i p t aker s . " APPENDIX B: NON-PHARMACOLOGICALLY BASED HUMAN RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM - 124 -OUTLINE FOR MARIJUANA Marijuana comes from the plant c a l l e d Cannabis Sa t iva . The ac t i ve drug in th i s plant i s THC. Two forms of the drug appear in North America. (a) Hashish - - the tops of the p lant ; as much as 20% THC. (b) Marijuana - - the en t i r e p lant , shopped up, minus seeds; only 1% THC. So, hashish i s more potent than marijuana. Marijuana i s usua l ly smoked. The e f f ec t s are not iceable almost immediately, and they l a s t f o r about 30 minutes. If the drug i s taken by mouth ( in a d r ink , or baked in cookies) i t i s less potent, the e f f e c t s are not iceable a f t e r 30 minutes, and they might l a s t 6 - 1 2 hours. A l so , the drug per s i s t s in the body. 56 hours fo r ha l f of i t to be e l iminated. E f fec t s of marijuana.outs ide the bra in : (a) rapid heart r a te . (b) reddening of eyes. (c) body temperature, blood pressure only s l i g h t l y changed (d) smoke i r r i t a t e s mouth and throat . E f fec t s of marijuana on the b ra in : ( i ) Usual dose. (a) euphoria (b) exaggeration of emotion (c) du l l i n g of a t tent ion (d) time sense l o s t (e) anxiety (f) sensory changes ( l i gh t s seem br i gh te r , e tc . ) (g) "zoom" lens e f f e c t (h) some appet i te change ( i ) impaired memory, e s p e c i a l l y of recent events ( i i ) Usual dose - - bad e f f e c t s : (a) anxiety • (d) nausea (b) panic (e) l i ghtness (c) d izz iness (f ) decrease in motor performance - 125 -Outline for Marijuana (continued) ( i i i ) Higher doses: (a) more pronounced distortions. (b) visual hallucinations (c) paranoia (d) psychotic state (iv) Higher doses -- adverse reactions: (a) greater toxicity when taken orally (b) psychosis (c) hangover (d) flashbacks 8. Long term effects of marijuana are being debated. (i) Some tolerance occurs, (ii) In some people, reverse tolerance occurs, and less drug is used: (a) person learns smoking technique (b) drug accumulated in body (i i i ) Long term adverse effects: (a) lung cancer (b) disease fighting cells are reduced (c) brain size reduced -- debatable (d) amotivational syndrome -- debatable (e) teenagers mature more slowly 9. Marijuana has no use in society. 10. Does marijuana use lead to use of other drugs? (i) Yes. (a) people using drugs are close to people using other drugs -- availability (b) barriers against drug use are broken down by smoking marijuana (ii) No. (a) heroin users take alcohol, tobacco along with marijuana (b) recent heroin users never used marijuana (c) no pharmacological reason why using marijuana should lead to use of other drugs - 126 -LISTED BELOW ARE A NUMBER OP SLANG TERMS. CIRCLE THE ONES THfiT REFER TO MARIJUANA. THEY MAY BE NICKNAMES, WORDS DESCRIBING USE, OR WORDS ASSOCIATED IN THE BUYING AND SELLING OF MARIJUANA. MUTAH JIVE CHIEF ACID MEZZ WEEKEND HABIT PEANUTS ON THE NOD POT NARCO MAINLINE LOCOWEED BARBS ARTILLERY GRASS HAWK TEA PARTY FRESH AND SWEET ROPE HEAD GOLD DUST CHARGED UP JOINT BREAD ROACH BUZZ BINDLE WEED TEXAS TEA YEN SHEE MOR A GRIFA BLOW A STICK WORKS HAY GRIEFO RED DEVILS LIPTON TEA BAGMAN KIEF REEFER PINKS STICK KILO SCA,G MANICURE JOY POWDER GAGE HOT SQUARE HOOKED DOPE HEMP DYNAMITE DECK MARY JANE COASTING WEED HEAD - 127 -Marijuana may be taken in several ways r e s u l t i n g in d i f f e r e n t e f f e c t s . Draw methods of taking th i s drug. Poss ib ly you have seen or heart about various methods. Some of them may be very d i f f e r e n t . Diagram  Method Diagram Method Diagram Method Other Methods - 128 -FIND OUT THE NAME OF THE MOST POTENT TYPE OF THE DRUG WHICH IS GENERALLY CALLED MARIJUANA. L 0 G T D A N W o C A M C A R A S A T N A G E S A N A G A & U A N G A X S J T G N C L A R A M E A M A C O N A D 14 K r E F F G B A A L S S s P E N S I A G R A I A H I A A E J G P R A M R K W R. F N A e> A B K S A B A M A C 0 H N A I A H H R G 1 R C 0 E T E H C 0 E K C 14 A R A s F Hidden above are the names for the d i f f e r e n t types of CANNABIS SATIVA, or marijuana. The name that appears most often i s the answer to the puzzle. Here are the names: HASHISH MACOHNA C HARAS GANJA KIEF DAGGA BHANG They appear forward, backward, horizontally, v e r t i c a l l y and diagonally. THE MOST POTENT TYPE IS: _ - 129 -OUTLINE FOR SOLVENT SNIFFING 1. Solvent s n i f f i n g has become a problem j u s t in the l a s t few years . 2. What are the solvents that a f f e c t the nervous system? (a) A i rp lane cements (e) Gasol ine (b) P l a s t i c cement ( f ) Cleaning f l u i d (c) F ingerna i l po l i sh remover (g) Corn and ca l l ou s remover (Poly) (d) Lagner th inner 3. The chemical substances found in the solvents that a f f e c t the bra in a re : (a) Toluene (d) Acetone (b) Xylene (e) Naphtha (c) Benzene ( f ) A lcohols 4. Solvent users - - some experimenters, some moderate user s , few heavy users : (a) Age 13-17, genera l ly (b) Boys more than g i r l s (c) Spree use — once in awhile to the point o f t o x i f i c a t i o n (d) Se l f l i m i t i n g - - people stop 5. Chronic users are usua l l y having problems: fami ly d i s o r g a n i z a t i o n , t ruancy, underachievers, s o c i a l problems. 6. E f f ec t s o f so lvent s n i f f i n g : combination of depressant and psycho-mimetic e f f e c t s . ( i ) Immediate - - depends a l o t on set . (a) l i g h t headed — spinning through space (b) euphoria - - f e e l i n g o f strength (c) drowsiness — f e e l i n g numb (d) h a l l u c i n a t i o n - - v i v i d c o l o r s , sounds ( i i ) A f t e r the drug wears o f f — person c a n ' t r e c a l l a l l that happened. (a) weight loss 7. Tolerance develops to some extent . - 1 3 0 -Outline for Solvent Sniffing (continued) 8. Psychological dependence occurs, and addition is found in chronic users. 9. Physical dependence with withdrawal is unlikely. 10. Problems: (a) death (suffocation) (b) heart stoppage (c) stop breathing (d) brain damage (rare) (e) psychological dependence — person escapes from reality, matures slowly (f) l iver, kidney damage is possible 11. Similar drugs — aerosols, or spray cans: (a) can be inhaled (b) same problems as above - 131 -OUTLINE FOR TOBACCO Dr. McNeil says that people don ' t u sua l l y think tobacco i s a drug, but i t i s . 2. Tobacco contains n i co t i ne which st imulates the nervous system to. re lease ce r t a i n chemical substances. 3. The reason why people smoke i s to get n i co t ine into the body to bring about the re lease of these chemical substances, such as ad rena l i n . 4. I f you take n i co t ine out o f tobacco, people won't smoke i t . The e f f e c t s o f n i co t i ne in the body: (a) blood vessels are c o n s t r i c t e d . (b) blood gets less oxygen because people inhave carbon d iox ide . (c) blood pressure increases . (d) overdose i s po s s ib le : nausea, vomit ing, los s o f consciousness. The long term e f f e c t s of cont inual n i co t i ne use: (a) decrease l i f e span. (b) more heart a t tacks . (c) more lung cancer — more than 90% of a l l lung cancer v ict ims are c i g a re t te smokers. (d) smoking mothers have more s t i l l b o r n babies, small l i v e babies, and more babies which d ie ea r l y in l i f e . 7. What i s the basis f o r smoking? Several t h e o r i e s : (a) psychologica l need to have something in the mouth. (b) pharmacological need f o r the brain to be e i t h e r st imulated or depressed. 8. Is smoking an addict ion? Look a t the f a c t s : (a) smokers use t h e i r drug every day, and some use i t every 30 minutes. (b) body changes occur: i r r i t a b i l i t y , increased appe t i t e , re s t l e s snes s , heart rate decreases, s leep disturbances a l l these happen when people stop smoking. (c) smokers w i l l continue even when they know i t ' s dangerous, or when they are s i c k . - 132 -Out l ine f o r Tobacco (continued) 9. Can people q u i t smoking? (a) i t ' s very hard. (b) not a l l people who say they can qu i t are ab le to do i t . 1 0 . Dr. McNeil th inks c i g a r e t t e smoking has a l l the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f true a d d i c t i o n . - 133 -OUTLINE FOR EFFECTS OF DRUGS ON CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM 1. There are two systems by which the body maintains i t s normal func t ion ing : (a) endocrine (gland) system (b) the nervous system 2. The Endocrine System: (a) long range and slow changes in the body (b) re lease of hormones to produce e f f e c t s , i . e . i n s u l i n hormone re leased from pancreas lowers blood glucose (decreases amount of sugar in our blood 3. Nervous System: rapid changes - - happen qu ick ly 4. Dr. McNeill s tates the nervous system i s d iv ided into two par t s : (a) centra l nervous system - - spinal cord and brain (b) per ipheral nervous system - - those nerves outs ide of spinal cord and brain 5. Per ipheral Nervous System can fu r ther be d iv ided i n t : (a) somatic - - nerves to arms and legs (b) autonomic - - organs such as heart , glands we respond automat ica l ly to ce r t a in s t imul i 6. Dr. McNeill e laborates on the Central Nervous System: (a) spinal cord - - two way nerve s igna ls (b) medulla or medulla oblongata - - breathing, keeping heart running - - ce r t a i n drugs can depress medulla (c) midbrain with r e t i c u l a r a c t i v a t i n g system - - sends nerves to other parts of brain (d) hypothalamus - - centra l contro l of autonomic system (e) thalamus - - "way s t a t i o n " (f ) cerebel lum - - contro l s balance (g) cerebra l cortex — most important part contains 9/10 of a l l nerves respons ib le fo r th ink ing , memory 7. Dr. McNeil l s tates that the basic un i t of the nervous system i s the nerve or neuron (a) 11 b i l l i o n (b) 10 b i l l i o n in centra l nervous system (c) mode up of c e l l body, dendr i te s , axon - - axon c a r r i e s message - - c a r r i e d e l e c t r i c a l l y (d) nerves communicate both e l e c t r i c a l l y and chemical ly - 134 -Out l ine fo r E f fec t s of Drugs on Central Nervous System (continued) 8. On his diagram Dr. McNeill explains how a message i s passed from nerve to nerve: (a) t ransmit ter (b) mitochrondria - - f a c to r i e s of c e l l (c) receptor area 9. Dr. McNeill s tates that the t ransmit ter and receptor can be compared to a lock and key: 10. Drugs a f f e c t nerves by act ing on the t ransmi t ter : (a) amphetamines — re lease large amounts of t ransmit ter (b) preventing re lease of t ransmit ter - - drugs such as na r co t i c s , a lcohol and depressants (c) mimic t ransmitter - - drug brings a change (d) blocking - - f i t t i n g onto receptor area to prevent change 11. Dr. McNeill expla ins the receptor and transmitted by the idea of lock and key: (a) lock and key f i t t i n g - - connection (b) wrong key in lock - - blocks r i gh t connection re su l t s in f i g h t between r i gh t key (drug) and wrong key (antagonist) 12. Antagonist can be helpfu l as pointed out by Dr. McNe i l l : - antagonize e f f e c t of narcot i c s Note - Each part of brain recept ive to only ce r t a i n types of drugs. Certa in drugs a f f e c t c e r t a i n areas. Furthermore each area of the brain has d i f f e r e n t s e n s i t i v i t y . - 135 -- 136 -ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS, USING YOUR OUTLINE AS A REFERENCE 1. The two systems i n the body which maintain normal body functioning are: a) k) __• 2. The system which contains rapid changes and i s quickly a f f e c t e d by d i f f e r e n t drugs i s the system. 3. The cent r a l nervous system consists of and 4. The basic unit of the nervous system i s or 5. Nerves communicate messages i n two ways: and 6: Drugs can a f f e c t a transmitter i n 4 ways. They may - and 7. Drugs that stop a c e r t a i n drug from taking e f f e c t are c a l l e d 8. Which type of drugs would release large amounts of transmitter? 9. What type of drugs would prevent release of transmitter? - 137 -USING YOUR OUTLINE AND THE DIAGRAM SHEET DRAW A LINE CONNECTING THE WORDS UNDER COLUMN A WITH ITS MEANING IN COBUMN B. ONE OF THEM IS COMPLETED FOR YOU. EACH MEANING CAN BE USED ONLY ONCE. Column A Cerebral Cortex Column B Quick changes, r e a l l y fast Neuron A l c o h o l a f f e c t s t h i s area, makes you t i p s y Endocrine System Lock and Key connection Autonomic The drug n a l l i n e i s c a l l e d t h i s because i t stops the action of '-narcotics Receptor and transmitter "Way s t a t i o n " Medulla The basic unit of the nervous system Spinal Cord Hypothalamus Slow changes i n the body organs Nervous system which reacts auto-m a t i c a l l y - p u l l hand away from hot stove Cerebellum Controls your breath of l i f e Antagonist Part of the ce n t r a l nervous system Thalamus Part that controls the autonomic system Nervous system Don't forget the most important part of the brain. Think, Remember. - 138 -The brain i s a very complicated mechanism. I t , also, i s a work of a r t . Nothing i n the world may be compared to i t . The b r a i n can do so many things. I t can store information, i t enables us to solve problems, and i t i s the c e n t r a l control of our whole body. Wow, what a c r e a t i o n ! What a teemendously complicated and s e n s i t i v e mechanism! FIND OUT WHAT CONTROLS THE BRAIN AND HOW IT CONTROLS THE BRAIN BY SOLVING THE PUZZLE BELOW Inst r u c t i o n The following sentence contains words that are written backwards and/or upside down. Re-arrange the l e t t e r s , putting them f i r s t i n t h e i r correct p o s i t i o n , then putting the l e t t e r s i n proper order. For example , c A _ i s r e a l l y SOUL MUSIC. A <9 N o / j _ V J r\ I - X S 3 A ^ 3 Z S 3 J J S The sentence i s : - 139; -Some of the material for t h i s program has been copyrighted. It has been used for research purposes only. - Uo -Session number 1: I n t r o d u c t i o n and Contract Formation L. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (25 min) Hand out mimeographed "Personal Value S h i e l d " to each student. Each student i s to complete each quadrant as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . Then each student i s to rank order which quadrant i s "most important" and to i n d i c a t e the ranking i n the brackets provided (allow 10 min). I n s t r u c t students to buttonhole or p i n t h e i r "Personal Value S h i e l d " to t h e i r chest. Have the students " m i l l " without v e r b a l l y communicating to other students u n t i l they have broken i n t o "choice t r y a d s " as i n s t r u c t e d . Each member of each tr y a d i s to communicate three quadrants of t h e i r s h i e l d s to the other two members of t h e i r t r y a d (allow 15 min). 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (5 min) Each f a c i l i t a t o r introduces h i m s e l f to the t o t a l c l a s s by communicating three quadrants of h i s "Personal Value S h i e l d " . Following the i n t r o -duction from each f a c i l i t a t o r another f a c i l i t a t o r asks: "Why are you t e l l i n g me t h i s ? " emphasizing the words "you," "me" and " t h i s . " No f u r t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n i s provided. 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (25 min) The c l a s s i s a r b i t r a r i l y d i v i d e d i n t o three " i l l u m i n a t i o n groups" (of about 10 people i n each group) and one f a c i l i t a t o r goes w i t h each group. Each p a r t i c i p a t o r of each group i s s t i l l wearing h i s "Personal Value S h i e l d . " The f a c i l i t a t o r i n each group asks the questions, "Why di d you t e l l the people what you t o l d them about y o u r s e l f ? " The f a c i l i t a t o r s o l i c i t s response as to the data that was communicated, the persons i n v o l v e d i n the t r a n s a c t i o n , and the r a t i o n a l e and importance of the act of communication. 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: Hand out "personal expectation sheets" as students leave the c l a s s . - 141 -Session number 1 : Personal Value S h i e l d (name) Quadrant #1 ( ) What are the two things I do BEST? 1. The best i s Quadrant #2 ( ) / What i s one t h i n g that I am r e a l l y / AGAINST? / 1. I r e a l l y am against / \ 2. The second best i s \ Quadrant #3 ( ) \ I f I had one f u l l year and \ u n l i m i t e d money, I would Quadrant #4 ( ) / What i s my highest REALISTIC / a s p i r a t i o n ? / \ Quadrant #5 ( ) \ Who are two people that \ I would l i k e to become \ more than anyone e l s e \ i n a l l h i s t o r y ? \ l m Quadrant #6 ( ) / What i s one t h i n g (person / i d e a l , hope) that I w o u l d / die f o r ? / \ 2* DIRECTIONS; 1. Complete each quadrant of the S h i e l d 2. Rank order from "most important" (1) to " l e a s t important" (6) and i n d i c a t e i n the brackets 3. Buttonhole the sheet to your chest. Wait f o r f u r t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n s . - 142 _ Session number 1 : Personal Expectation Sheet (To be completed BEFORE Session ill - This i s f o r your personal use ONLY) A. "The Me" I'd L i k e To Be Imagine i n your mind f o r about 3 minutes the r e a l or imaginary person that you would l i k e to be. F i x i n your mind an image of t h i s person. B r i e f l y l i s t the f i v e major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that he has that you would l i k e . L i s t only those things that YOU want, that YOU t h i n k that you would l i k e f o r YOU. 1. 2. __ 3. 4. 5. B. How To Be "The Me" I'd L i k e To Be A f t e r you have completed a l l f i v e major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of part A (above) ask y o u r s e l f the question, "What can I DO to make each one of those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s my own?" S t a r t w i t h #1 and work on that u n t i l you have completed i t and then go on to #2, and so on, u n t i l you have f i n i s h e d #5. For example, say the #1 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c t h a t you would l i k e i s to be "accepted and l i k e d by my f r i e n d s . " What can you DO to be accepted and l i k e d by them? Who are they? What are there names? Is i t r e a l l y important that I am l i k e d and accepted by ? Go ahead and do your best. - 143 -Now that you have completed part A and B, re-read what you have w r i t t e n and ask y o u r s e l f the q u e s t i o n , "Do I r e a l l y b e l i e v e t h a t I can i n c o r p o r a t e these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n t o my own p e r s o n a l i t y ? " I f your answer i s "Yes" then what i s stopping you from becoming the person that you would l i k e to be? Perhaps during the next fourteen sessions we w i l l again touch upon some of these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . At those times you might remember what those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are and determine whether or not they are r e a l i s t i c expectations f o r you. - 144 -Decide For Y o u r s e l f ; Session E v a l u a t i o n Session // ' Date: Time: ( C o n f i d e n t i a l Student Process Document) DIRECTIONS: 1 . The Session E v a l u a t i o n form i s a c o n f i d e n t i a l document f o r your own use only. No one w i l l see i t unless you show i t to them. 2 . The Session E v a l u a t i o n form w i l l be l i k e a personal d i a r y of your growth. I f you complete i t honestly you w i l l be able to see your change over the weeks of the Decide For Y o u r s e l f s e s s i o n s . 3. You may f e e l l i k e you've learned "nothing". I f that i s an honest response that i s the k i n d of response that would be appropriate to i n d i c a t e . 4 . You must complete the form during the s e s s i o n . I f you complete the form when you are at home you w i l l not get accurate data. 5 . Think and work r a p i d l y s i n c e only 5 minutes w i l l be allowed f o r completion. Complete a l l 1 0 blanks. I am completing t h i s form honestly. Yes No 1 . I learned that I 2. I r e a l i z e d that I 3. I re-learned that I 4 . I was s u r p r i z e d that I 5 . I n o t i c e d that I 6. I was pleased that I _ 7. I discovered that I 8 . I was displeased that I 9. I hope that I 0. I have decided that I - 145 -Session number 2; The E x i s t e n t i a l Moment i n Past, Present and Future Dimensions 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (15 min) Hand out mimeographed copies of an imaginary newspaper c l i p p i n g of Pr e s i d e n t Richard Nixon's r e s i g n a t i o n on a paper e n t i t l e d , "When Did I Become The Person That I Am Today?" On the paper i s a time l i n e of the ex-U.S. P r e s i d e n t . Below the time l i n e i s a s e r i e s of blanks e n t i t l e d "past choices" and another s e r i e s e n t i t l e d " a n t i c i p a t e d l i f e . " Two f a c i l i t a t o r s r o l e play i n costume a s e r i e s of t r a n s a c t i o n s between Richard Nixon and Nixon's w i f e demonstrating the d i f f i c u l t y of the e x i s t e n t i a l choice. The students complete the blanks as they watch the r o l e p l a y . i 2. I n s t r u e t i o n a l _ P e r i o d : (10 min) In three a r b i t r a r i l y d i v i d e d " i l l u m i n a t i o n groups" brainstorm on the past and f u t u r e i n f l u e n c i n g the present i n the imaginary r o l e play about Nixon's r e s i g n a t i o n . The group f a c i l i t a t o r w i l l record each expressed opinion on the blackboard or f l i p chart under the t i t l e s "past choices" and " a n t i c i p a t e d l i f e . " 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (20 min) Hand out mimeographed copies of a l i f e l i n e to each student. The extreme l e f t end of the l i n e i s l a b e l e d " b i r t h " and the extreme r i g h t end of the l i n e i s l a b e l e d "death." The student i s i n s t r u c t e d to place an "X" on the l i n e where he now i s , and compute h i s death age. He i s then to record between 10 and 20 past events below the l i n e and i n d i c a t e t h e i r p o s i t i o n on the l i n e . He i s to record between 5 and 10 f u t u r e events below the l i n e and i n d i c a t e t h e i r p o s i t i o n on the l i n e . The student's age f o r each event i s also recorded on the l i n e . 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: I n s t r u c t students to complete l i f e l i n e and to do a " r e a l b i r t h announcement," " I am what?" and "two o b i t u a r i e s . " Mimeographed copies of the forms are handed out at the completion of c l a s s . - 146 -Session number 2 ; L i f e l i n e (To be completed BEFORE session number 3 i f not completed during c l a s s ) DIRECTIONS: A. . On the l i f e l i n e below, your l i f e and death are i n d i c a t e d at the extremes of the l i n e . Place an "X" where you are r i g h t now and l a b e l i t w i t h your present age (years and months). According to your present age and the distance between your b i r t h and the present, p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y compute your death age. I n d i c a t e 10 to 20 past events that made you the k i n d of person you are today. Look to the f u t u r e and i n d i c a t e 5 to 10 f u t u r e events that you a n t i c i p a t e . For a l l of these events i n d i c a t e your approximate age i n years. B. Once you have completed the events on your l i f e l i n e , graph whether each experience was a good or bad experience. For example, do you t h i n k your b i r t h was a good or bad experience? How about your death? What about your NOW? Connect a l l the h i g h and low p o i n t s w i t h a s i n g l e graph l i n e , moving from the b i r t h p o i n t to the death p o i n t . r w "Good" ."Pretty much happy" When I was born Wli en I w i l l die "Pretty much unhappy" 'Bad' "A bummer" - 148 -Session number 2 : Real B i r t h Announcements (To be completed BEFORE s e s s i o n number 3) At your b i r t h your parents probably sent out b i r t h announcements that s a i d how "pleased" they were at your b i r t h . Maybe they were genuinely pleased and, y e t , maybe they were not pleased at a l l . Write a " r e a l b i r t h announcement" i n the space provided. Cut out the announcement and glue i t to a piece of cardboard. F o l d on the d i v i d i n g l i n e . What i s on the f r o n t cover? Is there any p i c t u r e ? What i s the col o r ? Is there anything on the i n s i d e l e f t h a l f ? What i s on the back? Is the message typed, w r i t t e n i n p e n c i l ? Decorate the card as you b e l i e v e your parents r e a l l y f e l t . I f they were joyous i n d i c a t e the joy on the card. I f they d i d not care, i n d i c a t e the care l e s s n e s s . You can use magazine c l i p p i n g s , f i n g e r p a i n t , anything that i s appropriate to communicate how you b e l i e v e your parents r e a l l y f e l t . - 149 -Session number 2 : I Am What? (To be completed BEFORE session number 3) You are a number of t h i n g s . Some of these a t t r i b u t e s are more e s s e n t i a l to you than others are. For example, i t may be--more important f o r you to be female than r e l i g i o u s , or upper c l a s s than O r i e n t a l . L i s t ten words or phrases that best answer the question, " I am what?" A f t e r having l i s t e d a l l ten words or phrases, rank order them from "most important" to " l e a s t important". Rank . . , 1 1 . 1. I am 2. I am 3. I am 4. I am 5. I am 6. I am 7. I am -8. I am 9. I am 10. I am - 150 -Session number 2 ; Two O b i t u a r i e s (To be completed BEFORE session number 3 ) An o b i t u a r y i s a b r i e f a r t i c l e i n a newspaper or news magazine about a person's death. I t contains the important b i o g r a p h i c data of the person. Imagine, i f you can, being dead r i g h t now. Under "Obituary Now" w r i t e what your obituary would be. Imagine being dead f i v e years from today. Under "Obituary Future" w r i t e what your o b i t u a r y w i l l be. Obituary Now Obituary Future - 151 -Session number 3: S t r u c t u r a l A n a l y s i s 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (5 min) Hand out mimeographed copies of the "Are you Someone Who?" qu e s t i o n n a i r e . Students complete the qu e s t i o n n a i r e . 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (20 min) On s t r u c t u r a l analyses i n T r a n s a c t i o n a l A n a l y s i s and e n t i t l e d "The Person That I Am." This i n s t r u c t i o n a l p e r i o d , as a l l others, are i l l u s t r a t e d by overhead p r o j e c t i o n of s t r u c t u r a l diagrams and cartoon c h a r a c t e r s . In a d d i t i o n to these medias, photographic s l i d e s w i l l be pr o j e c t e d i l l u s t r a t i n g Parent, Adult and C h i l d ego s t a t e s . 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (30 min) Students form choice t r y a d s . In the tryads the students are to w r i t e a 30 second mini-drama demonstrating an ego s t a t e of a popular f i g u r e : teacher, musician, f e l l o w student, p o l i t i c i a n , comic character, f a m i l y r o l e , e t c . (allow 15 min) Each t r y a d presents i t s completed mini-drama, i f time i s s u f f i c i e n t , s t a t i n g the name and ego s t a t e of the popular f i g u r e , and a c t i n g out how the ego s t a t e i s preceived i n body p o s i t i o n and vocabulary. 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: Students are to complete the "P-A-C L i f e Value I n d i c a t o r " and chart. In a d d i t i o n , they are to record three instances when they have been aware of being i n t h e i r Parent, t h e i r A d u l t , and t h e i r C h i l d . Students are informed that during the next s e s s i o n they w i l l have the opportunity to communicate these recorded instances of changed ego st a t e s i n choice t r y a d s . The homework assignments are handed to students as they leave the classroom. - 152 -Session number 3: The Person That I Am Every person has three ego states: a Parent (P), an Adult (A), and a Child (C). The person's Parent acts i n the same fashion as did h i s parents or guardians towards him. The Parent can be supportive and sympathetic (Nurturing Parent) or c r i t i c a l (Predjudiced Parent) and i s usually simultaneously both. The person's Adult i s r a t i o n a l and data processing oriented, making decisions on fact rather than prejudices or f e e l i n g s . The person's Child acts i n the same way as he did when he was a c h i l d acting c h i l d i s h . He may act i n an unfettered, "natural" fashion (Free Child) or i n an adapted manner to please or defy his i n t e r n a l P (Adapted C h i l d ) , and he often acts i n both ways. H The Person Parent (P) Adult (A) Child (C) Nurturing Parent (NP) Prejudiced Parent (PP) Free C h i l d L i t t l e Professor Adapted Child Descriptive Aspects of Personality No one ego state i s more important than the other and a l l three are necessary for the wholeness of the person. The Parent nurtures s e l f and others and reminds the Adult what i s or i s not appropriate i n a given s i t u a t i o n . The Adult computes the input data from Parent and C h i l d , integrates and weighs the material and makes decisions based on r e a l i t y . The Child i s usually the n o i s i e s t ego state acting s e l f i s h l y , c r e a t i v e l y , and spontaneously, i n s i s t i n g on here- and- now pleasure experiences. The ego states make themselves known by voices within the person, and are usually most vocal when they disagree. For example, i f an i n d i v i d u a l i s - 153 -deciding whether or not to use i l l i c i t drugs, h i s C h i l d may say, " I f i t f e e l s good, do i t ; " the Parent may say, "That i s not r i g h t and i t should not be done;" and the Adult may say, "Given the pharmacological data, the r i s k - b e n e f i t r a t i o , I have decided not to use drugs f o r now." An adolescent a f t e r robbing a drunk d e r e l i c t says to h i s probation o f f i c e r , " I know I shouldn't have h i t him (P) but I knew what I was doing (A) and anyway, I thought i t would be k i n d of fun (C)." A fourteen year o l d g i r l a f t e r e l o p i n g w i t h a much o l d e r man says to her f a t h e r , " I know I should have j u s t stayed at home (P), but I so much wanted some excitement (C), even though I made the d e c i s i o n a f t e r e v a l u a t i n g the consequences (A)." "That i s not r i g h t and i t should not be done" "Given the pharmacological data, the r i s k - b e n e f i t r a t i o , , I have decided not to use drugs f o r now." " I f i t f e e l s good, do i t . " There are four ways of determining what ego s t a t e a person i s i n : behavior, i n t e r - p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , e a r l y remembrances, and f e e l i n g s . Look at your behavior. I t i n c l u d e s your posture, the way you stand, s i t or walk; i t includes your v o i c e and the words that you use. For example, l i s t e n to the f o l l o w i n g words: cute, marvelous, awful, c h i l d i s h , f i l t h y , These are u s u a l l y Parent words. S u i t a b l e , p r a c t i c a l , a p p r o p r i a t e , and c o r r e c t are u s u a l l y Adult words. Words l i k e gee, f a r out, won't and can't are common C h i l d words. - 154 -Watch how you get along with people. I f the Parent i n you i s bossy, or thinks he knows i t a l l , he w i l l often upset the Chi l d i n other people. If the Chi l d i n you i s fun-loving and happy, the C h i l d i n others w i l l enjoy being around you, and have fun with you. When you behave as Adult, there i s a good chance that the people around you w i l l be Adult towards you. Check your early years, your childhood. You may remember how you s p o k e when you were l i t t l e , and how your mother and father talked. Some-times you w i l l notice that you are t a l k i n g exactly the same way you used to when you were a c h i l d . Then you w i l l know you are speaking as C h i l d . S o m e t i m e s you w i l l h e a r y o u r s e l f say t h i n g s e x a c t l y the way your mother or father d i d . You are then speaking as Parent. Check you own f e e l i n g s . This i s a most important t e s t . You can act u a l l y f e e l the state or part of you that i s active i n you at any given moment. What I might say speaking i n my Parent 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 'You look h o r r i b l e i n that h a l t e r top!" 'Never l e t a stranger give you candy or take you i n h i s 'Poor thing looks as i f he hasn't slept a wink." "Rhymin Simon' i s a h o r r i b l e album." 'It serves you r i g h t . " What I might say speaking i n my Adult 1. "People get 'wild mushrooms' on the U.B.C. endowment lands." 2. "I think i t s best to c a l l the p o l i c e . " 3. "Cabbage has a high vitamin C content." 4. "Why does Bilbo Baggins have h a i r on h i s toes?" 5. " I t ' s nearly four o'clock." What I might say speaking i n my Child 1. "Wow! She's b e a u t i f u l ! " 2. "I wish I could take some time o f f for fun." 3. "Nobody's going to make me throw out my Le v i ' s . " 4. "No matter how well I do my homework, I can't please Mr. Brown." 5. "Yeah, that's r e a l l y f a r out." - 155 -A l l three ego states are of equal importance. The Parent ego state i s th'e/one most disliked because i t can be c r i t i c a l of the selfishness of the Child. The Child is the state most loved because i t indulges i t s e l f , acts spontaneously and is most fun to be around. The Adult is the state that is usually most respected and typifies businessmen, students and politicians. Some people are constant(Parent, Adult or Child; they are stuck in one state to the "exclusion" of the others. Blocked out Child Blocked opt Parent Blocked out Adult erson who cannot play) (Person without a (Person who cannot think conscience) rationally) Another common problem in addition to "exclusion" that can lead to trouble i s contamination which means "messing"'.' The Parent or Child part of you can interfere with your Adult and mess up whatever you are doing or feeling. In some situations you may think you are using your Adult, but i f you are prejudiced, the Parent in you may be doing the talking. For example, i f your mother believed that people of another race are no good, the Parent in you may respond in the same fashion. Your Adult may then be contaminated by your Parent. That i s , your Adult may take what your mother said as fact, without really checking i t out. Your Adult can also be contaminated by your Child. For example, i f you think that people are against you when they really are not, i t may be the scared Child i n you that is messing up your Adult thinking. Parent contaminated C h i l d contaminated Parent and C h i l d Adult Adult contaminated Adult - 157 -Session number 3 : P-A-C L i f e Value Indicator (To be completed BEFORE session number 4) In the following pages are ten images of ten people. If you understand s t r u c t u r a l analysis (P-A-C) you w i l l be able to "hear" what your Parent, Adult and Child "say" about each one of these persons. Although every person i s an imaginary person, some may be l i k e your teachers, parents, friends and even yourself. How do you respond to them from your three ego states? Here i s an example of what you are to do: The b a r f l y : man i n h i s mid-60's who d i s l i k e s h i s wife; cannot hold a job because of drinking continually; has income from previous investments and welfare; has occasional extra-marital sexual r e l a t i o n s ; loves h i s children and gives them more than 10 hours of time each week, buys them 1. Simply f i l l i n the blank according to the response of your P, A and C. It helps some people to f i l l i n the Parent and C h i l d messages f i r s t , and then to complete the Adult message. Complete a l l 10 p e r s o n a l i t i e s before moving °JVitol-the? P^AS-Gikvhart • Complete the p e r s o n a l i t i e s i n any order that you l i k e . 2. Once you have completed your own P-A-C responses to a l l 10 p e r s o n a l i t i e s complete the P-A-C chart. Simply arrange the 10 p e r s o n a l i t i e s from "most harmful(1)" to "least harmful(10)" for your Parent, then your C h i l d and then your Adult. g i f t s . My My My - 158 -P-A-C L i f e Value I n d i c a t o r 1. The S h o p l i f t e r : comes from a w e l l to do f a m i l y ; mother d r i n k s q u i t e a b i t when alone at home during the day; s t e a l s a l l the time, but never over $25.00 each time; has never been i n any t r o u b l e w i t h p o l i c e ; i s i n grade 8 and claims to need the money to continue s c h o o l . 2. The French teacher: middle-aged Scottsman who loves the French language; has a very h i g h standard of ex c e l l a n c e f o r h i s students; both boys and g i r l s o f t e n break down and cry i n h i s c l a s s ; does not know why h i s students don't love French. 3. The ab o r t i o n g i r l : a c o l l e g e student spends her c o l l e g e t u i t i o n fees on an ab o r t i o n at the Vancouver General H o s p i t a l ; her parents gave her the school fees; she does not t e l l her parents f o r f e a r of h u r t i n g them; since she has no money f o r c o l l e g e she has dropped out and l i v e s i n a communal home and o c c a s i o n a l l y looks f o r a job, but cannot f i n d one; she worries that they w i l l e v e n t u a l l y f i n d out. 4. The underachiever: an i n t e l l i g e n t Vancouver high school student who decides on an occupational t e c h n i c a l program i n s t e a d of the academic program; si n c e grade 6 he has had poor marks e s p e c i a l l y i n p h y s i c a l education and h i s t o r y ; he has the p o t e n t i a l f o r A marks i n p h y s i c s , chemistry and b i o l o g y , but th i n k s he i s "nobody" and wants to be w i t h h i s f r i e n d s . - 159 -The drug user: uses MDA and "H" at l e a s t 3-4 times each week; t a l k s about drugs a l o t ; says he r e a l l y enjoys drugs and how i t expands h i s consciousness; he does very w e l l at school but i s in t e n d i n g on q u i t t i n g ; he has l o t s of home h a s s l e s ; he's l o s i n g f r i e n d s . The no-mother: works 48 hours each week becausershe l i k e s working (she has no f i n a n c i a l need); she i s not i n t e r e s t e d i n r e l a t i n g w i t h her 4 k i d s ; her o l d e s t daughter ( i n grade 8) i s having a d i f f i c u l t time r e l a t i n g to other g i r l s and spends much of her time w i t h grade 12 boys. The salesman: s e l l s i n f e r i o r q u a l i t y farm equipment to poor farmers who cannot a f f o r d to pay f o r the products; takes over the farms of those who w i l l not pay according to the c o n t r a c t ; a good husband and f a t h e r ; respected man i n the community. The hippy: a sloppy pot-smoking d r i f t e r ; claims to have no ambitions; p o l i c e record f o r vagrancy; l i v e s on welfare and on anybody who w i l l look a f t e r him; he i s 37 years o l d and has been d r i f t i n g s i n c e he was 19 years o l d . - 160 -The draft-dodger: opposed to U.S. war p o l i c y ; moves to Vancouver and goes to B.C.I.T.; graduates and gets a job as a h o t e l manager; h i r e s other U.S. draft-dodgers. A —< C .0. The runaway: grade 9 boy from middle c l a s s family runs away from home; he refuses to phone h i s parents so as to get back at them f o r some minor i n j u s t i c e ; h i s parents search madly f o r 2 years; a f t e r f i v e years the parents accept h i s "death; 1" the boy i s l i v i n g i n S e a t t l e and has j u s t graduated from a two year t e c h n i c a l school. Chart f o r "P-A-C L i f e Value I n d i c a t o r " : Parent Adult C h i l d 1. s h o p l i f t e r 2. French teacher 3. a b o r t i o n g i r l 4. underachiever 5. drug user 6. no-mother 7. salesman 8. hippy 9. draft-dodger 10. runaway - 161 -c Session number 3 : Your P-A~G (To be completed BEFORE session number 4) )IRECTIONS: lou are asked to record three instances i n which you spoke i n your Parent, rour Adult and your Child during the past one or two days. Write down as close is you can to what you remember you said. I f you were speaking from j rour Parent indicate what you said beside the Parent part of your egogram. Three instances i n the past few days i n which I spoke i n my Parent. What do you FEEL (not "think") l i k e when you speak i n your Parent (give a few descriptive words)? B. Three instances i n the past few days i n which I spoke i n my Adult: - 162 -Give a few des c r i p t i v e words of what i t FEELS l i k e to speak i n your Adult. C Three instances i n the past few days i n which I spoke i n my C h i l d : What does i t FEEL l i k e to speak i n your Child? - 163 -Session number 2»: Interpersonal Transaction 1. Hooking Activity; (15 min) Students are asked to form a choice tryad and to communicate their recorded instances of changed ego states. The f a c i l i t a t o r s during this period mix with the tryads encouraging attentive listening by the students. 2. Insight Experience A: (15 min) In the center of the room are placed magazines of various descriptions: traditionally male and female magazines, religious magazines, news magazines and the l i k e . Each student i s handed three 3" x 5" cards and i s instructed to make three collages representing their three ego states. On the back of each card the students record their particular ego state. The students are then asked to conceal their cards u n t i l a later time. 3. Instructional Period: (15 min) On "How I Transact With People" demonstrating complimentary, crossed and ulterior transactions. Instruction illustrated by a slide presentation of typical human transactions. 4. Insight Experience B: (10 min) Students are to form choice tryads and to take their concealed ego state collages and create complimentary, crossed and ulterior transactions with the other student. 5. Session Evaluation: (5 min) 6. Transferance Assignment: The students are to practise using complimentary, crossed and ulterior transactions at least five times i n the coming week without t e l l i n g anyone what they are doing. - 164 -Sess ion_number 4: How I T r a n s a c t w i t h P e o p l e A t r a n s a c t i o n i s an exchange between two p e o p l e , a b i t o f s o c i a l b u s i n e s s . I t can be an exchange o f f r i e n d l y words , C h r i s t m a s p r e s e n t s o r angry b l o w s . A l l c o n v e r s a t i o n s a r e t r a n s a c t i o n s , one exchange a f t e r a n o t h e r . These exchanges can be A - A , A - C , A - P , P -P , P -A, P -C , C -P , C -A, or C -C . The d i a g ram be low shows examples o f s i m p l e t r a n s a c t i o n s . The l i n e s w i t h arrows t e l l i n what d i r e c t i o n t h e commun ica t i on i s g o i n g . N o t i c e t h a t t h e l i n e s a r e p a r a l l e l . They do no t c r o s s . Suppose a mother s ay s to h e r s on , "What t ime i s i t ? " ( A d u l t .of m o t h e r ) . He s a y s , " I t ' s t w e l v e o ' c l o c k " ( A d u l t Qf s o n ) . T h i s i s a s i m p l e , u n c r o s s e d t r a n s a c t i o n , A d u l t to A d u l t . I f t he P a r e n t i n mother s a y s , "Come get a h u g , " and the C h i l d i n h im s a y s , "Oh, g o o d y ! " t he l i n e s i n the d i ag ram a r e s t i l l p a r a l l e l , so the t r a n s a c t i o n i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d and u n b r o k e n . The re i s no r u l e s a y i n g A d u l t - t o ^ A d u l t t r a n s a c t i o n s a r e t h e b e s t k i n d . Two o r more p e o p l e t a l k i n g to one a n o t h e r can s w i t c h f rom one ego s t a t e to a n o t h e r e a s i l y , w i t h no b r e a k i n the c o n v e r s a t i o n , and w i t h a l l t he t r a n s a c t i o n s r e m a i n i n g u n c r o s s e d . - 165 -s: " P o l i t i c i a n s are always cron'-" " r: "Canada w i l l have i t s own 'Watergate' one day s: "What i s your name?" r: "Brenda. What's you r s ? " s: " C a r l i Simon i s the best s i n g e r i n the w o r l d ! " r: "No way! Boz Scaggs s i n g s b e t t e r than her!" #1 Person #2 Sometimes the l i n e s become crossed, as the diagram below shows. Crossed t r a n s a c t i o n s r e s u l t i n a breakdown of communication. The diagram shows a mother t a l k i n g Adult to A d u l t . She asked, i n an u n c r i t i c a l way, "What time i s i t ? " but her son, i n s t e a d of answering w i t h h i s A d u l t , " I t ' s :welve o'clock," says a n g r i l y , from h i s C h i l d , "Why are you always r u s h i n g i e ? " The communication about time immediately breaks down and switches to a. d i s c u s s i o n about whether the mother i s rushing him. The t r a n s a c t i o n i s crossed. her Son - 166 -Another kind of transaction i s c a l l e d u l t e r i o r , one that has a hidden message i n i t . For example, a car salesman i s t a l k i n g to a customer who obviously admires the product. The salesman says straightforwardly, "This i s our best model, but there are only two l e f t . " He may be t e l l i n g the truth, but h i s Adult i s t a l k i n g not only to the Adult of the customer, but i s also sending a secret message to the C h i l d . The customer's C h i l d answers to himself, "Gee, I might miss out," and says aloud, " I ' l l take i t ! " The Adult of the salesman p o l i t e l y directed himself to the Adult of the customer, but he "hooked the C h i l d " by sending a secret message so he could q u i c k l y close the s a l e . The salesman i n the diagram above works an angle from h i s Adult. His u l t e r i o r transaction i s angular. Another kind of transaction i s c a l l e d duplex, or double, i n which two ego states i n both persons are a c t i v e . For example, a boy may say to h i s g i r l f r i e n d , from h i s Adult to her Adult, "We can study at my place tonight." She answers from her Adult to h i s Adult, "Fine. See you at eigh t . " Someone overhearing t h i s conversation might hear i t as a straightforward exchange of information, and miss the C h i l d - t o - C h i l d secret exchange, which i s , l e t ' s say (only the two of them know f o r sure): "Let's goof o f f tonight." "Yes, l e t ' s . " - 167 -The behavior that f o l l o w s a duplex t r a n s a c t i o n (see diagram below) w i l l depend more on the secret message than on the spoken message. What's r e a l l y going on i n an u l t e r i o r t r a n s a c t i o n may have nothing to do w i t h what's s a i d aloud. However, not a l l u l t e r i o r t r a n s a c t i o n s are dishonest. People commonly c a r r y on two conversations at once without being sneaky. For example, two l o v e r s may t a l k i n words about l i f e insurance while t h e i r eyes communicate something q u i t e d i f f e r e n t than f a c t s and f i g u r e s . - 168 -Session number i»a; Complimentary, Crossed and Ulterior Transactions A. Complimentary: B. Crossed: p -< A »—< C P »< A C - 172 -Session number 5: B e h a v i o r a l Choice One element i n v o l v e d i n the "Decide f o r Y o u r s e l f " human r e l a t i o n s h i p t r a i n i n g program i s the a c t u a l element of d e c i d i n g upon appropriate l i f e a t t i t u d e s and l i f e behaviors. In a d d i t i o n to a d e c i s i o n to change or to remain the same, b e h a v i o r a l contracts are employed. Each contract contains three p a r t s : f i r s t , a s p e c i f i c d e s c r i p t i o n of behaviors i n the d e s i r e d l i f e s t y l e ; second, a commitment on the p a r t of\the student to implement the l i f e s t y l e ; t h i r d , a commitment on the p a r t of a s i g n i f i c a n t other person to evaluate the implemented l i f e s t y l e . Session number 5 emphasizes the b e h a v i o r a l dimension of chosen change. 1. I n s i g h t Experiences: (55 min) The students are asked to become as comfortable as p o s s i b l e w h i l e s t a y i n g i n a seated p o s i t i o n . They may s i t on the f l o o r , l e a n against the w a l l s , s i t on a c h a i r , change the p o s i t i o n or l o c a t i o n of the c h a i r . For the next 30 minutes the students w i l l be i n v o l v e d i n a s e r i e s of fantasy experiences. At the conclusion of each fantasy experience, the f o l l o w i n g kinds of questions are asked: who would you l i k e to be ... can you be the person you would l i k e to be ..'v how would you f e e l being t h i s new person ... do other people l i k e t h i s new person ... how about your parents ... the p o l i c e ... your f r i e n d s ... your teacher ... ? F o l l o w i n g the 30 minute fantasy experiences the students w i l l share t h e i r experiences i n i l l u m i n a t i o n groups. 2. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 3. Transferance Assignment: As students leave the classroom, hand out mimeographed copies of the " A l t e r n a t i v e A c t i o n Search." - 173. -Session number 5: Behavioral Choice A. Sex Reversal Would you please r e l a x i n a comfortable p o s i t i o n . I f your c h a i r i s uncomfortable you may leave your c h a i r and s i t on the f l o o r or lean against the w a l l . Do not become so c l o s e to people that you are aware of sounds they may make or that you touch them (pause u n t i l a l l students appear s e t t l e d ) . Now that you are i n a comfortable p o s i t i o n , c l o s e your eyes and r e l a x . Please remain quietet.Your eyes w i l l be closed f o r about 5 minutes so j u s t r e l a x , (pause f o r a few moments)) Now t r y to get i n touch w i t h your body. Do you f e e l pressure from s i t t i n g anywhere on your body? (pause) Do you f e e l y o u r s e l f breath or your heart beat or your blood move? (pause) Do you f e e l s t i f f n e s s or soreness anywhere? (pause) With your eyes s t i l l closed and your body p e r f e c t l y relaxed .. (pause) .. imagine that your sex i s reversed (pause). I f you are a boy imagine y o u r s e l f to be a g i r l and i f you are a g i r l imagine y o u r s e l f to be a boy (pause). Become r e a l l y aware of your new body. (Pause 30 seconds between each question.) 1. How i s your body d i f f e r e n t now? 2. How do you f e e l i n t h i s new body? 3. How w i l l you l i v e your l i f e d i f f e r e n t l y because of t h i s new body? 4. W i l l people act d i f f e r e n t l y towards you now? 5. Do you l i k e y o u r s e l f i n your new body? With your eyes s t i l l closed and your body p e r f e c t l y relaxed ... (pause) imagine that you are changing back to your o r i g i n a l sex. (pause). Become r e a l l y aware of your r e a l body. (Pause 30 seconds between each question^ 1. How i s your body d i f f e r e n t now? 2. Do you experience d i f f e r e n t things i n your r e a l body? 3. Would you r a t h e r be a boy or a g i r l ? With your body p e r f e c t l y r e l a x e d , very slowly open your eyes. Do not t a l k or make any nois e . Reversing our usual way of t h i n k i n g i s a way of saying maybe some things and events i n the world could a c t u a l l y be the reverse of how I see them. I t i s one way of temporarily d i s c a r d i n g our p r e j u d i c e s and seeing i f another way of l o o k i n g at things could be more accurate. For example, i f my image of myself i s that I am strong and tough and only g i r l s are tender and ge n t l e , then I must deny any weakness, or warmth, and tender f e e l i n g s that I have. I f I am w i l l i n g to temporarily give up my image when I reverse r o l e s and become a g i r l i n fantasy, I become my image of what a g i r l i s l i k e and f e e l s l i k e i n s i d e . Since my image of a g i r l permits weakness and tender f e e l i n g s , I can then allow myself to explore my own r e a l f e e l i n g s of weakness and tenderness that I d i d not p r e v i o u s l y - 174 -permit myself, because they d i d not f i t my image. I w i l l become aware that we are a l l made up of male and female q u a l i t i e s , and l e a r n to ce l e b r a t e and enjoy both sides of my p e r s o n a l i t y . B. Race Reversal The same i n s t r u c t i o n s are given as i n Sex Reversal except that Caucasian and Native Indian are the opposites employed. Fol l o w i n g the Race Reversal f a n t a s y , students are i n s t r u c t e d to m i l l and to look at each i n d i v i d u a l as e i t h e r an East Indian, an O r i e n t a l , an American b l a c k , a Native Indian or a Caucasian and to imagine hatred. (The a t t i t u d e i s then change to P-C and then A-A non-verbal t r a n s a c t i o n s . ) C. The Magic Swapshop The same i n t r o d u c t i o n i s given as i n the Sex Reversal fantasy. Short pauses between most sentences are i n d i c a t e d . Imagine you are walking i n a c i t y at ni g h t i n the r a i n . . . you are warmly dressed i n w o l l e n c l o t h e s and comfortable. (5 sec.) J u s t ahead there i s a strange l i t t l e s i d e s t r e e t . (5 sec.) As you walk down t h i s s t r e e t , you w i l l see one s t o r e window. (5 sec) That s t o r e window has an i n c r e d i b l e v a r i e t y of things i n i t — s o m e o l d , some new, some very a n c i e n t . (10 sec.) Some of i t i s junk (5 sec.) and some i s treasure (5 sec.) and you'd never expect to see a l l these things i n the same window. (5 sec.) As you stand there l o o k i n g at t h i s window f u l l of t h i n g s , a f r i e n d l y l i t t l e o l d man walks out of the door (10 sec.) and i n v i t e s you i n t o h i s shop. (5 sec.) He e x p l a i n s that t h i s i s no ordi n a r y shop, but that w i t h i n t h i s s m a l l shop there i s everything i n the world. (10 sec.) Anyone who f i n d s h i s way to t h i s shop can choose one t h i n g and take i t home. (10 sec.) You cannot take money, and you cannot s e l l what you take f o r money. Aside from t h i s , you can have any one t h i n g from the shop. (5 sec.)Take some time to look around the shop and see what i s there. (15 sec.) There are a l l s o r t s of l i t t l e nooks and s i d e rooms, w i t h things that you might want to have. (15 sec.) Event u a l l y you w i l l have to decide which one of these many things you want to take w i t h you...When you have decided what you want to take w i t h you, take some time g e t t i n g to know i t b e t t e r . (15 sec.) Look at i t c a r e f u l l y (5 sec.) n o t i c e a l l the d e t a i l s about i t . ( 5 sec.) Touch i t w i t h your hands, (5 sec.) handle and sm e l l i t . ( 5 sec.) How do you f e e l about t h i s thing?...(10 sec.) As you s t a r t to walk out the door w i t h i t , the storekeeper speaks to you again and says: (5 sec.) "You may have t h i s , as I s a i d before. There i s one c o n d i t i o n — y o u must give me something i n r e t u r n . (5 sec.) I t can be a b s o l u t e l y anything you have, (10 sec.) i t may be a way of  behaving you want to give up (10 sec.) or a bad f e e l i n g you want to get r i d of f o r e v e r , (10 sec.) but you must give me something i n r e t u r n f o r what you take." What w i l l you give the o l d man? (15 sec.) Take a. l i t t l e time to decide..(5 sec.)..Now t e l l the o l d man(what y o u _ w i l l give him. (5 sec.) Now walk out the door, and take a l a s t look at the s t o r e . (5 sec.) Slowly say goodbye to the s t o r e . (5 sec.) Now keeping your eyes close d r e t u r n to t h i s room and b r i n g w i t h you whatever you decided to take from the shop. (5 sec.) - 175 -Now become t h i s thing that you found i n the shop. (5 sec.) As t h i s thing,what are you l i k e ? (5 sec.) What are your c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ? (5 sec.) What i s your size? (5 sec.) What i s your function or use? (5 sec.) Now keeping your eyes closed become yourself again, and look again at t h i s object. (5 sec.) See i f you can discover s t i l l more about i t . (5 sec.) Do you understand i t better? (5 sec.) Say goodbye to t h i s object, and put i t away somewhere i n your pocket..(5 sec.)..and now j u s t rest q u i e t l y f o r a l i t t l e while... ~1 - 176 -Frequently, we f i n d ourselves acting one way i n a s i t u a t i o n and l a t e r r e g r e t t i n g i t or wishing we had behaved d i f f e r e n t l y . The cl e a r e r people are about t h e i r values, the more congruent t h e i r actions are with t h e i r f e e i i n g s and b e l i e f s and, therefore, the less often they l a t e r regret t h e i r actions. This strategy enables students to consider a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r action i n various s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n s . The goal i s to encourage students to bring t h e i r everyday actions more consistently into harmony with t h e i r f e e l i n g s and b e l i e f s . 1. You are walking behind someone. You see him take out a cig a r e t t e pack; withdraw the l a s t c i g a r e t t e ; put the ci g a r e t t e i n his mouth; crumple the package and nonchalantly toss i t over his shoulder onto the sidewalk. You are twenty-five feet behind him. What i s your decision? 2. There i s a boy i n your class who has a body odor problem. You know the general sentiment i s , "He's not such a bad ki d , but I j u s t hate to get hear him." You hardly know him - you ju s t have sort of a nodding acquaintance at a f r i e n d l y distance. What i s your decision? 3. You are pusing a shopping cart i n a supermarket and you hear a thunderous crash of cans. As you round the corner you see a two year old being beaten, quite severely, by h i s mother, apparently f o r p u l l i n g out the bottom can of the pyramid. What i s your decision? 4. You are on a vacation t r i p and are d r i v i n g to the beach with your parents. You would l i k e to go to the amusement park, but you are concerned because you have spent most of the money you had saved f o r your vacation e a r l i e r . Your father stops f o r gasoline and you get out and walk around. A lady i s walking back to her car and you see her purse f a l l open and her wallet f a l l out. You walk over, pick up the wallet j u s t as the lady gets into her car to drive away. The edges of several ten d o l l a r b i l l s are s t i c k i n g out of the wallet. No one saw you pick i t up. What i s your decision? - 177 -5. You see a k i d three or four years younger than you s h o p l i f i n g at the l o c a l discount s t o r e . You're concerned that h e ' l l get i n t o s e r i o u s t r o u b l e i f the s t o r e d e t e c t i v e catches him. What i s your d e c i s i o n ? 6. You're t a k i n g a r e a l l y lousy course at s c h o o l . You're not doing w e l l i n the course. On the day of the f i n a l exam, someone o f f e r s to s e l l you a copy of what he claims i s the f i n a l f o r only $5.00. What i s your d e c i s i o n ? 7. Your f a t h e r has been g i v i n g you a l o t of f l a c k about how much TV you watch., One day you come home from school and the TV set i s n ' t working. You suspect your f a t h e r has done something to the s e t . What i s your d e c i s i o n ? 8. Your family: i s having a d i s c u s s i o n about a b o r t i o n and you n o t i c e that your 1/7-year-old s i s t e r becomes extremely upset. What i s your de d e c i s i o n ? 9. You're l a t e . Your dad s a i d you had to have the car back by midnight, or i t would be r e a l t r o u b l e f o r you. Two blocks away from your house, you h i t a dog who runs across the s t r e e t . What i s your d e c i s i o n ? .0. You have been i n v i t e d to a p r i v a t e p a r t y . You would r e a l l y l i k e to go. Being included w i t h t h i s group i s very important to you. A l l you have to do i s b r i n g your own booze and grass. What i s your d e c i s i o n ? - 178 -Session number 6: Basic P o s i t i o n s and S t r o k i n g 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (15 min) Provide each student w i t h s u f f i c i e n t paper that he may choose the s i of p a i n t i n g he w i l l do. Pla c e s e v e r a l b a s i c p a i n t c o l o r s i n three spots of the room. Have each student take two c o l o r s and make a f i n g e r p a i n t i n g e n t i t l e d : "Please be c a r e f u l .. t h i s i s me!" The students should spend considerable time i n d e c i d i n g which c o l o r s to p i c k (allow 5 min). They should t r y to l e t the c o l o r s p i c k them. Only two c o l o r s that p e r f e c t l y describe the students should be chosen. The students now post t h e i r p a i n t i n g s about the room. 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (15 min) Tr a n s a c t i o n a l A n a l y s i s i n s t r u c t i o n on Basic P o s i t i o n s and S t r o k i n g , e n t i t l e d , "Winning and Loosing i n R e l a t i o n s h i p s . " 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (20 min) Each student i s provided w i t h s u f f i c i e n t "Art C r i t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l Sheets" to evaluate each p a i n t i n g i n the room. I f he would l i k e to t a l k to the person about h i s p a i n t i n g he i n d i c a t e s that on the space provided (allow 10 min). In t r y a d groups discuss how c r i t i c i z i n g people's a r t work e n t i t l e d , "This Is Me" made you f e e l . Does t h i s s m all i n t e r a c t i o n r e f l e c t your b a s i c p o s i t i o n ? With respect to your own p a i n t i n g do you see how you might i n t e r a c t w i t h people? (10 min) 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) Completed w h i l e Paul Simon's "Something So Ri g h t " i s played on c a s s e t t e recorder. 5, Transferance Assignment: As the student leaves c l a s s a number of Transferance Assignments handed to him, a l l of which need to be completed before s e s s i o n 7. - i7?; -Session number 6: Winning and Loosing In Relationships Everyone needs strokes« A stroke i s a pat on the back, a word of recognition, a k i c k on the shins. Everyone needs to get and to give some kind of stroking, pleasant or unpleasant. An infant would rather be spanked than completely ignored. A stroke that helps you f e e l you are OK i s c a l l e d a p o s i t i v e stroke. One that t e l l s you you are not-OK i s a negative stroke. Loving i s p o s i t i v e stroking. Hating i s negative stroking. A stroke given to you for what you do rather than for what you are i s a c o n d i t i o n a l stroke. For example, i f your father says to you, "I l i k e you when you do as you're t o l d , " he i s giving you a stroke on the condition that you give him something i n return. He i s not stroking you for what you are. When a stroke i s given to you for what you are rather than for what you do, as when your mother says, "I love you because you are you," her stroke i s unconditional. It has no s t r i n g s attached. When you are given strokes only f o r doing "good things/^ and not f o r being who you are, you may soon resent doing "good things"1,' and react' i n a negative way, perhaps with anger. Everyone seems to need much p o s i t i v e unconditional stroking. You probably prefer to be t o l d that you are OK for what you are, rather than only for what you do. Strokes are necessary f o r p h y s i c a l and mental health. Without strokes, infants may die, because t h e i r urge to l i v e decreases. Parents can stunt the healthy growth of t h e i r baby by discounting his need for strokes. When a mother repeatedly ignores her crying infant and says, "01^he always bawls l i k e that," she i s discounting him. He may whimper himself back to sleep, h i s need for stroking unmet. As you grow up you become more w i l l i n g to take word stroking (symbolic) instead of the p h y s i c a l stroking you had when you were a l i t t l e baby. You s t i l l need and want p h y s i c a l stroking, but you often have to s e t t l e f or word stroking. Stroking for being i s more important than stroking for doing. This i s an important lesson. You need not f e e l ashamed to ask for p o s i t i v e stroking. A good question to ask yourself i s , "What kind of strokes do I make sure I get, and how do I make sure I get them?" One of the best ways to get p o s i t i v e strokes i s to give them. The kind of strokes you give and get depends on how your C h i l d f e e l s about yourself and about others (basic p o s i t i o n s ) . There are four such basic p o s i t i o n s . - 180 -1. I'M OK: YOU'RE OK. This i s the healthy p o s i t i o n , the "get-on-with,<"-winner's p o s i t i o n . 2. I'M OK: YOU'RE NOT-OK. This i s the p o s i t i o n of a C h i l d who d i s t r u s t s others. I t i s the " g e t - r i d - o f " p o s i t i o n (by i g n o r i n g , d i v o r c i n g , or, i n the extreme, k i l l i n g ) . 3. I'M NOT-OK: YOU'RE OK. This i s the p o s i t i o n of the C h i l d who u s u a l l y f e e l s unworthy or depressed. I t i s the "get-away-from" p o s i t i o n (by withdrawing, running away, or committing s u i c i d e -gr a d u a l l y or a b r u p t l y ) . 4. I'M NOT OK: YOU'RE NOT OK. This i s the "get-nowhere" p o s i t i o n of a C h i l d who f e e l s he can't win, that l i f e j u s t i s n ' t worth i t . He may even go crazy to get put away to escape i t . I f the C h i l d i n you f e e l not-OK, you probably learned to s e t t l e f o r more negative than p o s i t i v e s t r o k e s . You may tu r n down p o s i t i v e s t r o k e s , f e e l i n g you don't deserve them. You may even go out of your way to c o l l e c t negative s t r o k e s . Although you want compliments, you may f e e l uncomfortable g e t t i n g them. When you do get one, you may t h i n k the person g i v i n g i t i s j u s t being p o l i t e , or wants something. I f you feels OK about y o u r s e l f you probably draw on a s t r o k e reserve. Having received p l e n t y of p o s i t i v e s t r o k e s , you have a ready supply to give and to enjoy f o r y o u r s e l f . Being open to p o s i t i v e s t r o k e s , you get more, and have more time and energy to be a mature Parent, a competent Ad u l t , and a f r e e C h i l d . - 181 -a Session number 6 : A r t C r i t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l DIRECTIONS: Round about you are a number of f i n g e r p a i n t i n g s by f e l l o w students. Each one i s e n t i t l e d , "Please be c a r e f u l . . . t h i s i s me!" You know which p a i n t i n g i s your own and some of your f r i e n d s know which p a i n t i n g i s yours. However, you do not know who painted many of the p a i n t i n g s , and many of your f e l l o w students do not know who painted your p a i n t i n g . Below i s an "Art C r i t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l " numbered from 1 to 7. For every p a i n t i n g i n the room (except your own) you are to r a t e from 1 to 7 what you t h i n k of the p a i n t i n g . Then d i r e c t l y below the p a i n t i n g , leave your "Art C r i t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l " sheet. Secondly, the "Art C r i t i c D i f f e r e n t i a l " sheet may be ^anonymous_(that '±sj_i you don't have to s i g n your name) i f you l i k e . However, you w i l l have your best experience i f you d i s c l o s e your i d e n t i t y . T h i r d l y , i f you d i s c l o s e who you are to the a r t i s t of the p a i n t i n g you have the op t i o n of responding to three questions. I f you understand, go ahead! 2 3 4 5 6 7 :st Very good ng i t means e q u i t e a A p r e t t y good piece of a r t . I l i k e i t I t ' s r e a l l y p r e t t y ordinary Not bad, but I l i k e others much b e t t e r P r e t t y bad H o r r i b l e . . . . . r e a l l y makes me awful s i c k b i t to me ie i s ; chosen to remain [anonymous. 1 | J (check) .d l i k e to know who you are. j (check) .d l i k e to t a l k about your p a i n t i n g , l a i n t i n g made me f e e l (check) 3 t Very good i t means q u i t e a b i t to me is A p r e t t y good piece of a r t . I l i k e i t I t ' s r e a l l y p r e t t y o r d i n a r y Not bad, but I l i k e others much b e t t e r P r e t t y bad . . . r e a l l y awful H o r r i b l e , makes me s i c k chosen to remain anonymous. I l i k e to know who you are. 1 l i k e to t a l k about your p a i n t i n g , l i n t i n g made me f e e l (check) (check) (check) 3t _L Very good i t means q u i t e a b i t to me is A p r e t t y good piece of a r t . I l i k e i t I t ' s r e a l l y p r e t t y o r d i n a r y 5 Not bad, but I l i k e others much b e t t e r P r e t t y bad . . . r e a l l y awful H o r r i b l e , makes me s i c k J chosen to remain anonymous. [ l i k e to know who you are. I l i k e to t a l k about your p a i n t i n g . l i n t i n g made me f e e l (check) (check) (check) Very good i t means q u i t e a b i t to me A p r e t t y good piece of a r t . I l i k e i t i s I t ' s r e a l l y p r e t t y o r d i n a r y chosen to remain anonymous. l i k e to know who you are. l i k e to t a l k about your p a i n t i n g , n t i n g made me f e e l (check) (check) Not bad, but I l i k e others much b e t t e r P r e t t y bad . . . r e a l l y awful H o r r i b l e , makes me s i c k (check) 6 J_ Very good i t means q u i t e a b i t to me A p r e t t y good piece of a r t . I l i k e i t is I t ' s r e a l l y p r e t t y o r d i n a r y chosen to remain anonymous. l i k e to know who you are. l i k e to t a l k about your p a i n t i n g , i n t i n g made me f e e l (check) (check) Not bad, but I l i k e others much b e t t e r P r e t t y bad . . . r e a l l y awful (check) H o r r i b l e , makes me s i c k _ 183 -e s s i o n number 7: Stamp C o l l e c t i n g and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Rackets . Hooking A c t i v i t y ; (10 min) Hand out an "Anonymous Bombardment" e x e r c i s e sheet randomly to each student. On each sheet i s w r i t t e n a name of a student i n the c l a s s . He i s to complete the sheet w i t h reference to the student i n d i c a t e d . F o l l o w i n g the completion of the a c t i v i t y one f a c i l i t a t o r c o l l e c t s a l l of the sheets. . I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d ; (15 min) I n s t r u c t i o n on the concept of stamp c o l l e c t i n g and rackets w i t h s p e c i a l emphasis on good and bad f e e l i n g s and b e h a v i o r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n of f e e l i n g s . . I n s i g h t Experience: (25 min) The students are asked to form choice i l l u m i n a t i o n groups. The "Anonymous Bombardment" e x e r c i s e sheets are handed to the student i n d i c a t e d i n the bracket. In t h e i r groups of 10»discussion i s to focus on the r e c e p t i o n of s i x gold stamps and how that a f f e c t s t h e i r immediate f e e l i n g s and behavior. The c o l l e c t i o n of s i x brown stamps i s f a n t i s i z e d . Formation of rackets are discussed. . Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) Transferance Assignment: As the student -leaves the classroom transferance assignments are handed to him. - 184 -Session number 7: My 'Stored Up Feelings Stamp c o l l e c t i n g r e f e r s to the Child's c o l l e c t i o n of old (archaic) good (gold) and bad (brown) f e e l i n g s f o r a l a t e r exchange f o r a psychological p r i z e . For examplej i f a person does not say "thank you>'" you may c o l l e c t a brown stamp. You can save up i n s u l t s or hurts from someone u n t i l you f e e l you have enough to trade i n for one b i g punch on his jaw. You can choose to f e e l that a f t e r a l l you've had to take from him you have earned the " r i g h t " to h i t him. That i s , you have saved up enough stamps f o r one g u i l t - f r e e act of revenge. Brown stamps are for bad f e e l i n g s , gold stamps f o r good f e e l i n g s . You may want to cash i n a f u l l page or f u l l book of brown stamps for one free temp§Er. tantrum or a day off " s i c k " from school. You may need many books of brown stamps to shout a " f r e e " swear word at you Dad or Mom. The " f r e e " means free from f e e l i n g s of g u i l t , at le a s t f o r awhile. It means you f e e l you now have the " r i g h t " to do what you might not o r d i n a r i l y do. You can save up your good f e e l i n g s to use as gold stamps. I f you have done someting w e l l you may use the good f e e l i n g as an excuse to relax, or to have yourself a good time. I f you do t h i s you are a "gold-stamp" c o l l e c t o r . People i n whom the Chi l d f e e l s he i s OK, and others are OK, too, do not have to c o l l e c t e i t h e r brown to gold stamps. They do not need excuses for what they do or f e e l . Here i s an example of a l i t t l e g i r l who i s shopping f o r a brown stamp, and a mother who could have avoided the uproar simply by taking the daughter, a f t e r the opening remark, into her arms. "Mommy, I don't think you r e a l l y love me." "Why of course I love you. Don't be s i l l y . " "How can you love me when you get so mad at me?" "I get mad at you because I love you. I want you to learn to do things r i g h t . " "You mean you only love me when I do s t u f f for you?" "You know that's not so." " I t i s too, and I hate you." "Now l i s t e n here, young lady, I've heard about enough." "I knew i t . You don't love me. Nobody loves me." "I've had i t . The way you"re behaving, who could love you?" '-13$ -This l i t t l e g i r l ' s C h i l d went out of her way to c o l l e c t "unloved" f e e l i n g s , that i s , brown stamps. Stamp c o l l e c t o r s , e s p e c i a l l y brown-stamp c o l l e c t o r s , have a hard' time throwing t h e i r stamps away. The C h i l d wants to cash them i n , not f o r g e t them. Questions l i k e the f o l l o w i n g may help you see i f you are a stamp c o l l e c t o r : (3 Do you s u l k when you don't get your own way? (^)Do you put things o f f , and then f e e l g u i l t y f o r not doing them? (^)T)o you do things you consider wrong, and then f e e l bad? Q D o you sometimes pla y " s t u p i d " when you r e a l l y know what's going on? (^)Do you sometimes stop y o u r s e l f from r e l a x i n g because you f e e l you don't deserve a r e s t ? The C h i l d i n you can c o l l e c t "depression" (Low f e e l i n g s ) stamps f o r a f r e e "drop out," " q u i t , " or s u i c i d e t r y . "Anger" stamps can be used f o r a f r e e a s s a u l t . You can c o l l e c t "Crazy" stamps f o r a f r e e t r i p to a mental h o s p i t a l . J a i l s are f u l l of people i n whom the C h i l d c o l l e c t s brown stamps. Even i f a l l your l i f e you have been c o l l e c t i n g brown stamps, or bad f e e l i n g s , you can change. You can re p l a c e your bad f e e l i n g s w i t h good f e e l i n g s . You do not have to accept brown stamps no matter how o f t e n they are handed to you. And you do not need gold stamps to f e e l good. Dealing i n t r a d i n g stamps i s a racket because a c o l l e c t o r uses the stamps d i s h o n e s t l y . He does not operate aboveboard. His s u p p l i e r s may not even be aware they are s u p p l i e r s . Have you ever been s u p r i s e d by someone say i n g , "I've never f o r g i v e n you f o r that"? You didn't know the person had c o l l e c t e d a stamp. Brown stamp c o l l e c t o r s jump to conclusions about what a person "meant" when he s a i d something. They hear i n s u l t s i n simple remarks. Both brown and gold stamp c o l l e c t o r s look f o r excuses f o r t h e i r behavior and f e e l i n g s . These are some bad f e e l i n g s you might use to cash i n f o r a f r e e tantrum or s u l k : f e a r , c o n f u s i o n , anger, f r u s t r a t i o n , a n x i e t y , depression, and s t u p i d i t y . Your f e e l i n g s u s u a l l y come from the C h i l d i n you. Take smoking f o r example. I f you smoke and f e e l g u i l t y , and the g u i l t leads you as Adult to take a c t i o n ( q u i t t i n g ) , your g u i l t i s not a r a c k e t . But i f you continue to smoke and you continue to f e e l g u i l t y about i t , then your g u i l t i s probably a bad f e e l i n g racket i n which you can c o l l e c t brown stamps to cash i n l a t e r f o r a f r e e "low f e e l i n g " or coughing s p e l l . 186 -That may be the way the C h i l d i n you a t t r a c t s a t t e n t i o n f o r s t r o k e s . I f so, the Adult i n you may not r e a l i z e what you are doing. Your C h i l d can be c l e v e r at doing things your Adult i s not aware of. Drin k i n g a l c o h o l may be another example. I f a number of your f r i e n d s have ignored you, you can't get along w i t h parents, and your p r i n c i p a l c a l l e d you to the o f f i c e , you may go out and get "bombed."; You have cashed i n a l l these brown stamps to get drunk and now the sca l e s are balanced. Rackets are taught by parents, or guardians. Many of your bad f e e l i n g s are probably not " f o r real." :. I f the C h i l d i n you has not taken b a s i c p o s i t i o n No. 1 (that i s , "I'm OK, and others are OK t o o " ) , you w i l l be i n some k i n d of b a d - f e e l i n g r a c k e t . Your parents w i l l have permitted you to use f e e l i n g s as excuses. A good way to check on what your f e e l i n g racket might be i s to r e c a l l what happened i n your home when things got u p t i g h t . Did your parents respond w i t h anger, confusion, depression, g u i l t , f e a r , nervousness, a n x i e t y , or Adult action? I f they d i d not u s u a l l y respond w i t h Adult a c t i o n , they probably taught you a f e e l i n g r a c k e t . - 187 - [ Session number 7 « Anonymous Bombardment Jotice i n the bracket above a student's name. Do not i n d i c a t e to that student or to any other student that you have the "Anonymous Bombardment" sheet f o r that student. lere i s what you are to do: s^ you learned i n session number 6 there i s such a t h i n g as p o s i t i v e and lega t i v e , c o n d i t i o n a l and u n c o n d i t i o n a l s t r o k i n g . Simply w r i t e three >ositive c o n d i t i o n a l (+C) and three p o s i t i v e u n c o n d i t i o n a l (+UC) statements ibout the person i n d i c a t e d i n the bracket above. [f you do not know the student at a l l or i f the "Anonymous Bombardment" sheet has your own name on i t , r a i s e your hand q u i e t l y . tow t h i s i s important: be honest and s i n c e r e . Do not make anything up. [f you cannot complete a l l 6 spaces then leave them blank. C+ci) C+C2) C+C3) (+UC1) (+UC2) (4UC3) [f you d e s i r e , and i t would probably be most h e l p f u l to you i f you d i d so, fou may i n d i c a t e who you are and give up your anonymity. The way to do ;his i s to f i l l i n your name i n the space provided. [ have decided to give up my anonymity Yes; No. - 188 -session number 8: S c r i p t A n a l y s i s L. Hooking A c t i v i t y ; (10 min) Each student i s handed a l a r g e piece of newsprint or computer paper and a f e l t marker. The students are to w r i t e on s i d e A of the paper 20 or more one word a d j e c t i v e s that best describe who they t h i n k they are. These are to be w r i t t e n w i t h the opposite hand that they normally w r i t e w i t h . The students concealwhat they have w r i t t e n . I. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (15 min) I n s t r u c t i o n on the Tr a n s a c t i o n a l A n a l y s i s concept of s c r i p t i n g , i n c l u d i n g c u l t u r a l and s u b c u l t u r a l s c r i p t s , f a m i l y s c r i p t s , p s y c h o l o g i c a l s c r i p t s and s c r i p t s w i t h a curse. 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (25 min) Each student p i c k s up h i s l a r g e piece of paper and holds i t to h i s back w i t h the a d j e c t i v e s i d e of the paper to h i s back (side B f a c i n g outwards). Then, w i t h the free hand, each student i s to w r i t e an " o r i g i n a l and courageous" p o s i t i v e ( c o n d i t i o n a l or u n c o n d i t i o n a l ) s t r o k e f o r each student (10 min). When completed they are to form i n t o s m a l l groups of 5, w i t h t h e i r o r i g i n a l a d j e c t i v e l i s t ( s i d e A) face up. Each person i n the small group of 5 turns over h i s sheet and reads the l i s t of p o s i t i v e strokes i n the f i r s t person present tense. For example, " I am l i k e a b l e s " " I am a t h l e t i c , " " I am good at penmanship" (15 min). +. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: As the student leaves the classroom, h i s transferance assignments are handed to him. ("What i s your s c r i p t ? " ) _ 189 _ Session number 8: _ This i s My L i f e Your l i f e depends on what i s known as your s c r i p t . I t i s your l i f e p l a n , which your C h i l d decided upon i n your e a r l y y e a r s , and which you are now probably not aware of. You can f i n d out what your s c r i p t i s by examining your Parent messages and your C h i l d f e e l i n g s . Your s c r i p t i s e i t h e r healthy or unhealthy, depending on your b a s i c p o s i t i o n . I f your C h i l d e a r l y i n l i f e was convinced that he i s not q u i t e OK, that he i s unloveable, you may want to change your s c r i p t . For example, your C h i l d may have decided, " I t never pays to get c l o s e to people," because you t r i e d that as a l i t t l e boy and got burned. Your s c r i p t then would be a pl a n not to al l o w y o u r s e l f to get c l o s e to people i n a warm, open way. You w i l l s e t t l e i n s t e a d f o r r e l a t i o n s h i p s based mainly on game p l a y i n g . You w i l l get s t r o k e s , but they w i l l o f t e n be nega t i v e , or only c o n d i t i o n a l ones. You w i l l s t i l l want intimacy, but your C h i l d w i l l be a f r a i d to r i s k i t . You w i l l probably not change your s c r i p t u n t i l you decide to s t a r t seeing the C h i l d i n you as great, and lo v e a b l e , knowing that you deserve a l l the p o s i t i v e strokes you can get, and that you can be s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d i n g e t t i n g them. Y o u r r t r a n s a c t i o n s , your b a s i c p o s i t i o n , your stamps. your r a c k e t , the ways you f i l l your time, and the games you p l a y are a l l p a r t of your l i f e p l a n . Looking at these w i l l help you to e x p l a i n why you chose to l i v e the way you have, and what you may want to change. C h i l d d e c i s i o n s , such as, " I w i l l never l e t anyone get c l o s e to me," a f f e c t everything you do now, perhaps without your even knowing i t . But you can know i t ; you can decide not to lead a d u l l l i f e , not to head f o r an unhappy ending. You can change your s c r i p t , l i n e by l i n e . That means you can stop p l a y i n g at l i f e , and s t a r t l i v i n g i t . Some t y p i c a l l i f e s c r i p t questions are: What i s your e a r l i e s t childhood memory? What was your f a v o r i t e f a i r y t a l e ? What i s the myth i n your house about your b i r t h (e.g. "Mother almost d i e d " ) ? What was the n i c e s t (worst) t h i n g your mo.therr(father) ever s a i d to you? What d i d you f e e l when she (he) s a i d i t ? And what d i d you say to y o u r s e l f ? What you s a i d to y o u r s e l f a f t e r the n i c e s t or worst p a r e n t a l remark may be one of your most important l i f e l o n g d e c i s i o n s . Your s c r i p t depends mainly on your C h i l d d e c i s i o n about how you were going to l i v e your l i f e . You may have sev e r e l y l i m i t e d your options (choices) by that l i f e t i m e commitment. You based i t mostly on the messages -i.90 -you got from the C h i l d i n your parents. While the Parent and Adult of your mother and f a t h e r may have been t e l l i n g you s e n s i b l e t h i n g s , the C h i l d i n them could have been sending out f o o l i s h messages. For example, both your parents could have been a d v i s i n g you to grow up and act your age, w h i l e the l i t t l e C h i l d i n your mother was wis h i n g you would stay a baby. In the meantime, the C h i l d i n your f a t h e r could have been showing you how to act as a baby (have temper tantrums, d r i n k too much, be i r r e s p o n s i b l e , e t c . ) , The "here's how" message of a s c r i p t may come from any of e i t h e r parent's ego s t a t e s . (The diagram below shows how i t i s commu-n i c a t e d at the C h i l d l e v e l i n an unhealthy s c r i p t ^ . Your mother and fa t h e r may have t o l d you to get as much education as p o s s i b l e , w h i l e the C h i l d i n them was bragging about how w e l l they d i d without f i n i s h i n g school. The C h i l d i n them could be j e a l o u s of you doing b e t t e r than they d i d , without t h e i r A dults knowing they r e a l l y f e e l that way. You - 191 -The three sets of c i r c l e s i n the above diagram t e l l you how a s c r i p t may be formed. Messages from the C h i l d of your parents are c a l l e d i n j u n c t i o n s . An i n j u n c t i o n from the C h i l d i n your mother or f a t h e r i s sometimes c a l l e d a "Witch Message" i f i t discounts your importance and advises you to develop a harmful l i f e s c r i p t . I t i s not always put i n words. I t may be s e c r e t . For example, your mother may have helped you not "grow up" by never l e t t i n g you f i n i s h a j o b , even though she might have thought she was being good to you. A l l of us have r e c e i v e d some di s c o u n t i n g messages from our parents because no parents are p e r f e c t . - 192 -session number 8 : What Is Your S c r i p t ? DIRECTIONS: [nvest a good deal of time and e f f o r t i n t h i s assignment. Record i n w r i t t e n form on t h i s piece of paper (or another sheet) your responses to the foll o w i n g questions and statements. L. Nonverbal messages i n your s c r i p t : Close your eyes and t r y to see e a r l i e s t f a c i a l expression you can r e c a l l . I f only parts of the face emerge, such as eyes or mouth, look at these c l o s e l y . Whose faces do you see? Now t r y to r e c a l l the nonverbal messages your parents sent through t h e i r a c t i o n s ( i . e . a f f e c t i o n a t e k i s s , clenched f i s t , s l a p on the bottom, pat on the head, e t c . ) . What are the main ones? What pleasant or unpleasant f e e l i n g s are aroused i n you? What messages do the f a c i a l expression and body act i o n s convey? I. Verbal messages i n your s c r i p t : Imagine y o u r s e l f to be of c h i l d age again. You- are now 2 or 3 or 4 years o l d . What do you t h i n k your parents say about: Your worth Your looks Your a b i l i t i e s Your i n t e l l i g e n c e Your morals Your h e a l t h Your s e x u a l i t y Your future Say i n one sentence what you imagine each of your parent f i g u r e s thought of you. - 193 -Is the way that you t h i n k of y o u r s e l f now (today) r e l a t e d to the way your parents t h i n k of you now? Yes ; No . Role I d e n t i f i c a t i o n : Think about your l a s t few days and r e c a l l how you r e l a t e d to d i f f e r e n t people. Did you f i n d y o u r s e l f p l a y i n g any of the three dramatic r o l e s -V i c t i m , Persecutor, Rescuer? V i c t i m w i t h Persecutor w i t h ^ Rescuer w i t h Do you play one r o l e more o f t e n then another?. . Does your r o l e change when the s e t t i n g changes? ( i . e . , from home to sch o o l , etc.) On Stage: Imagine your l i f e drama being performed on a stage. I s i t r . a : Comedy Soap opera Farce Melodrama Saga (other) Tragedy (other) What i s the s c r i p t theme of your play? Is i t success o r i e n t e d , f a i l u r e o r i e n t e d , c o n s t r u c t i v e , nonproductive ? Imagine that you are the audience watching your p l a y . What do you do? 1. applaud 2 . cry Q 3. b o o Q 4. laugh 5. go to sleep 6. want your money back (^) 7. excuse y o u r s e l f to the bathroom 8. (other) . L i f e Stages: Imagine your l i f e as a r e v o l v i n g stage w i t h each of your s e t t i n g s as a s e c t i o n of i t . Diagram your various s e t t i n g s according to the amount of time you i n v e s t i n each. Evaluate a t y p i c a l month i n your l i f e . E l i m i n a t e s l e e p i n g time unless i t i s of p a r t i c u l a r importance to you. - 194 -Do your i n t e r e s t s l i e where your time and energy are invested? Yes; No. I f "No," w i l l you choose to do anything about r e - d i s t r i b u t i n g your time and energy? Yes; No. I f "Yes," what w i l l you do? Who seems to be d i r e c t i n g your drama on each l i f e stage? (Perhaps your f r i e n d s , parents, church l e a d e r s , teachers, y o u r s e l f , f a m i l y , e tc.) Cast of Characters: Think of the most important people who are c u r r e n t l y i n your l i f e drama. L i s t them from 1 to 10 ( i f there are more than 10, l i s t them). 1.. 2.. 3. 4. 5.. 6.. 7. 8.. 9.-1 0 -Rank them i n terms of time (column A), energy (column B) and r e a l i n t e r e s t (column C) you i n v e s t i n them (from 1 being "most" to 10 being " l e a s t " ) . Reverse the s i t u a t i o n . How much time, energy and r e a l i n t e r e s t do they i n v e s t i n you? (columns a, b,cc) Do they f u r t h e r your l i f e plans? Yes; No. I f "Yes," how? I f "No," why do you continue your a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h them? - 195 -Session number 9: S c r i p t A n a l y s i s 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (5 min) On the sheet of paper e n t i t l e d "Sweatshirt" w r i t e a name, a word or phrase that seems to f i t f o r you. An example may be: , ! I f i t f e e l s good, do i t , " "S.F.U. t r a c k team," "Beethoven," "Addidas" ( e t c . ) . 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (15 min) Session number 9 i s e s s e n t i a l l y a c o n t i n u a t i o n of s e s s i o n number 8 on s c r i p t i n g but from a d i f f e r e n t t a c t : a s e r i e s of examples and the c r e a t i o n of a d e s i r a b l e s e l f - s c r i p t . 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (30 min) Brainstorm i n i l l u m i n a t i o n groups the p o s s i b l e d e s i r a b l e f a c t o r s i n a l i f e s c r i p t . Have each student record the response w h i l e the group f a c i l i t a t o r w r i t e s the responses on the blackboard. 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: As the students leave the classroom hand them a copy of "A L i f e S c r i p t Questionnaire." - 196 -Session number 9: This Is My L i f e (part 2) " A l l the world's a stage and a l l the men and women merely p l a y e r s . They have t h e i r e x i t s and entrances; each man i n h i s time plays many parts!''.' (Shakespeare) As does a character i n a drama, you l i v e out your l i f e according to a s c r i p t which you have w r i t t e n . As a c h i l d you made many l a s t i n g d e c i s i o n s about y o u r s e l f , and those d e c i s i o n s were based mostly on the messages that you re c e i v e d from your parents. For example, your mother may have s a i d to you over many years, "He's j u s t l i k e h i s f a t h e r , " and now, i n many ways, maybe you are l i k e your f a t h e r . Or perhaps your f a t h e r thought, though never s a i d to you, "Gee, I wish she was a boy!" and now, perhaps, you are more l i k e a boy than a g i r l . Your parents messages served as d i r e c t i v e s or commands t e l l i n g you how to l i v e . The messages could have been p r o h i b i t i o n s , l i k e , "Don't t a l k back," or "Grow up!" or permissions, l i k e , "Have a good time." You re c e i v e d many, and you made sure d e c i s i o n s about some of them. You complied to assure y o u r s e l f of the n u r t u r i n g you needed. l.Take a few moments r i g h t now and l i s t f i v e p r o h i b i t i o n s or permissions that you remember when you were a very young person: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Are these d i r e c t i v e s part of your s c r i p t ? What do you think? You may not be aware of how your e a r l y childhood d e c i s i o n s i n f l u e n c e - 197 -your l i f e p l a n to t h i s day. The C h i l d i n you made these long-term commitments when your Adult was poo r l y informed or misinformed. At that time, the d e c i s i o n s may have been app r o p r i a t e , even necessary f o r your s u r v i v a l , but w i t h some of them you may now be d e f e a t i n g y o u r s e l f . They are not e a s i l y reversed without Adult awareness. Here are some common childhood d e c i s i o n s . As you read through them, check them i f they apply to you today, and cross them out i f they don't apply. Be honest w i t h y o u r s e l f . ' ' ' ' ' ' " I guess I'm p r e t t y smart" • s s - " I am dumb." " I t ' s fun to f e e l good about myself." '' ' ' ' ' " I ' l l make i t even i f i t k i l l s me." • ' "Most people are O.K." "Most people are not O.K." " I t doesn't pay to get c l o s e to anyone." ' ' " I t ' s n i c e to be lo v e d . " _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ " I ' l l probably have to d i e before anyone cares about me." "what's the use? I ' l l probably never be happy." Suppose as a young person you came to the c o n c l u s i o n , " I ' l l probably never be happy." You may have had good reasons f o r being unhappy. Years l a t e r the Sad C h i l d c o n c l u s i o n , whose words you had f o r g o t t e n , may s t i l l be i n e f f e c t . You may not allow y o u r s e l f to f e e l happy, because when you d i d as a young person, you ended up being hurt or disappointed. You may now play Sad C h i l d games that pay o f f i n sad f e e l i n g s to p r o t e c t y o u r s e l f from disappointment. Your not OK f e e l i n g C h i l d may i n t e r f e r e wi your d e s i r e to be happy. - 198 -C h a r l i e i s a good example of a person who made childhood d e c i s i o n s , l i v e s by them, and has not checked them out w i t h h i s A d u l t . His mother t o l d him, " C h a r l i e , you're j u s t no good. Why can't you be good?" His f a t h e r t o l d him, "Look C h a r l e s . When you get to Grade 8, drop out and get a job as a welder. You get good money." So C h a r l i e has been supposing that he's a no-good guy, he's p r e t t y dumb (he should only go to grade 8) and he's always thought that he'd l i k e to be a welder. Then he met a g i r l at the end of Grade 8 that he r e a l l y l i k e d . She wanted to be a concert p i a n i s t and planned to go through seven years of u n i v e r -s i t y studying music. One lunch hour he f i n a l l y got the courage up to t a l k to her ( b e l i e v i n g he was not OK and she was OK, i t was hard f o r him to t a l k to her) and she r e a l l y enjoyed t a l k i n g to him. And obviously C h a r l i e l i k e d t a l k i n g to her, that i s , u n t i l she s a i d : " C h a r l i e , what are you going to take next year at school?" As C h a r l i e began t e l l i n g her that he was going to q u i t school and be a welder, he f e l t trapped. He thought, "I'm dumb, I can't go to s c h o o l , I'm going to q u i t . " Although he could have analyzed h i s childhood d e c i s i o n w i t h h i s A d u l t , h i s Parent kept saying, "Come on, you're j u s t a dummy!" And he q u i t s c h o o l , became a plumber (couldn't get i n t o welding) and never saw that g i r l again. You have probably chosen a whole number of s c r i p t s . Maybe you have chosen a c u l t u r a l s c r i p t , p a s t i n g maple l e a f f l a g s on j a c k e t s and windows and repeatedly saying "eh" to your American f r i e n d s . Or maybe you have chosen a r e l i g i o u s s c r i p t and you c a r r y the biggest King James B i b l e you can f i n d so as to evangelize your f r i e n d s . Perhaps you have chosen a sub^-cultural s c r i p t , a c t i v e l y defying the values of your parents w i t h your worn-out jeans, s k i - j a c k e t s , l o n g - h a i r and w o r l d l y expressions. - 199 -Or you might, have chosen a f a m i l y s c r i p t and you say things l i k e , "In our f a m i l y , home i s a man's c a s t l e , " or "There's always at l e a s t one black sheep i n our f a m i l y . " There i s another k i n d of s c r i p t that we have already mentioned b r i e f l y and t h i s i s a p s y c h o l o g i c a l s c r i p t . Everyone has chosen a p s y c h o l o g i c a l s c r i p t and i t i s e i t h e r a winner's s c r i p t , a l o s e r ' s  s c r i p t or a banal s c r i p t . A person who has a winner's s c r i p t i s the person who does something without any excuses and does i t as best he can. Everyone has someone that they admire a l o t and that person u s u a l l y has a winner's s c r i p t . A l o s e r ' s s c r i p t i s one that i s adapted from the not OK C h i l d p o s i t i o n . A l o s e r f i n d s excuses f o r not doing what he wants to do. Losers have s c r i p t s w i t h t r a g i c endings: s k i d row, p r i s o n , or a mental h o s p i t a l . A banal s c r i p t i s the non-winner and non-loser who pla y s i t safe j u s t to stay even. They obey a c o n t r o l l i n g Parent and do not r i s k C h i l d intimacy or t e s t our Adult awareness. Those who have a banal s c r i p t u s u a l l y f e e l bored, l o n e l y and depressed. Both people w i t h a banal and l o s e r s c r i p t s can become winners. But they need to make an Adult d e c i s i o n to do so. - 200 -Session number 9: : "Sweatshirt" At one time or another i n our l i v e s we have chosen a p a r t i c u l a r phrase or word that seems to sum up our l i f e s c r i p t . Sometimes t h i s i s l e t t e r e d on a T - s h i r t , or we pen i t on our arm, or p l a s t e r i t on a car bumper. What would you say i s the main word or phrase that best sums you up? Write i t on the sw e a t s h i r t . These are some other words or phrases that sum me up w e l l : - 201 -on number 9:;t>: A L i f e S cript Questionnaire (To be completed BEFORE ~~ session number 10). )escribe yourself b r i e f l y . )escribe your mother b r i e f l y . )escribe your father b r i e f l y . What does your mother say when she compliments you? what does she say when she c r i t i c i z e s you? What i s her main advice to you? what does your father say when he compliments you? What does he say when he c r i t i c i z e s you? khat i s h i s main advice to you? - 202 -What nicknames have people c a l l e d you? What do the names mean? What do you want to be when you're an adult? What does your mother want you to be? What does your f a t h e r want you to be? What do you l i k e most about y o u r s e l f ? What do you l i k e l e a s t about y o u r s e l f ? Do you ever f e e l that something might be wrong w i t h you? ( i f yes, ask what.) What have you done i n the lasV l i t t l e w h i i e that you f e e l m q s t awful about? What would you f e e l i f ' someone caught you doing t h i s ? Describe the bad f e e l i n g you have had most o f t e n i n your l i f e . _ 203 -When d i d you f i r s t f e e l t h i s bad f e e l i n g ? What was your f a v o r i t e c h i l d story' What was your f a v o r i t e part of i t ? I f you could be the person you r e a l l y wanted to be and do the things he would do, what would you be doing f i v e years from today? I f you f o l l o w through on what you are now planning f o r y o u r s e l f , what w i l l you be doing f i v e years from today? When do you t h i n k you might die? At what age? What w i l l i t say on your tombstone? What would "heaven on e a r t h " be f o r you? What do you wish your mother had done d i f f e r e n t l y ? What do you wish your f a t h e r had done d i f f e r e n t l y ? - 204 -I f by magic you could change anything about y o u r s e l f , what would you change? What do you want most out of l i f e ? What i s your biggest problem? What d e c i s i o n s are you going to have to make so that you can be the k i n d of person that you want to be? What about y o u r s e l f w i l l you change to implement these d e c i s i o n s ? What w i l l you do to make those changes? How w i l l you know that you have reached your goal? - 205 -Session number 10: B e h a v i o r a l Choice One element i n v o l v e d i n the "Decide f o r Y o u r s e l f " human r e l a t i o n s h i p t r a i n i n g program i s the a c t u a l element of d e c i d i n g upon appropriate l i f e a t t i t u d e s and l i f e behaviors. In a d d i t i o n to a d e c i s i o n to change or to remain the same, b e h a v i o r a l c o n t r a c t s are employed. Each contract contains three p a r t s : f i r s t , a s p e c i f i c d e s c r i p t i o n of behaviors i n the d e s i r e d l i f e s t y l e ; second, a commitment on the p a r t of the student to implement the l i f e s t y l e ; t h i r d , a commitment on the p a r t of a s i g n i -f i c a n t other person to evaluate the implemented l i f e s t y l e . Session number 10 emphasizes the b e h a v i o r a l dimension of chosen change. 1. I n s i g h t Experiences: (55 min) The students are asked to become as comfortable as p o s s i b l e w h i l e s t a y i n g i n a seated p o s i t i o n . They may s i t on the f l o o r , lean against the w a l l s , s i t on a c h a i r , change the p o s i t i o n or l o c a t i o n of the c h a i r . For the next 30 minutes the students w i l l be i n v o l v e d i n a s e r i e s of fantasy experiences. At the c o n s l u s i o n of each fantasy experience, the f o l l o w i n g kinds of questions are asked: who would you l i k e to be ... can you be the person you would l i k e to be ... how would you f e e l being t h i s new person ... do other people l i k e t h i s new person ... how about your parents ... the p o l i c e ... your f r i e n d s ... your teacher ... ? Following the 30 minute fantasy experiences the students w i l l share t h e i r experiences i n i l l u m i n a t i o n groups. 2. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 3. Transference Assignment: As students leave the classroom, hand out mimeographed copies of " A l t e r n a t i v e L i f e S t y l e s . " - 2 0 6 -Session number 1 0 : B e h a v i o r a l Choice The Wise Man on the Mountain: (see i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r s e s s i o n No.5, A c t i v i t y A.) I want you to imagine that you are walking up a t r a i l i n the mountains^ at n i g h t . There i s a f u l l moon which l e t s you see the t r a i l e a s i l y , and you can a l s o see q u i t e a l o t of your surroundings .... What i s t h i s t r a i l l i k e ? .... What e l s e can you see around you? .... How do you f e e l as you walk up t h i s mountain t r a i l ? .... J u s t ahead there i s a s m a l l s i d e t r a i l that leads up higher to a cave that i s the home of a very wise man who can t e l l you the answer to any question. Turn o f f onto t h i s s i d e t r a i l and walk toward the wise man's cave ... N o t i c e how your s u r -roundings change as you move up t h i s t r a i l and come c l o s e r to h i s cave When you a r r i v e at the cave, you w i l l see a sm a l l campfire i n the f r o n t of the cave, and you w i l l be able to f a i n t l y see the s i l e n t wise man by the l i g h t of the dancing flames of the f i r e ... Go up to the f i r e , put some more wood on i t , and s i t q u i e t l y . . . . As the f i r e burns more b r i g h t -l y you w i l l be able to see the wise man more c l e a r l y ... Take some time to r e a l l y become aware of him — h i s c l o t h e s , h i s body, h i s f a c e , h i s eyes. Now ask the x^ise man a qu e s t i o n that i s very important to you ... As you ask t h i s q u e s t i o n , continue to watch the wise man, and see how he re a c t s to what you say. He might answer you w i t h words a l o n e , or he might a l s o answer you w i t h a gesture or f a c i a l e x p r e s s i o n , or he might show you something ... What k i n d of answer does he give you? J u s t as you are about to say goodbye to the wise man, he turns and reaches i n t o an o l d l e a t h e r bag behind him, and searches i n the bag f o r - 207 -something very s p e c i a l to give to you ... He takes i t out of the bag and gives i t to you to take.home w i t h you ... Look at the g i f t he gives you ... How do you f e e l toward the wise man now? ... T e l l him how you f e e l ... and slowly say goodbye to him. Now turn away, and s t a r t walking back down the mountain t r a i l , b r i n g your g i f t w i t h you ... As you walk back down the t r a i l , look at the t r a i l c a r e f u l l y so that you w i l l remember how to f i n d your way back to the wise man when you want to v i s i t him again ... Be aware of your surroundings, and how you f e e l ... Now keep your eyes c l o s e d , and b r i n g your g i f t w i t h you as you r e -turn to t h i s room ... With your eyes c l o s e d , take some time now to examine t h i s g i f t i n more d e t a i l ... What d i d he give you? R e a l l y discover more about i t ... Touch i t , ... Smell i t , ... t u r n i t over i n your hands and look at i t c a r e f u l l y ... Now put the g i f t away c a r e f u l l y and s a f e l y i n your -memory ... and say goodbye to i t f o r now. You may open your eyes. Statue of Y o u r s e l f : - 208 -Statue of Yourself: Now I want you to imagine that you are i n a very dark b u i l d i n g . You can't see anything at a l l yet, but you know that i t i s some kind of art museum or art g a l l e r y f or sculpture. D i r e c t l y i n front of you, there i s a statue or sculpture of yourself as you r e a l l y are. It might be r e a l i s t i c or abstract, but t h i s statue somehow expresses your basic existence. Look into the darkness, and as the l i g h t gradually increases you w i l l be able to see what th i s statue i s l i k e ... Slowly the l i g h t w i l l increase, and you w i l l be able to discover more about t h i s statue ... What i s i t s shape and form? ... How large i s i t , and what i s i t made of? ... As you are able to see i t more c l e a r l y , discover s t i l l more d e t a i l s ... Walk around i t and look at i t from d i f f e r e n t angles ... Go close to i t and touch i t with your hands ... How does i t feel? ... Now I want you to become t h i s statue. Imagine that you are t h i s statue, and change your posture and p o s i t i o n to f i t the form of the statue ... How do you f e l l as t h i s statue?... What are you l i k e ? ... Describe yourself as t h i s statue, "I am — " ... What i s your existence l i k e as t h i s statue? ... What happens to you, and how do you f e e l about this? ... Now bring t h i s statue to l i f e i n your imagination ... As a l i v i n g statue, what do you do and what i s your l i f e l i k e ? ... Take a l i t t l e time to discover more about your existence as t h i s l i v i n g statue ... Now become yourself again and look at t h i s statue ... Does the statue seem any d i f f e r e n t to you now? ... Has anything changed?... How do you f e e l now toward t h i s statue? ... Slowly get ready to say goodbye to t h i s statue. Say goodbye now, return to your existence i n t h i s room, and q u i e t l y absorb what you have j u s t experienced ... - 209 -In a minute or two I'm going to ask you to open your eyes and r e t u r n to the group. Then I want each of you, i n t u r n , to become your statue p h y s i c a l l y , and t e l l about your existence as t h i s statue — take a posture that f i t s your statue and t e l l a l l the d e t a i l s of your experience as t h i s s tatue and what you do when you b r i n g the statue to l i f e ... Now open your eyes, and come back to the group ... Who i s w i l l i n g to begin? ... - 21n -Session number 10 a: A l t e r n a t i v e L i f e Styles (To be completed BEFORE Session number 11) Dire c t i o n s : In t h i s a c t i v i t y you are to formulate your own philosophy of l i f e by responding to 13 other ways of l i v i n g . This w i l l allow you to consider a l t e r n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e s , more"thoughtfully consider your own l i f e s t y l e , and, perhaps, choose a new l i f e s t y l e . 1. Read each l i f e s t y l e described below, progressing i n order from "way 1" to "way 13." Evaluate each l i f e s t y l e from 1 to 7 d i r e c t l y a f t e r you have read i t . Do not wait u n t i l you have read a l l the ways. Remember that i t i s not a question of what kind of l i f e you now lead, or the kind of l i f e you think you ought to l i v e i n our society, or the kind of l i f e you think would be good for other persons, but simply the kind of l i f e you would personally l i k e to l i v e . Use the following scale and write one of these numbers i n the box at the conclusion of each way to l i v e : -7 - " T e r r i f i c , f ar out, tremendous" 6 -r "Yeah, I l i k e i t quite a b i t , pretty much." 5 - "Oh, I guess i t i s O.K. I l i k e i t s l i g h t l y " 4 ^ "I r e a l l y don't not l i k e i t or l i k e i t - I'm i n d i f f e r e n t to i t . " 3 "I don't think much of i t ... I d i s l i k e i t s l i g h t l y " 2 - "I d i s l i k e i t quite a l o t " .. . 1 - "Horrible, awful, r e v o l t i n g " 2. Once you have completed a l l 13 ways to l i v e , rank order from the l i f e s t y l e you l i k e most to the l i f e s t y l e you l i k e l e a s t . Perhaps you have evaluated several l i f e s t y l e s the same. When t h i s happens, - 211' -determine which one has a higher rank order to you. Use the space provided. 3. Now write your own l i f e s t y l e . What w i l l i t be? You can borrow phrases or sentences from the 13 outlined l i f e s t y l e s . But your own l i f e s t y l e must be your own. 4. F i n a l l y , what are the ten things that you have done i n the l a s t week that are consistent with the philosophy of l i f e that you have described (in #3). Way 1: In t h i s design for l i v i n g the i n d i v i d u a l a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e s i n the s o c i a l l i f e of his community, not pr i m a r i l y to change i t but to under-stand, appreciate, and preserve the best that man has attained. In t h i s l i f e s t y l e , excessive desires are avoided and moderation i s sought. One wants the good things of l i f e , but i n an orderly way. L i f e i s to have ciLarity, balance, refinement, c o n t r o l . V u l g a r i t y , great enthusiasm, i r r a t i o n a l behavior, impatience, indulgence are to be avoided. Friend-ship i s to be esteemed, but not easy intimacy with many people. L i f e i s marked by d i s c i p l i n e , i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , good manners, p r e d i c t a b i l i t y . S o c i a l changes are to be made slowly and c a r e f u l l y , so that what has been achieved i n human culture i s not l o s t . The i n d i v i d u a l i s act i v e p h y s i c a l l y and s o c i a l l y , but not i n a he c t i c or r a d i c a l way. Restraint and i n -t e l l i g e n c e should give order to an active l i f e . Way 2: In t h i s way of l i f e , the i n d i v i d u a l f o r the most part goes i t alone, assuring himself of privacy i n l i v i n g quarters, having much time to himself, attempting to control h i s own l i f e . Emphasis i s on s e l f -s u f f i c i e n c y , r e f l e c t i o n and mediation, knowledge of oneself. Intimate associations and r e l a t i o n s h i p s with s o c i a l groups are to be avoided, - 212 -as are the p h y s i c a l manipulation of objects and attempts at c o n t r o l of the p h y s i c a l environment. One should aim to s i m p l i f y one's e x t e r n a l l i f e , to moderate d e s i r e s which depend upon p h y s i c a l and s o c i a l f o r c e s outside of oneself. One concentrates on refinement, c l a r i f i c a t i o n , and s e l f - d i r e c t i o n . Not much i s gained by l i v i n g outwardly. One must avoid dependence upon persons or t h i n g s ; the center of l i f e should be found w i t h i n oneself. Way 3 : This way of l i f e makes c e n t r a l the sympathetic concern f o r other persons. A f f e c t i o n i s the main t h i n g i n l i f e , a f f e c t i o n that i s f r e e from a l l traces of the i m p o s i t i o n of oneself upon others, or of using others f o r one's own purposes. Greed i n possessions, emphasis on sexual passion, s t r i v i n g f o r power over persons and t h i n g s , excessive emphasis upon i n t e l l e c t , and undue concern f o r oneself are to be avoided. These things hinder the sympathetic love among persons which alone gives s i g n i f i c a n c e to l i f e . Aggressiveness blocks r e c e p t i v i t y to the fo r c e s which f o s t e r genuine personal growth. One should p u r i f y o n e s e l f , r e s -t r a i n one's s e l f - a s s e r t i v e n e s s , and become r e c e p t i v e , a p p r e c i a t i v e , and h e l p f u l i n r e l a t i n g to other persons. Way 4: L i f e i s something to be enjoyed - sensuously enjoyed, enjoyed w i t h r e l i s h and abondonment. The aim i n l i f e should not be to c o n t r o l the course of the world or to change s o c i e t y or the l i v e s of others, but to be open and r e c e p t i v e to things and persons, and to d e l i g h t i n them. L i f e i s a f e s t i v a l , not a workshop or a school f o r moral d i s c i p l i n e . To l e t oneself g£>, to l e t things and persons a f f e c t o n e s e l f , i s more important than to do - or to do good. Such enjoyment r e q u i r e s that one "be s e l f - c e n t e r e d enough to be keenly aware of what i s happening w i t h i n i n - 213 -o r d e r to be f r e e f o r new h a p p i n e s s . One s h o u l d a v o i d e n t a n g l e m e n t s , s h o u l d no t be too dependent on p a r t i c u l a r p e o p l e o r t h i n g s , s h o u l d no t be s e l f - s a c r i f i c i n g ; one s h o u l d be a l o n e a l o t , s h o u l d have t ime f o r m e d i t a t i o n and awareness o f o n e s e l f . Bo th s o l i t u d e and s o c i a b i l i t y a r e n e c e s s a r y f o r t he good l i f e . Way 5: T h i s way o f l i f e s t r e s s e s t he s o c i a l group r a t h e r than the i n d i v i d u a l . A p e r s o n s h o u l d no t f o c u s on h i m s e l f , w i thdraw f rom p e o p l e , be a l o o f and s e l f - c e n t e r e d . R a t h e r he s h o u l d merge h i m s e l f w i t h a s o c i a l g roup , e n j o y c o o p e r a t i o n and c o m p a n i o n s h i p , j o i n w i t h o t h e r s i n r e s o l u t e a c t i v i t y f o r t he r e a l i z a t i o n o f common g o a l s . P e r s o n s a r e s o c i a l , and p e r s o n s a r e a c t i v e ; l i f e s h o u l d merge e n e r g e t i c group a c t i v i t y and c o o p e r a t i v e group en joyment . M e d i t a t i o n , r e s t r a i n t , c o n c e r n f o r o n e ' s s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y , a b s t r a c t i n t e l l e c t u a l i t y , s o l i t u d e , s t r e s s on o n e ' s p o s s e s s i o n s a l l c u t t he r o o t s wh i ch b i n d p e r s o n s t o g e t h e r . One s h o u l d l i v e o u t w a r d l y w i t h gu s to e n j o y i n g the good t h i n g s o f l i f e , w o r k i n g w i t h o t h e r s t o s e c u r e t h e t h i n g s wh i ch make p o s s i b l e a p l e a s a n t and e n e r -g e t i c s o c i a l l i f e . Those who oppose t h i s i d e a l a r e no t t o be d e a l t w i t h too t e n d e r l y . L i f e c a n ' t be too f a s t i d i o u s . Way 6: T h i s p h i l o s o p h y sees l i f e as dynamic and the i n d i v i d u a l as an a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a n t . L i f e c o n t i n u o u s l y t ends to s t a g n a t e , t o become com-f o r t a b l e , t o become s i c k l i e d o ' e r w i t h the p a l e c a s t o f t h o u g h t . A g a i n s t t h e s e t e n d e n c i e s , a p e r s o n must s t r e s s the need f o r c o n s t a n t a c t i v i t y -p h y s i c a l a c t i o n , a d v e n t u r e , t he r e a l i s t i c s o l u t i o n o f s p e c i f i c p rob lems as they a p p e a r , the improvement o f t e c h n i q u e s f o r c o n t r o l l i n g the w o r l d and s o c i e t y . Man ' s f u t u r e depends p r i m a r i l y on what he d o e s , no t on what he f e e l s o r on h i s s p e c u l a t i o n s . New prob lems c o n s t a n t l y a r i s e - 214 -and always w i l l a r i s e . Improvements must always be made i f man i s to progress. We can't j u s t follow the past or dream of what the future might be. We have to work r e s o l u t e l y and continually i f c o n t r o l i s to be gained over the forces which threaten us. Man should r e l y on tec h n i c a l advances made possible by s c i e n t i f i c knowledge. He should f i n d h i s goal i n the so l u t i o n of his problems. The good i s the enemy of the better. Way 7: This philosophy says that we should at various times and i n various ways accept something from a l l other paths of l i f e , but give no one our exclusive a l l e g i a n c e . At one moment one way may be more appropriatej at another moment another i s the most appropriate. L i f e should contain enjoyment and action and contemplation i n about equal amounts. When any one way i s ca r r i e d to extremes, we lose something important for our l i f e . So we must c u l t i v a t e f l e x i b i l i t y ; admit d i v e r s i t y i n ourselves; accept the tension which t h i s d i v e r s i t y produces; f i n d a place for detachment in the midst of enjoyment and a c t i v i t y . The goal of l i f e i s found i n the dynamic i n t e r a c t i o n of the various paths of l i f e . One should use a l l of them in°building a l i f e , and not one alone. Way 8: Enjoyment should be the keynote of l i f e . Not the he c t i c search for intense and e x c i t i n g pleasures, but the enjoyment of the simple and e a s i l y obtainable pleasures; the pleasures of j u s t e x i s t i n g , of savoring food, of comfortable surroundings, of t a l k i n g with f r i e n d s , of rest and relax a t i o n . A home that i s warm and comfortable, chairs and a bed that are s o f t , a kitchen w e l l stocked with food, a door open to friends -t h i s i s the place to l i v e . Body at ease, relaxed, calm i n i t s movements, not hurried, breath slow and easy, a willingness to nod and to r e s t , gratitude to the worSid that feeds the body - so should i t be. Driving ambition.iand the fanaticism of a s c e t i c i d e a l s are the signs of d i s -contented people who have l o s t the capacity to f l o a t i n the stream of simpl carefree, wholesome enjoyment. Way 9: Receptivity should be the keynote of l i f e . The good things of l i f e come of t h e i r own accord, and come unsought. They cannot be found by resolute action. They cannot be found i n the indulgence of the sen-suous desires of the body. They cannot be gathered by p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n ,the turmoil of s o c i a l l i f e . They cannot be given to others by attempts to be h e l p f u l . They cannot be garnered by hard thinking. Rather do they come unsought when the bars of the s e l f are down. When the s e l f has ceased to make demands and waits i n quiet r e c e p t i v i t y , i t becomes open to the powers which nourish i t and work through i t ; sustained by these powers, i t knows joy and peace. S i t t i n g alone under the trees and the sky, open to nature's voices, calm and receptive, then can be wisdom from without enter within. Way 10: S e l f - c o n t r o l should be the keynote of l i f e . Not the easy s e l f -control which retreats from the world, but the v i g i l a n t , stern, manly control of a s e l f which l i v e s i n the world, and knows the strength of the world and the l i m i t s of human power. The good l i f e i s r a t i o n a l l y directed and f i r m l y pursues high i d e a l s . It i s not bent by the seductive voices of comfort and desire. I t does not expect s o c i a l Utopias. I t i s d i s -t r u s t f u l of f i n a l v i c t o r i e s . Too much should not be expected. Yet one can with v i g i l a n c e hold firm the reins of s e l f , control unruly impulses, understand one's place i n the world, guide one's actions by reason, maintain s e l f - r e l i a n t independence. And i n t h i s way, though he f i n a l l y perish, man can keep h i s human dig n i t y and respect, and die with cosmic - 216 -good manners. Way 11: The contemplative l i f e i s the good l i f e . The external world i s not f i t habitat f or man. I t i s too bi g , too cold, too pressing. I t i s the l i f e turned inward that i s rewarding. The r i c h i n t e r n a l world of i d e a l s , of s e n s i t i v e f e e l i n g s , of re v e r i e , of self-knowledge i s man's true home. By the c u l t i v a t i o n of the s e l f within, man becomes human. Only then does there a r i s e deep sympathy with a l l that l i v e s , an understanding of the s u f f e r i n g inherent i n l i f e , a r e a l i z a t i o n of the f u t i l i t y of ag-gressive action, the attainment of contemplative joy. Conceit then f a l l s away and au s t e r i t y i s dissolved. In giving up the world, one finds the larger and f i n e r sea of the inner s e l f . Way 12: The use of the body's energy i s the secret of a rewarding l i f e . The hands need material to make into something; lumber and stone f o r b u i l d i n g , food to harvest, clay to mold. The muscles are a l i v e to joy only in action: i n climbing, running, s k i i n g , and the l i k e . L i f e f inds zest i n overcoming, dominating, conquering some obstacle. It i s the active deed which i s s a t i s f y i n g ; the deed that meets the challenge of the present, the daring and the adventuresome deed. Not i n cautious f o r e s i g h t , not in relaxed ease does l i f e a t t a i n completion. Outward energetic acti o n , the excitment of power i n the tangible present - t h i s i s the way to l i v e . Way 13: A person should l e t himself be used. Used by other persons i n th e i r growth, used by the great objective purposes i n the universe which s i l e n t l y and i r r e s i s t i b l y achieve t h e i r goal. For persons' and the world's purposes are b a s i c a l l y dependable and can be trusted. One should be humble, constant, f a i t h f u l , uninsistent. Grateful f o r a f f e c t i o n and. protection, but undemending. Close to persons and to nature, and - 2 1 7 -w i l l i n g to be second. Nourishing the good by devotion. One should be a serene,confident, quiet vessel and instrument of the great dependable powers which move to f u l f i l l themselves. - 218 -m a t i v e L i f e S t y l e s : P r i o r i t y of Likeness ige the l i f e s t y l e s according to the k i n d of l i f e you would p e r s o n a l l y l i k e to from 1 to 13. 1. I would l i k e to l i v e t h i s way the most: way 2. way # 3. way 4. way # 5. way # 6. way # 7. way # 8. way # 9. way # 10. way # 11. way 12. way # 13. I would l i k e to l i v e t h i s way the least:way # e the back of t h i s sheet of paper to o u t l i n e your own l i f e s t y l e ] . 10 things that you have done, i n t h i s past week that are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the l i f e e you have described. (I;f you need e x t r a paper, a t t a c h a second sheet). 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. _ 219 _ Session number 11: Game A n a l y s i s 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (15 min) This s e s s i o n deals w i t h game a n a l y s i s and i s e n t i t l e d "Do you want to p l a y ? " I t concerns i t s e l f w i t h u n s t r a i g h t c h i l d t r a n s a c t i o n s to avoid intimacy. 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (20 min) Have each student describe and create games as o u t l i n e d i n the "Game A n a l y s i s " E x e r c i s e . 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: - 220 -Session number 11; Do You-Want To P l a y ? One way you can s t r u c t u r e time w i t h people i s by p l a y i n g games. In a game, the Adult part of you does not know e x a c t l y what the C h i l d or Parent i s up t o ; that i s , the C h i l d or Parent has a secret reason f o r p l a y i n g a game. When you are not coming on s t r a i g h t — t h a t i s , when your message to another person i s u l t e r i o r , f o r some hidden purposes, such as to have a f e e l i n g of d e f e a t i n g him, you are p l a y i n g a game. For example, you may be h e l p i n g a person w i t h a problem, t h i n k i n g w i t h your Adult that you are r e a l l y h e l p i n g him. At the same time your C h i l d may be making fun of him. Here i s an example of a game c a l l e d "Now I've got you" (NIGY). You and a group of your f r i e n d s , a r e having c o f f e e at a restaurant and see a r e a l l y a t t r a c t i v e g i r l come i n . Everyone at the t a b l e s t a r t s t a l k i n g about her and s e v e r a l of the guys c a l l out rude remarks to her. You n o t i c e that Barry i s not enjoying the f o o l i n g around and that makes you k i n d of mad because you've been c o l l e c t i n g brown stamps over him f o r some time. So you ask him*. "What's the matter, Barry, don't you l i k e being w i t h us?" Part of you knows that he may not r e a l l y want to be w i t h you at a l l . When he says, "Well I j u s t don't much l i k e t a l k i n g behind. Jane's back, e s p e c i a l l y r o t t e n t h i n g s , " you say something l i k e , " I t ' s funny that you're the only p u r i t a n i n the group. What's your problem?" Barry w i l l probably resent your remark and you w i l l probably l i k e h i s resentment. You may then say, "What are you g e t t i n g u p t i g h t about? You're the weird nut, not me!" Barry who may be p l a y i n g "Kick Me" probably sensed that you were never r e a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n a s t r a i g h t answer. He could have refused to p l a y by i g n o r i n g your qu e s t i o n , j o i n i n g Jane, or by saying something l i k e , "Sure I l i k e being w i t h you," and l e t t i n g i t go at t h a t . A set of t r a n s a c t i o n s i s a game i f i t meets four requirements: 1. The p l a y e r s seem to have an honest reason f o r the t r a n s a c t i o n ; e.g. "Dom't you l i k e being w i t h us?" "Not much." 2. They al s o exchange se c r e t messages; e.g. "Do you want a k i c k ? " "Yes." 3. They experience a f e e l i n g pay-off; e.g., one f e e l s s u p e r i o r , and the other f e e l s put down. (They c o l l e c t t h e i r stamps.) 4. The Adults of both p l a y e r s are unaware they are i n a game, although they may become immediately aware when the game i s over. - 221 -The game of NIGY ends w i t h a f e e l i n g of winning over, or of b e a t i n g down, the other p l a y e r . The game K i c k Me ends w i t h the f e e l i n g of being wronged. A C h i l d may want to f e e l wronged i n order to have a reason f o r revenge, f o r " G e t t i n g Even;" Another C h i l d may want to f e e l wronged i n order to have a good reason f o r running away, g e t t i n g a d i v o r c e , q u i t t i n g s c h o o l , doing dope. People who want to f e e l wronged use games to c o l l e c t brown stamps. People who want to f e e l they are r i g h t use games to c o l l e c t gold stamps. Games that pay o f f i n gold stamps are sometimes c a l l e d good and crooked games because they end i n p o s i t i v e s t r o k e s , but i n an u n s t r a i g h t way. Games that pay o f f i n brown stamps may be c a l l e d bad and crooked. P l a y e r s can switch p l a c e s , or r o l e s , w h i l e p l a y i n g games. The three common r o l e s , as shown i n the diagram below, are V i c t i m (V), Persecutor (P), and Rescuer (R). The NIGY player i n the example above i s the Persecutor. His V i c t i m agrees to play by going along. A f t e r f e e l i n g s u p e r i o r i n c r i t i c i z i n g V i c t i m , Persecutor might f e e l g u i l t y and t r y to Rescue. V i c t i m could then switch to Persecutor by a n g r i l y t e l l i n g Rescuer to forget i t . Rescuer then becomes V i c t i m . These switches go i n e i t h e r d i r e c t i o n around the t r i a n g l e formed by the three r o l e s . A person may p l a y a l l three r o l e s at once: e.g., the "martyr" mother who says, "Don't bother about me...I'm only the housekeeper," i s complaining of being a V i c t i m f o r having to care f o r (Rescue) her f a m i l y , who may hear her as a Persecutor. V i c t i m - 222 -Children's f a i r y t a l e s were invented by s t o r y t e l l e r s who recognized these three r o l e s i n people's l i v e s . L i t t l e Red R i d i n g Hood, w h i l e out to Rescue v i c t i m Grandma, ran i n t o Persecutor Wolf, and set h e r s e l f up to become h i s V i c t i m . But Persecutor Wolf ended up as V i c t i m of the Rescueing Woodsman. You recognize your games by t h e i r p a y - o f f s . When you f e e l you've "wonj •' but part of you knows you took u n f a i r advantage, you know you were p l a y i n g a game l i k e NIGY. When you f e e l put down, but sense that you asked f o r i t , you know you were i n a s e l f - d e f e a t i n g game l i k e K i c k Me. You can choose not to p l a y . The best way to stop a game i s to refuse the pay-off; that i s , refuse to cash i n on the f e e l i n g that u s u a l l y r e s u l t s from the game. You w i l l , l i t t l e by l i t t l e , stop t r y i n g to p l a y the game, once you decide not to take the pay-off. You may then be ready to drop the r a c k e t . Why would you want to p l a y games i n the f i r s t place? You have at l e a s t f i v e reasons: 1. Games help your C h i l d stay i n your racket by c o l l e c t i n g or cashing i n stamps. You may f e e l uneasy i f your stamp balance i s not r i g h t . 2. Games help you to keep from f a c i n g up to what you're a f r a i d o f , such as r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , competition,others' opinions of you, e t c . 3. Games help you pass time w i t h others without your having to get too close to them (avoiding intimacy w i t h f r i e n d s or parents maybe.). 4. Games help you get s t r o k e s , although they may be negative. 5. Games help to "prove" that your C h i l d ' s b a s i c p o s i t i o n (such as, " I am not as OK as others") i s " r i g h t . " Why would any C h i l d want to f e e l not OK? No C h i l d would, unless he was convinced from h i s e a r l y years that he was not as OK as o t h e r s . I f he was convinced of t h a t , he w i l l then be out to "prove" i t i n order to b e l i e v e there i s no use i n t r y i n g to change f o r the b e t t e r . Remember— your C h i l d can f e e l not-OK without your Adult r e a l i z i n g i t . Instead of p l a y i n g games, you have another way to spend time w i t h people. Intimacy i s a c l o s e , l o v i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h another person, without any games. I t i s the best way to get and give s t r o k e s . Married love may be i t s best expression, but intimacy does not always i n c l u d e sex. Father-son, s i s t e r - b r o t h e r , f r i e n d - f r i e n d r e l a t i o n s h i p s can be very i n t i m a t e . - 223 -Session number 11 : Game A n a l y s i s E x e r c i s e A. L i s t e d below are s e v e r a l kinds of games. Describe the theme and purpose f o r each game and i l l u s t r a t e w i t h some h y p o t h e t i c a l t r a n s l -a t i o n s . 1. " I f i t weren't f o r you." 2. "I'm only t r y i n g to help you." 3. "Poor me." B. Imagine a game you play. Name i t anything you l i k e . Describe i t below. Why do you play t h i s game? Give at l e a s t 3 reasons that apply to you. 1. 2. - 224 -Session number 12: Problem Solving 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (15 min) Copies of the "Zap Technique" are d i s t r i b u t e d to the students and are completed. 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l Period: (25 min) E n t i t l e d "Bash Trapping and Problem Solving (1)" and has to do with making decisions from the Adult Ego state. 3. Insight Experience: (10 min) Students are asked to form choice tryads and determine the ego state i n which they responded i n the zap technique. Instructions w i l l be projected from the overhead projector. 4. Session Evaluation: (5 min) 5. Tranferance Assignment: As students leave the classroom, copies of the " A l l i g a t o r River" are handed to them. They are to play the game with as many of t h e i r family members present as possible. - 225 -Session Number 12 - Bash Trapping and Problem Solving (1) Have you ever been in a situation in which you f e l t trapped? Per-haps your parents are telling you that university is the avenue to success and you have the hardest time passing even the simplest subjects. So you bash your head against the academic wall and feel like you are getting nowhere. Or maybe, somewhere along the line, you learned that i t i s really important to like everybody and be liked by everybody. So you develop a mask that i s smiling and cheerful, when on the inside you feel like a hypocrite. You feel trapped and in the trap you discover you don't know who you really are, but you joist keep on smiling, feeling more and more trapped. These are examples of "bash trapping." when you bash yourself against some wall ("university i s the avenue to success," "need to like and be liked by everyone"). It gives you more than headaches. You begin to feel depressed, disillusioned and discouraged. There are three major reasons people bash trap: 1. they really don't know who they are (they have "lax ego state boundaries")| 2. they are bigoted or deluded (they have a "contaminated Adult'0 ; 3. they don't accept their whole selves ("rigid ego state boundaries" resulting in "exclusion"). Problem solving i s the opposite of bash trapping since i t avoids running f u l l force into a situation that you think is "necessary but impossible." There are a number of stages for getting out of a bash trap: (1) reality testing; (2) seeking alternative solutions; (3) estimating the - 226 -l o g i c a l consequences of each a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n (e.g. w i l l t h i s d e c i s i o n r e s u l t i n a new bash t r a p ? ) ; ( 4 ) making a choice; ( 5 ) impler-menting the choice. R e a l i t y t e s t i n g i s the process of checking out what i s r e a l . I t in v o l v e s separating f a c t from fantasy, t r a d i t i o n s , o p i n i o n s , and a r c h a i c f e e l i n g s . I t includes p e r c e i v i n g and e v a l u a t i n g the current s i t u a t i o n and r e l a t i n g the data to past knowledge and experience. R e a l i t y t e s t i n g allows a person to f i g u r e out a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s . When a person has a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s , he can then estimate the probable consequences of the v a r i o u s courses of a c t i o n . The Adult ego s t a t e ' s f u n c t i o n s of r e a l i t y t e s t i n g and p r o b a b i l i t y e s t i m a t i n g serve the purpose of m i n i -m i z i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y of f a i l u r e and regr e t and i n c r e a s i n g the p o s s i b i -l i t y of c r e a t i v e success. C r e a t i v e success i s achieved by choosing the best a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n and implementing i t , t h a t , i s , making i t work i n your l i f e . Why does a person l i k e y o u r s e l f bash trap? I. Because he probably doesn't know who he r e a l l y i s . Samuel B u t l e r wrote, "An open mind i s a l l very w e l l i n i t s way, but i t ought not to be so open that there i s no keeping anything i n or out of i t . I t should be capable of s h u t t i n g i t s doors sometimes, or i t may be found a l i t t l e d r a f t y . " A person w i t h l a x ego boundaries doesn't c l o s e the doors between h i s ego s t a t e s . He appears to l a c k i d e n t i t y and gives the impression of being s l i p s h o d i n h i s behavior. He s l i p s c o n t i n u a l l y from one ego s t a t e to another i n response to j u s t about everything. He may have great d i f f i c u l t y f u n c t i o n i n g i n the r e a l world and be i n ser i o u s need of p r o f e s s i o n a l help. One woman wi t h t h i s boundary problem was described by others i n a - 227 -c o u n s e l l i n g group': "You never know what's going on w i t h her or what she's going to do next." A person w i t h l a x boundaries can be diagrammed as f o l l o w s : The person w i t h l a x ego boundaries has l i t t l e Adult c o n t r o l . For example, a drug user's Parent might say, " I know I shouldn't take drugs," and h i s C h i l d says, "But gee, there's nothing e l s e to do, and i t f e e l s good," and h i s Adult never r e a l l y makes a d e c i s i o n , except that he j u s t continues to take drugs. His Adult i s not i n c o n t r o l and, hence, he does not r e a l l y know who he i s . He i s a l l confused i n s i d e . 2. He may be "bigoted" or "deluded" The c l e a r t h i n k i n g of the Adult may be " s p o i l e d " or "contaminated" by the C h i l d or the Parent. When the parent contaminates the Adult there i s " b i g o t r y " and when the C h i l d contaminates the Adult there i s "de l u s i o n . " Contamination occurs when the Adult accepts as true some unfounded Parent b e l i e f s or C h i l d d i s t o r t i o n s , and r a t i o n a l i z e s and j u s t i f i e s these a t t i t u d e s . - 228 -contaminated by the Parent ( b i g o t r y ) The A d u l t , The Adult contaminated by the C h i l d (delusion) The Adult contaminated by the Parent and C h i l d ( b i g o t r y and delusion) We a l l know what .., b i g o t r y i s : " I t hate b l a c k s , Muslims, peanuts (though I've never t a s t e d them) and women!" " S c o t t i s h people are good savers and Jews are t i g h t wads." "Everyone needs at l e a s t 8 hours s l e e p . " "Men should work i n o f f i c e s and women should cook and sew." "Don't t r u s t anyone over t h i r t y . " B i g o t r y i s when our Parent t e l l s us something and we accept i t without checking i t out w i t h our Adult. So b i g o t r y doesn't have to only be r a c i a l , sexual or r e l i g i o u s , i t can be anything when the Parent contaminates the Adul t . B i g o t r y o f t e n i n t r u d e s on the laws of s o c i e t y . U n t i l r e c e n t l y , under Texas law a man who k i l l e d h i s w i f e f o r a d u l t e r y was p r a c t i c i n g j u s t i f i a b l e homocide; however, i f a w i f e k i l l e d her husband i n a s i m i l a r circumstance, i t was f i r s t degree murder. The same dynamic seemed to be a work when a U.S. l e g i s l a t o r introduced a b i l l e a r l y i n 1969 asking - 22? -that young people of nineteen be given the vote, w i t h the exception, however, of young men w i t h long h a i r , He admonished, " i f they're going to be c i t i z e n s , they should look l i k e c i t i z e n s . " When the C h i l d contaminates the Adult there i s d e l u s i o n . Delusion i s j u s t as common as b i g o t r y : "No one loves me." "People are always t a l k i n g behind my back." "Heroin i s good f o r you." "Since I've been working at the Spot, I'm i n d e s p e n s i b l e . " "Some day 'Mr. Right' w i l l come along and rescue me from my r o t t e n home." When the ego s t a t e boundaries are r e a l i g n e d , the person understands h i s C h i l d and Parent r a t h e r than being contaminated by these i n f l u e n c e s . One c l i e n t expressed t h i s decontamination process when he s a i d , " I used to have t h i s strange idea that no one could ever l i k e me. Now I see that t h a t ' s j u s t the way I f e l t at home as a k i d . Now I r e a l i z e that not everybody l i k e s me, but many people do." A r e a l i z a t i o n such as t h i s means that he has solved h i s problem and i s no longer bash t r a p p i n g . 3. Perhaps He Does Not Accept His Whole S e l f Not accepting your whole s e l f means excluding part of you that you don't much l i k e . This happens when a person almost always comes on Parent, or always i s not i n touch w i t h h i s whole s e l f . The C h i l d e x c luding the Parent and Adult (ConS sta n t C h i l d ) The Parent excluding the Adult and C h i l d (Constant Parent) The Adult excluding the Parent and C h i l d (Constant Adult) - 230; -A person who operates p r i m a r i l y from the Parent ego s t a t e o f t e n t r e a t s others, as i f they were c h i l d r e n . Such behavior can be found i n the teacher who "takes care o f " everyone's problems at the school or i n the f a t h e r who t r i e s to run the personal l i v e s of h i s c h i l d r e n , who cannot be approached reasonably, or who d i s p l a y s l i t t l e or no sense of humor. E i t h e r knowingly or unknowingly the Constant Parent c o l l e c t s people who are w i l l i n g to be dependent upon, or subordinate t o , him and o f t e n casts h i m s e l f w i t h someone i n the complementary r o l e of Con-stant C h i l d . One type of Constant Parent i s hardworking and has a strong sense of duty. He may be judgmental, c r i t i c a l of o t h e r s , and m o r a l i s t i c . He may n e i t h e r laugh nor cry from h i s C h i l d , nor be o b j e c t i v e l y reasonable from h i s Adult. He "knows a l l the answers," manipulates others and i s domineering, overpowering, and a u t h o r i t a r i a n . The person who operates p r i m a r i l y as Constant Adult i s c o n s i s t e n t l y o b j e c t i v e , uninvolved, and concerned p r i m a r i l y w i t h f a c t s and data processing. He may appear u n f e e l i n g and unsympathetic. He may not empathize w i t h someone who has a headache, and may be a bore at a p a r t y . People who e x h i b i t the r i g i d boundary problem of the Constant Adult may seek jobs that are not o b j e c t - o r i e n t e d r a t h e r than people-o r i e n t e d . They may s e l e c t vocations where a b s t r a c t t h i n k i n g devoid of emotion i s valued. They may be a t t r a c t e d , f o r example, to accounting, computer programming, engineering, chemistry, p h y s i c s , or mathematics. The Constant Adult o f t e n experiences t r o u b l e at home because he needs to be i n v o l v e d w i t h the r e s t of the f a m i l y . With l i t t l e c a r i n g Parent or f u n - l o v i n g C h i l d , h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p s are l i k e l y to be s t e r i l e . - 231 -His f a m i l y probably f e e l unhappy because he gives them so l i t t l e s t r o k i n g . A p h y s i c i a n w i t h t h i s problem may make a competent d i a g n o s i s , but h i s p a t i e n t s may complain that he l a c k s a bedside manner, that he i s c o l d , a l o o f , and doesn't care about them. A p a t i e n t on the operating t a b l e may be emotionally b e t t e r prepared f o r surgery i f the doctor says p a r e n t a l l y , "Now don't worry ... we w i l l take good care of you," r a t h e r than f a c t u a l l y "You have a 50-50 chance of s u r v i v i n g t h i s o p e r a t i o n . " The person who operates p r i m a r i l y as Constant C h i l d i s the one who i s the perpetual l i t t l e boy or g i r l who, l i k e Peter Pan, doesn't want to grow up. He doesn't t h i n k f o r h i m s e l f , make h i s own d e c i s i o n s , or take r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h i s own behavior. He may e x h i b i t l i t t l e conscience i n h i s dealings w i t h other people. The Constant C h i l d attaches h i m s e l f to someone who w i l l take care of him. A man or woman who wants to be "kept," babied, punished, rewarded, or applauded i s l i k e l y to seek out a Constant Parent who can a f f o r d him. People w i t h t h i s ego boundary problem are o f t e n s u c c e s s f u l as performers on the stage or on the p l a y i n g f i e l d . However, without adequate Adult f u n c t i o n i n g , the performer may spend h i s s a l a r y i m p u l s i v e l y , o f t e n ending up broke. The drug a d d i c t i s al s o a Constant C h i l d . His only concern i s to s a t i s f y himself and to t h i s end he may p r o s t i t u t e h i m s e l f , s t e a l or k i l l . These are the three main reasons why a person bash t r a p s . The f i v e -stage process f o r problem s o l v i n g i s how to get out of the bash t r a p . Why do you bash trap? How do you sol v e your problems? What are your bash traps? - 232 -Session Number 12a - The Zap Technique How do you make deci s i o n s ? Do you do whatever you want to ( C h i l d ) ? Or do you do only what you know you should do (Parent)? Maybe your Adult acts as the executive of your p e r s o n a l i t y , c o n s u l t i n g your Parent and C h i l d . There are two ways of approaching the Zap Technique. You can t h i n k i t s p r e t t y important to f i n d out how to make d e c i s i o n s or you can f i g u r e i t s p r e t t y unimportant and j u s t f o o l around. What i s your de c i s i o n ? 1. I w i l l t r y to understand (check the space that 2. I w i l l f o o l around best summarizes your d e c i s i o n ) D i r e c t i o n s : You have the power of " e l i m i n a t i o n " by "zapping"" E l i m i n a t i o n i s the suspending of a human l i f e f orever i n a land where a l l bad dreams come true. Zapping i s the power of doing t h a t . Only you people i n t h i s c l a s s have that power. And you must e x e r c i s e i t . Below are ten p a i r s of c i r c l e s each connected by a zap l i n e . You have the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of e l i m i n a t i n g one of the two people by converting the zap l i n e i n t o an arrow. You must complete a l l ten zap l i n e s i n t o e l i m i n a t i o n arrows. O The person you love the most, other than y o u r s e l f An unknown baby i n an unknown country - 233 -Someone you r e a l l y d i s l i k e Everybody, i n c l u d i n g y o u r s e l f Henry K i s s i n g e r (U.S. Secretary of State) The person s i t t i n g c l o s e s t to you r i g h t now A p r i s o n e r convicted of murder (he i s appealing the c o n v i c t i o n ) Miss America, 1969 Your m i n i s t e r ( r a b b i , e l d e r , s p i r i t u a l leader) Bobby Orr - 234 -Session Number 12b - A l l i g a t o r R i v e r I n v i t e as many of your f a m i l y as you can to p l a y " A l l i g a t o r River.!' Allow about one-half hour to play. Here i s what to do: f i r s t , read the s t o r y ahead and then re-read the s t o r y again i f d e s i r e d . Go ahead! Once there was a g i r l named A b i g a i l who was i n love w i t h a boy named Gregory. Gregory f e l l o o f f h i s 10 - speed b i k e and broke h i s Sony t r a n s i s t o r r a d i o . A b i g a i l , being a tr u e f r i e n d , volunteered to take h i s radi o to be r e p a i r e d . But the Sony r e p a i r shop was across the r i v e r , and the r i v e r was f u l l of a l l i g a t o r s . Poor Gregory couldn't l i s t e n to "LG without h i s r a d i o , so A b i g a i l was desperate to get across the r i v e r to the r e p a i r shop. While she was standing f o r l o r n l y on the bank of the r i v e r , c l u t c h i n g the busted r a d i o i n her hands, a boy named Sinbad g l i d e d byvin a rowboat. She asked Sinbad i f he would take her across. He agreed to on c o n d i t i o n that w h i l e she Was having the radi o r e p a i r e d , she would go to a nearby r e s t a u r a n t , hang around out f r o n t , and buy some hashish f o r him. A b i g a i l refused to do t h i s and went to see a f r i e n d named Ivan who had a boat. When A b i g a i l t o l d Ivan her problem, he s a i d he was too busy to help her out and didn't want to be i n v o l v e d . A b i g a i l , f e e l i n g that she had no other choice, returned to Sinbad and t o l d him she would buy some hash f o r him. When A b i g a i l returned the r e p a i r e d t r a n s i s t o r radio to Gregory, - 235 -she t o l d him what she had to do. Gregory was app a l l e d at what she had done and toOid her he never wanted to see her again. A b i g a i l , upset, turned to Slug w i t h her t a l e of woe. Slug was so sorry f o r A b i g a i l that he promised her he would get even w i t h Gregory. They went up to the school where Greg was p l a y i n g b a l l and A b i g a i l watched h a p p i l y w h i l e Slug smashed Gregory i n the mouth and stomped on h i s t r a n s i s t o r r a d i o . Now that you have read the s t o r y at l e a s t t w i c e , rank order from 1 - 5 the most o b j e c t i o n a b l e people i n the s t o r y . Write your rank o r d e r i n g on a piece of paper from most objectionabTLe (1) to the l e a s t o b j e c t i o n -able (5). Compare your ranking and discuss your reasons. Do you know why your f a m i l y chose the ranking they did? You §hould! - 236 -Session number 13: Problem S o l v i n g 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (15 min) Have each student imagine i n h i s mind a problem that he i s p r e s e n t l y experiencing or has experienced i n h i s immidiate past. L i s t as many as 20 p o s s i b l e ways of s o l v i n g the problem. 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (15 min) E n t i t l e d "Bash Trapping and Problem Solving (2):'" This s e s s i o n i s a c o n t i n u a t i o n of the one immediately previous. I t focuses on how to solve problems from the Adult ego s t a t e . I n s i g h t Experience: (15 min) In the i n s t r u c t i o n a l p e r i o d , f i v e ways of responding to a problem were recorded. Ask the student which way he responds to problems. 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: As the students leave the classroom hand to them a "Problem S o l v i n g Contract"" - 237 _ Session number 13: Bash Trapping and Problem Solving (2) Each person has the p o t e n t i a l to put h i s Adult i n executive con-t r o l of h i s ego s t a t e s . I f freed from negative or i r r e l e v a n t i n f l u e n c e from h i s Parent and C h i l d , he i s emancipated to make h i s own autonomous d e c i s i o n s . Unless a person has Adult awareness of h i m s e l f , most outside s t i m u l i are l i k e l y to be f i r s t responded 'to by e i t h e r the Parent or C h i l d ego s t a t e s or both. When the Adult becomes the e x e c u t i v e , a person l e a r n s to r e c e i v e more and more s t i m u l i through h i s Adult. He stops, l o o k s , and l i s t e n s f o r h i m s e l f , perhaps counting to ten, w h i l e he t h i n k s . He evaluates before a c t i n g and takes f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r him thoughts, f e e l i n g s , and behavior. He assumes the task of determining which of the p o s s i b l e responses i n h i s ego s t a t e s are a p p r o p r i a t e , using that which i s OK from h i s Parent and h i s C h i l d . Response «£• Stimulus (a) Adult using parent programming In some instances the person may take a look at the s i t u a t i o n and decide that what h i s mother or f a t h e r would do i s the appropriate t h i n g to do. For example, he may decide to s y m p a t h e t i c a l l y comfort a c r y i n g , l o s t c h i l d i n a l a r g e department s t o r e as h i s parents would have done (Diag. a ) . At another time he-may r e j e c t h i s Parent response and withhold a c r i t i c a l remark he learned from h i s f a t h e r (Diag. b ) . Stimulus — E.esponse (b) Adult r e j e c t i n g parent programming In some instances a person can take a look at a s i t u a t i o n and decide to respond to i t as he d i d when he was a c h i l d . For example, when d r i v i n g past a r e s e r v o i r on a hot s u l t r y day, he may suddenly stop the car, check out i f i t ' s safe and decide to take a running jump i n t o the water to c o o l o f f . At another time he may r e j e c t a C h i l d impulse to have sex, swear at a parent, do dope, or race h i s car. Making a conscious choice i n v o l v e s s h i f t i n g from one ego s t a t e to another when i t i s appropriate. For example, by an act of f r e e w i l l a person can s h i f t from C h i l d resentment to Adult concern and a c t i o n . John was caught t a l k i n g i n an E n g l i s h exam and was escorted by the teacher to the v i c e - p r i n c i p a l ' s , o f f i c e . The v i c e - p r i n c i p a l , who never much l i k e d John, decided to expel him from sc h o o l , but r e a l i z e d that that a c t i o n was not appropriate. Although the v i c e - p r i n c i p a l ' s C h i l d wanted to have revenge, h i s Adult e x e r c i s e d executive c o n t r o l and John was given some more appropriate form of punishment. The Adult ego s t a t e as executive of the p e r s o n a l i t y r e f e r e e s between the Parent ego s t a t e and the C h i l d ego s t a t e , e s p e c i a l l y when the inner dialogue i s h u r t f u l or d e s t r u c t i v e . In such cases the Adult becomes a more r a t i o n a l Parent to the C h i l d than the a c t u a l parents were s e t t i n g r a t i o n a l l i m i t s , g i v i n g r a t i o n a l permissions, seeking reasonable g r a t i f i c a t i o n f o r the C h i l d . The f o l l o w i n g cases i n d i c a t e how the Adult might r e f e r e e or e f f e c t a compromise between C h i l d and Parent dialogue. Jim I could get away w i t h i t , but I'd have to work twice as hard to make up f o r i t . No poi n t i n s t a y i n g home. Mary - -2-4U • -fA J I'm capable as a worker and ^ — being a secretary i s below my p o t e n t i a l . I'm going to transfer to the academic program. © Larry I'm trapped i n t h i s r e l a -tionship with Beth. P 1 You should count your blessings, Larry. There's not many guys who have a g i r l f r i e n d that i s good looking. © What are the pros and cons of staying i n t h i s r elationship? What are the pros and cons of stopping i t ? I think I ' l l t a l k to my Grandad before I decide. He gives me good objective data. Tom (c jl don't get that word the teacher ( P JNever interrupt when someone i s ^ — ' j u s t used but i f I ask, I ' l l sound — t a l k i n g . You might make a f o o l stupid. of yourself. ( A ) If I don't 'ask my question 3 ..I _ _ might miss the whole point of the lecture. So here_ goes_,_ey_en ' i f I f e e l stupid. When a person activates his Adult and makes that part of him the executive of h i s personality, he i s able to solve problems and stop h i s bash trapping. He may see avenues that he could never see before: . . . my job i s a dead end and i t ' s wrecking my marriage. . . . my beauty has no r e a l power, I had better work at school. . . . being a "groupie" alienates me from myself. . . . r e a l friendships are rare; how can I be a better friend? . . . there i s no f a i r y godmother to rescue me from my homework. . . . s i t t i n g w a i t i n g f o r things to happen i s a h o r r i b l e waste 6 f time. Faced w i t h such awarenesses -many people f e e l f r e e . But they a l s o -may f e e l d e s p a i r , r e a l i z i n g that they have r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e i r own l i v e s . For the f i r s t time they r e a l i z e that i f they are to be rescued, they must r e l y on themselves and strengthen t h e i r own resources, f o r much of l i f e i s a d o - i t - y o u r s e l f p r o j e c t . Although the f e e l i n g of despair i s p a i n f u l , i t i s a challenge to do something d i f f e r e n t . At t h i s p o i n t a person can (1) remove him-s e l f from s o c i e t y by becoming a hermit i n some i s o l a t e d p l a c e , by being committed to a mental h o s p i t a l , or by l o c k i n g himself up i n a h o t e l room; (2) t r y to e l i m i n a t e h i s problems by "tuning out" w i t h a l c o h o l or drugs, or more d e c i s i v e l y by committing s u i c i d e ; (3) get r i d of the people whom he sees as causing him p a i n ; sending the c h i l d r e n away, shedding a w i f e or husband, or murdering someone; (4) do nothing and wait (5) get b e t t e r and begin to l i v e i n the r e a l world. People who decide to l i v e i n the r e a l world, who decide they were born to win, agree w i t h D i s r a e l i that " L i f e i s too short to be s m a l l . " - 242 _ Session number 13 : Problem S o l v i n g Contract (To be completed before Session number 14) D i r e c t i o n s : As you complete t h i s c ontract be as honest as you are able. Spend about one^half hour completing i t . Once you have completed i t t r y to solve more problems t h i s way. 1. Imagine i n your mind the most important problem or d e c i s i o n you have to deal w i t h . In f i v e words or l e s s d e fine the problem. 2. L i s t the f i v e best ways and the f i v e worst ways of s o l v i n g your problem. "The Best" "The Worst" 1. 1. 2. 2. 3. 3. 4. • 4. 5 . 5 . 3. Decide on which way you are going to solve your problem from the ten ways l i s t e d above. How w i l l you do i t ? 4. When are you going to implement your d e c i s i o n ? Give the hour, day, month and year. 5. What i s the best p o s s i b l e outcome as a r e s u l t of the way }rou decided to deal w i t h your problem? 6. What i s the worst p o s s i b l e outcome as a r e s u l t of the way you decided to deal w i t h your problem? - 243' -i • • • 7. What i s most l i k e l y to happen as a r e s u l t of the way you decided to deal w i t h your problem? 8. Often times i t i s h e l p f u l to i n c l u d e an "overseer" i n your c o n t r a c t . He w i l l evaluate you on how you have completed your contract and give you some more help. Who w i l l t h i s person be? 9. Is your problem solved? - 244 -Session number 14: Time S t r u c t u r i n g 1. Hooking A c t i v i t y : (10 min) Have the students w r i t e a four l i n e poem e n t i t l e d "Time." Share the poems i n tryads. 2. I n s t r u c t i o n a l P e r i o d : (15 min) E n t i t l e d "What Do You Want To Do?" This s e s s i o n concerns i t s e l f w i t h time s t r u c t u r i n g . The s e s s i o n covers intimacy, withdrawl, r i t u a l s , a c t i v i t i e s an'd"pas;t%riing i n a survey manner. I t i s intended to make the students analyze and r e s t r u c t u r e t h e i r time. 3. I n s i g h t Experience: (30 min) In tyrads discuss and l i s t at l e a s t three examples of the v a r i o u s ways time i s s t r u c t u r e d i n your s c h o o l , w i t h your f a m i l y and w i t h your f r i e n d s . R e c a l l how time has been s t r u c t u r e d over the past week. Rank the v a r i o u s ways of s t r u c t u r i n g your time. Do you f e l l you used your time w e l l t h i s past week? Do you i n t e n d to change any-thing? 4. Session E v a l u a t i o n : (completed to the taped music of "Bookends" and "When I'm Sixty-Four") (5 min) 5. Transferance Assignment: As the student leaves c l a s s , he i s handed a time schedule f o r a one week p e r i o d . The student i s to determine how he a l l o c a t e s h i s time and search f o r c r e a t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e s to p o o r l y managed time. - 245 -Session number 14; What Do You Want To Do? To give and get strokes you need people. When you are w i t h them you have only s i x ways of f i l l i n g the time. The way you do so depends on which of the four b a s i c p o s i t i o n s the C h i l d i n you has taken and on the k i n d of s t r o k i n g your C h i l d wants from others. Your greatest need i s to be c l o s e to someone i n a l o v i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p ( i n t i m a c y ) . But there are f i v e other ways, and you use them because you choose not to be i n t i m a t e wwith everyone you meet. I t may be that the C h i l d i n you because he i s not sure that he i s OK i s a f r a i d to get too c l o s e to anyone. I f so, you w i l l use the f i v e other ways to f i l l time w i t h people, even though your C h i l d s t i l l wants to be i n t i m a t e . Since you may not be sure that you are that l o v a b l e , you may s e t t l e f o r ways of g e t t i n g along trhat seem to be s a f e r , l e s s f r i g h t e n i n g , than intimacy. The f i r s t way you can f i l l time w i t h people i s c a l l e d withdrawal. You withdraw when you are present p h y s i c a l l y , but absent mentally from the people around you. I t i s a way of h o l d i n g out, r e f u s i n g to get mixed up w i t h o t h e r s , even to the p o i n t of making b e l i e v e you are somewhere e l s e . Day dreaming, f o r example, i s one way to withdraw. The second way to f i l l time w i t h people i s by r i t u a l s . A r i t u a l i s a f i x e d way of behaving towards o t h e r s , a t r a n s a c t i o n or set of t r a n s a c t i o n s that almost everyone uses. For example, i n g r e e t i n g your f r i e n d s , you may say something l i k e , " H i , how ya doing?" Your f r i e n d may say, " H i , I'm f i n e . How are you?". You may say, "Fine, thanks." This i s a f i x e d way of behaving, an example of one of our many g r e e t i n g r i t u a l s . Each remark i s a "word s t r o k e . " I f people do not r e t u r n these s t r o k e s , we - 246 -consider them u n f r i e n d l y , or even rude, Ifyyou have good manners, you are probably a good s t r o k e r . You can be depended on to go through the r i t u a l s . A t h i r d way to f i l l time w i t h others i s by a c t i v i t i e s . This i s it1' u s u a l l y c a l l e d "work; or " s c h o o l " and i s not u s u a l l y f o r the sake of s o c i a l v i s i t i n g , but ra t h e r to get something done. Since a c t i v i t i e s are o f t e n done w i t h others, i t i s a l s o a way of g e t t i n g strokes. A f o u r t h way you can f i l l time w i t h people i s pastiming. " B u l l s e s s i o n s " and gossip are examples of pastimes. Some have names, such as "General Motors," a pastime i n which people t a l k about and compare c a r s ; "Who Won" i s t a l k about s p o r t s : "Wardrobe" about fa s h i n g s . Some pastimes are Man Talk and othe r s , Woman Talk. You can name other pastimes. They are s u s u a l l y pleasant ways of expfengitng. s t r o k e s , f i l l i n g time, and g e t t i n g to know people. "Making Out" i s a pastime of some and i t may lead to a l o v i n g closeness ( i n t i m a c y ) , or i t may be done without love at a l l . - 247 -sion number 14a - This Week's Time Schedule ow i s a time schedule f o r the week s t a r t i n g next Monday. Complete the schedule ing the next several days but before the upcoming Monday. Use a p e n c i l and p l e t e i t to within a hal f hour. For example, what do you intend to be doing 11:30 p.m. Friday, or 8:30 a.m. Sunday? On the reverse side t o t a l -up how you | l be spending your time (e.g. 10 1/2 hours eating, 20 hours watching T.V., 3 1/2 irs studying, etc.) L i s t the ways that you would rather spend your time (Child), ^t you should spend your time (Parent), and that you have decided to spend your ie i n the future (Adult). - 248 -Session number 15: Conclusion As a conclusion to the set experiences, have the students discuss i n t h e i r i l l u m i n a t i o n groups how they w i l l t r a n s l a t e the i n s i g h t s they have achieved into the " r e a l world" s i t u a t i o n . Conclude the session with a good deal of p o s i t i v e stroking to the group.;' - 249 -BIBLIOGRAPHY Berne, E. Games People Play, N.Y.: Grove Press, 1964. Berne, E. P r i n c i p l e s of Ga?oup Treatment, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1966. Berne, E. Transactional Analysis i s Psychotherapy, N.Y.: Ballantine Books, 1961. Berne, E. What Do You Say After You Say Hello? N.Y.: Simon and Shuster, 1970. Campos, L. and McCormick, P. Introduce Yourself to Transactional Analysis (3rd e d i t i o n ) . Stockton, C a l i f o r n i a : San Joaquin I n s t i t u t e of T.A., 1972. Cooke, Sharon Transactional Analysis and Gestalt for Students. Un-published proposal, 1973. Har r i s , T. I'm O.K. - You're O.K.: A P r a c t i c a l Guide to Transactional  Analysis. New York: Harper and Row, 1969. James, Muriel and Jongeward, Dorothy. Born to Win, Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1971. Jongeward, Dorothy and Uames, Muriel. Winning With People, Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1972. Simon, Sidney, Howe, Leland and Kirschenbaum, Howard. Values C l a r i f i c a - t i o n : A Handbook of P r a c t i c a l Strategies for Teachers and  Students. N.Y.: Hart Pub. Co., 1972. Stevens, John. Awareness, Moab, Utah: Red People Press, 1971. * * * * A APPENDIX C: DRUG BEHAVIOR QUESTIONNAIRE - 250 -ANONYMOUS VANCOUVER DRUG QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS: Do not w r i t e your name on t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Do not show anyone your answers to the que s t i o n n a i r e . The questionnaires w i l l be marked by machines and l a t e r destroyed. However, we do need to be able to know which qu e s t i o n n a i r e s were answered by the same person at a l a t e r date. Therefore, record your mother's maiden name  and f i r s t i n i t i a l on space number 1. 1. (Your mother's maiden name and f i r s t i n i t i a l ) CHECK THE SPACE THAT APPLIES TO YOURSELF - 251 -Are you a boy o or a g i r l o 2 . How o l d were you on your l a s t b i r t h d a y ? 3 . 1 1 or l e s s 12 1 3 1 4 o o o o Check the category that a p p l i e s to y o u r s e l f . (Mark one only) 15 or o l d e r o I have used I have used drugs — I drugs — I w i l l keep on might use using them them again I have used drugs — I w i l l not use them again I have NOT I have NOT used drugs — used drugs — I might l i k e I am not going to t r y them to use them o o o o o For each of the f o l l o w i n g drugs show how many times you have used them i n the past two months f o r other than medical reasons. Mark only one space f o r each Never 1 or 2 3 to 5 6 to 8 9 or more 4 . A l c o h o l (Liquor, Beer, Wine) 5 . Amphetamines (Speed, Pep P i l l s , D iet P i l l ) 6 . B a r b i t u r a t e s (Seconal, Bennies, G o o f b a l l s , Sleeping P i l l s ) 7 . Cocaine (Coke, Snow) 8 . Hallucinogens (LSD, A c i d , Mescaline, MDA, Peyote) 9 . Inhalants ( S n i f f , Glue, P o l y , Gas, Thinners) LO. Marijuana or Hashish (Pot, Grass) 1 1 . Opiates (Heroin, Morphine, Demarol, Smack, Horse) 1 2 . Tobacco ( C i g a r e t t e s , C i g a r , Pipes) 1 3 . Other ( s p e c i f y ) In the past TWO months how o f t e n have you been to a party or gathering where drugs were used? (not i n c l u d i n g tobacco and a l c o h o l ) 6 to 1 0 Q More t h a n Q Never (^) 1 or 2 Q times 3 to 5 Q times times 10 times 1 5 . CHECK THE SPACE THAT APPLIES TO YOURSELF - 252 -Do your parents (or guardians) know about your using drugs? tobacco and a l c o h o l ) I don't use drugs' o They don't^->. know I use\ / drugs I'm not s u r e / ^ \ i f they know\_y They knowA~\ and want V J me to stop (not i n c l u d i n g They know/^. and say \_J i t ' s ok The f o l l o w i n g are reasons why some people use drugs. IF YOU DO USE DRUGS choose the one reason that comes c l o s e t to your reason f o r ta k i n g drugs. IF YOU DO NOT USE DRUGS choose one reason why you t h i n k students use drugs. (Mark only one.) (not i n c l u d i n g tobacco and a l c o h o l ) To r e l i e v e or to escapeV-/ te n s i o n and worries or fun, f~\ i c k s , o r ^ F  k  t h r i l l s For c u r i o s i t y ~ ( ^ ~ \ to see what ^—' i t ' s l i k e To f e e l f \ at home^—' w i t h a group Some othe reason pn the average week now much do you smoke c i g a r e t t e s and/or c i g a r s ? (Mark one space f o r each) (Note: f o r c i g a r s there are 5 to a pack) Not at a l l Less than one pack a week 1 to 2 packs a week 3 to 4 packs a week 5 to 6 packs a week one pack a DAY or more Ci g a r e t t e s Cigars I f you have used drugs but have stopped which of the f o l l o w i n g comes I have not stopped Tr OR I do not use I had a bad experience I saw what harm i t d i d to f r i e n d s I j u s t outgrew i t o o o as many as apply) I was I was a f r a i d of in f l u e n c e d g e t t i n g by what my caught parents or f r i e n d s s a i d o o Some other reason o Have you re c e i v e d any of the f o l l o w i n g ways of g i v i n g drug i n f o r m a t i o n i n school? (Mark as many as apply) None(^) F i l m / " ) Books, Lecture (~^ \ Group (^) pamphlets "^^ ^ d i s c u s s i o n Other o 22. In general what i s your o p i n i o n of the inf o r m a t i o n on drugs you re c e i v e i n school? (Mark one) Exc e l l e n t ^ " " ) Very (^) Good (^) P o o r f ^ Very f^) Have not W g o o d ^ W W poor W r e c e i v e d W any I f you wanted i n f o r m a t i o n on drugs what k i n d of in f o r m a t i o n would you l i k e ? (Mark as many as apply) I don't want any i n f o r m a t i o n What the drug does to my mind and body How I can t e l l i f a drug i s pure and clean What the long range (future) e f f e c t s of the drugs w i l l be What the laws are concerning drugs o o o o o APPENDIX D: DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL On the following pages there i s e i t h e r a word or a phrase i n CAPITAL LETTERS followed by pa i r s of opposite words underneath the c a p i t a l i z e d word or sentence. Between each of the p a i r s of opposites there are seven dashes. YOU are to place a mark on one of the 7 positions that are between the two opposite words. The mark should i n d i c a t e how you f e e l about the CAPITALIZED word or concept. Look at the examples below: EXAMPLE 1: Good Slow Cruel MY EDUCATION 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 o s o o o a o D D 0 0 D J) fj Bad Fast Kind In t h i s example, "MY EDUCATION" i s the idea being described and the p a i r s of opposites are Good-Bad, Slow-Fast, and Cruel-Kind. I f MY EDUCATION seems to you to mean something VERY GOOD, you would put a mark i n the f i r s t space on the Good-Bad scale. I f "MY EDUCATION" seemed to you to mean something SLOW, then you would place your mark i n the second space on the Slow-Fast s c a l e . And i f you f e e l that "MY EDUCATION" means something which i s neither Cruel nor Kind, then you would put your mark i n the middle space - the fourth space. On the following pages, place your marks r a p i d l y . What i s wanted i s your f i r s t impression. There are no " r i g h t " or "wrong" answers. Be sure to make only one mark for each pair of words. Do not skip any pair s of words or pages. - -PBANA - 2J7 - 254 -± ± -L_L 2 I - Ill 1- o o o 00 u ro| <n u a: D N| D o o <_> o _. >- w Q < 2) O Q Oj H _____ H i I _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q z £ Q c o : > - z _ i o a . | - > o < t I < i < D 3 D U O O U ^ U . S < S - ) - D < t , 0 O 2 Q u a ro o c\l z u Q p CO ___ ± 3f c <cra:o_cvi — o _ a: co-^co_— — —rn co MY EDUCATION dull weak doesn't matter bad boiled le undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong stupid dislike hurt unfriendly TAKING DRUGS ONCE oiled d u l l weak doesn't tnaftp-bad undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong stupid _di__ike_ hurt. unfriendly HANGING AROUND WITH PEOPLE WHO TAKE DRUGS nnnnnrr fun strong matters good self-controlled nice responsible a l l right smart like helped friendly dull weak doesn't matter bad undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong stupid dislike hurt unfriendly PEOPLE WHO TRY TO GET OTHERS TO DO DRUGS fun strong matters good self-controlled nice responsible a l l right smart like. Jl_lped_ dull weak doesn't matter bad undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong stupid dislike friendly USE PENCIL ONLY — MARK ONLY ONE RESPONSE PER ITEM — ERASE CLEANLY hurt unfriendly URBAN A - 2J7 SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL DIGITEK ANSWER SHEET - 255 -JJL ±1A At 2 o — LJ m. • H A in H o r j o o __ hi u . CO rt ui "I 10 D J - cr o CM| D O O O O ro < j5 O < ZJ O Q Cj 1-41 ft-ft^m J . •ft <fl rB i . <rt * ctt 1 1 <fl eft 0 3 0 0 0 0 z « t i : ) - z j ( j i h > 0 S ^ S J ^ ^ ^ S W O O U J T U . S < S - 5 T < ( 0 O 2 O hi O _a < J -- Ui — f^ - U Q CO ui o _ °- ° CM 00 ™ H Z U D § £ £ CO 2 4* <H I .cW .fl tfl cfl < e i c o « : w ^ o „ m c t c o - 5 c n u . t - - - - . < ^ C D o MY TEACHER F 0 0 0 o - o 0 d u l l weak :rolled l e 0 0 0 0 0 doesn't matter bad und i s c i p l i n e d nasty i r r e s p o n s i b l e a l l wrong stupid d i s l i k e hurt unfriendly SMOKING GRASS •oiled d u l l weak doesn't matter bad un d i s c i p l i n e d nasty i r r e s p o n s i b l e a l l wrong stupid d i s l i k e hurt unf r i e n d l y KIDS WHO COME TO SCHOOL STONED fun strong matters good s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d F d u l l doesn't matter nice responsible a l l r i g h t smart l i k e helped f r i e n d l y bad u n d i s c i p l i n e d nasty i r r e s p o n s i b l e a l l wrong stupid d i s l i k e hurt unfriendly PEOPLE WHO DO SOFT DRUGS ONCE OR TWICE A MONTH fun strong matters good s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d n i c e responsible  a l l r i g h t smart l i k e helped f r i e n d l y d u l l weak doesn't matter bad u n d i s c i p l i n e d nasty i r r e s p o n s i b l e a l l wrong stupid  d i s l i k e  hurt RBANA - 217 SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL D1GITEK ANSWER SHEET - 256 -H i _____ c r i j M i l l 1 z o — Ll H Q O O LJ U 0 0 CO U —(-J - K D CM D O ° <-> _ I Z o _ _____ __1 Ift 1 J J 1 1 2 _! 1 1 _ _a_ ( D O : Q : V Z - J O O - | - > O l i l < f l . < 3 D D l J O O U u . z < S - 5 - 3 < < n O z Q " T -z u Q P CO i l <§+} _L_ ____ JL __ ±4 IT < « •« O ( «l r O _ _ #_R_N*S> 0 proIlea d u l l weak doesn't matter bad u n d i s c i p l i n e d nasty KIDS WHO NEVER TAKE DRUGS fun strong matters good s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d n i c e d u l l doesn't matter b_d_ und i s c i p l i n e d pasty bie i r r e s p o n s i b l e responsible i r r e s p o n s i b l e a l l wrong a l l r i g h t a l l wrong stupid smart a tup id d i s l i k e l i k e dislike hurt helped 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 unfriendly f r i e n d l y unfriendly DROPPING ACID T O 0 0 0 0 0 PEOPLE MY AGE WHO USE SOFT DRUGS STEADILY d u l l fun d u l l :-fl 0 0 0 0 0 0 weak strong D 0 weak 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 doesn't matter matters doesn't matter bad good 0 0 frad r o l l e d u n d i s c i p l i n e d s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d u n d i s c i p l i n e d nasty nice nasty le i r r e s p o n s i b l e responsible i r r e s p o n s i b l e a l l wrong stupid d i s l i k e hurt unf r i e n d l y a l l T ight a l l wrong smart stupid like. ritflHkft helped hurt f r i e n d l y u n f r i e n d l y URBANA - 217 SEMANTIC D I F F E R E N T I A L D I G I T E K ANSWER S H E E " - 257 11IH W tiffli Si! ± ± 33 3 o — UJ f- O O O Ul O GO OT kl j- a. a 3 O o o <_> w V hi < I-o < O Q I-1 I 4) L -ij II I 1,1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I i 1 rH ot di 33 0 0 0 z m o r o : > - z - J O C L i - > o < U < l < D 3 D u g O U T L . S < £ - 3 - ) < < / ) O Z Q UJ O I Z _ l < o • UJ Q. 0 0 a o u T z Ul a P co <R 4+ cN oH <tt -tt <N oH i f if <» 4+ cU ott <tt 4+ cW oH eft cH rH # I < c e a : o o : c \ j « - o _ , „ , o: C 0 - ) C 0 U . r - r - - - < 7 > t O o MARKS IN SCHOOL KIDS WHO QUIT TAKING DRUGS trolled. dull weak doesn't matter bad blfi. undisclplined nasty, -irresponsible a l l wrong stupid dislike -hurt. unfriendly DRINKING ALCOHOL dull i£X_12i_i ble_ weak. fun strong matters good self-controlled nice doesn't matter _bjid_ undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong stupid d i s l i k e -hurt-unfriendly responsible a l l right smart like helped friendly TT d u l l weak doesn't matter bad undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong stupid dislike hurt unfriendly PEOPLE WHO USE HEROIN fun strong matters good self-controlled nice responsible a l l right smart -like Jhelped friendly d u l l weak doesn't matter bad undisciplined nasty irresponsible a l l wrong 8tupid dislike hurt unfriendly pfttAMA -21? SEMANTIC D I F F E R E N T I A L DiOiTEK ANSWER SHEET - 258 •-< tc tc- o tt pj w O _• _ . cc O-> -j cr> u. — — , - • > * . ' O p r o l l e d 0 0 dull weak doesn't matter bad undisciplined nasty. irrespons-fblP all wrong stupid dislike hurt unfriendly HARD DRUGS boiled 0 0 dull weak undisciplined nasty irresponsible all wrong stupid j i L a l i k f L luirt_ unfriend!v PEOPLE fun strong matters good self-controlled nice. ^responsible all right smart like helped friendly yrjj USF Aim HASHISH dull _____ J__L undisciplined nanty irreapon-<h^f all wrong stupid. diglike ImrJL unfriendly SOFT DRUGS fun 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 dull strong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wftflk matters 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 doesn't matter good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bad self-controlledq 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 undiscidined nice 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nasty responsible 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 irresoonsible all right 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 all wrong smart 0 0 0 0 0-0 0 stupid 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 helped 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 hurt •FT* on/II n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 APPENDIX Et TABULATION OF VARIABLES FROM DRUG BEHAVIOR QUESTIONNAIRE - 259 -TABLE I VANCOUVER DRUG QUESTIONNAIRE VARIABLE LIST Variable 1: sex Variable 2: age Variable 3 s drug use category-Variable 4s alcohol use in the past two months Variable 5s amphetamine use i n the past two months Variable 6s barbiturate use i n the past two months Variable 7s cocaine use in the past two months Variable 8s hallucinogen use i n the past two months Variable 9s inhalant use i n the past two months Variable 10s marijuana and hashish use i n the past two months Variable l i s opiate use i n the past two months Variable 12s tobacco use i n the past two months Variable 13s other use i n the past two months Variable 14s party attendance where drugs available i n the past two months Variable 15s a v a i l a b i l i t y of drugs Variable 16s parental knowledge of drug use not including tobacco and alcohol Variable 17s reason why people use drugs, not including tobacco and alcohol Variable 18s cigarette use per week Variable 19s cigar use per week Variable 20s reason for discontinuing drug uses have not stopped or do not use. - 260 -Variable 21: reason for discontinuing drug use: had a bad .experience Variable 22: reason for discontinuing drug use: saw harm i t causes to friends Variable 23: reason for discontinuing drug use: outgrew i t Variable 24: reason f o r discontinuing drug use: a f r a i d of getting caught. Variable 25: reason for discontinuing drug use: influenced by words of parents or friends Variable 26: reason for discontinuing drug use: some other reason. Variable 27: method of receiving drug information: none Variable 28: method of receiving drug information: f i l m Variable 29: method of receiving drug information: l i t e r a t u r e Variable 30: method of receiving drug information: lecture Variable 31: method of receiving drug information: group discussion Variable 32: method of receiving drug information: other. Variable 33: opinion of information Variable 34: information desired: nothing Variable 35: information desired: e f f e c t of drug on mind and body Variable 36: information desired: discerning cleanliness and purity of drug Variable 37: information desired: long-range e f f e c t s of drug use Variable 38: information desired: laws concerning drugs. - 261 -TABLE II SEX DISTRIBUTION (VARIABLE 1) FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST Treatment Treatment Control Total Group A Group B Group Respondents No. % No. % No. % No. % Pretest males 21 47.73 23 47.92 75 52.45 119 50.64 females 22 50 25 52.08 68 47.55 115 48.94 unidentified 1 2 . 2 7 0 0 0 0 1 0 . 4 3 Postest males 16 51.11 12 33.33 93 55.69 121 51.71 females 14 45.16 24 66.67 74 44.31 112 47.86 unid e n t i f i e d 1 3 . 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 Totals pretest postest 44 100 48 100 143 100 235 100 31 100 36 100 167 100 234 100 TABLE III AGE DISTRIBUTION (VARIABLE 2) FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST Treatment Treatment Control Number of Tot a l Group No. A % Group No. B % Group No. % Respondents No. % No. % Pretest 11 years or less 0 0 1 2.08 2 1.40 3 1.28 12 years 6 13.64 3 6.25 9 6.29 18 7.66 13 years 25 56.82 37 77.08 97 67.83 159 67.66 235 100 14 years 12 27.27 7 14.58 32 22.38 51 21.70 15 years or older e 0 0 0 2 .007 2 0.85 missing data 1 2.27 0 0 1 .007 2 0.85 Postest 11 years or less 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 years 3 9.68 5 13.89 13 7.78 21 8.97 13 years 16 51.61 23 63.89 85 50.90 124 52.99 234 100 14 years 9 29.03 7 19.44 60 35.93 76 32.48 15 years or older 2 6.45 1 2.78 5 2.99 8 3.42 missing data 1 3.23 0 0 4 2.40 5 2.14 TABLE IV DRUG INVOLVEMENT POSITION STATEMENTS (VARIABLE 3) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST POR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL "I have used drugs-I w i l l keep on us-ing them" No. % "I have used drugs-I might use them again" No. "I have used drugs-I w i l l not use them again" No. "I have not "I have not Missing used drugs- used drugs- data might l i k e to am not go-t r y them" ing to use them No. % No. % No. % Totals No. Treatment pretest postest group A Treatment group B pretest postest 2 0 1 2 4.55 0 2.08 5.56 7 5 6 3 15.91 16.13 12.50 8.33 2 0 0 1 4.55 0 0 2.78 2 2 7 5 4.55 6.45 14.58 13.89 30 23 33 24 68.18 74.19 68.75 66.67 1 2.27 44 100 1 3.23 31 100 1 2.08 1 2.78 48 36 Control group pretest postest 3 11 2.10 6.59 14 19 9.79 11.38 6 4.20 f 4.90 111 77.62 2 1.40 143 100 7 4.19 12 7.19 116 69.46 2 1.20 167 100 Totals pretest postest 6 13 2.55 5.56 27 27 11.49 11.54 8 3.40 16 6.81 174 74.04 4 1.70 235 100 8 3.42 19 8.12 163 69.66 4 1.71 234 100 TABLE V INCIDENCE OP ALCOHOL (VARIABLE POUR) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Never No. % Alcohol Incidence Por Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test Totals 1 or 2 times No. % 3 to 5 6 to 8 9 or more Missing times times times data No. % No. % No. % No. % No. 1 to 9 or more times No. % Treatment group A pretest 15 34.09 13 29.55 8 18.18 3 6.82 3 6.82 2 4.55 44 100 27 postest 10 32.26 10 32.26 2 6.45 2 6.45 7 22.58 0 0 31 100 21 Treatment group B pretest 22 45.83 13 27.08 7 14.58 2 4.17 4 8.33 0 0 48 100 26 postest 10 27.78 9 25.00 9 25.00 1 2.78 5 13.89 2 5.56 36 100 24 Control group pretest 41 28.67 44 30.77 22 15.38 7 4.90 20 13.99 9 6.29 143 100 93 postest 50 29.94 43 25.75 20 11.98 15 8.98 32 19.16 7 4.19 167 100 110 Totals pretest 78 33.19 70 29.79 7 15.74 12 5.11 27 11.49 11 4.68 235 100 146 postest 70 29.91 62 26.50 31 13.25 18 7.69 44 18.80 9 3.85 234 100 155 ro TABLE VI INCIDENCE OF AMPHETAMINES (VARIABLE FIVE) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST POR TREATMENT GROUPS A,B & CONTROL Amphetamine Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test 1 or 2 3 to 5 6 to 8 9 or more Missing 1 to 9 or Never times times times times data Totals more times No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment group A pretest 36 81.82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 18.18 44 100 0 3.25 postest 25 80.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.23 5 16.13 31 100 1 3.25 Treatment group B pretest 39 81.25 0 0 1 2.08 1 2.08 0 0 7 14.58 48 100 2 4.17 postest 33 91.67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8.33 36 100 0 0 Control group pretest 116 81.12 2 1.40 1 0.70 1 0.70 1 0.70 22 15.38 143 100 5 3.38 postest 137 82.04 5 2.99 3 1.80 1 0.60 2 1.20 19 11.38 167 100 11 6.59 Totals pretest postest 191 81.28 2 0.85 2 0.85 2 0.85 1 0.43 37 15.74 235 100 7 2.98 195 82.98 5 2.13 3 1.28 1 0.43 3 1.28 27 11.54 234 100 12 5.13 INCIDENCE OF BARBITURATES (VARIABLE SIX) AT TABLE VII PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Never No. % Barbiturate Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test 1 or 2 tiroes No. % 3 to 5 times No. % 6 to 8 times No. % 9 or more times No. % Missing data No. % Totals No. % 1 to 9 or more times No. % Treatment group A pretest 37 84.09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 15.91 44 100 0 0 <n postest 25 80.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.23 5 16.13 31 100 1 3.23 °» i Treatment group B pretest 38 79.17 1 2.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 18.75 48 100 1 2.08 postest 31 86.11 0 0 1 2.78 0 0 0 0 4 11.11 36 100 1 2.78 Control group pretest 119 83.22 2 1.40 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 15.38 143 100 2 1.40 postest 140 83.83 4 2.40 1 0.60 1 0.60 2 2.40 19 11.38 167 100 8 4.79 Totals pretest postest TABLE VIII INCIDENCE OF COCAINE (VARIABLE SEVEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Cocaine Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test Never No. % 1 or 2 times No. % 3 to 5 times No. % 6 to 8 times No. % 9 or more times No. % Missing data No. % Totals No. % 1 to 9 or more times No. % Treatment group A pretest 34 77.27 3 6.82 postest 23 74.19 1 3.23 0 1 Treatment group B pretest 36 75.00 2 4.17 0 postest 31 86.11 2 5.56 0 Control group pretest 114 79.72 3 2.10 0 postest 132 79.04 9 5.39 1 0 0 3.23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.60 1 0 0 0 0 0 0.60 0 0 1 0 2 5 0 0 2.08 0 1.40 2.99 7 6 9 3 24 19 15.91 19.35 18.75 8.33 16.78 11.38 44 31 48 36 143 167 100 100 100 100 3 2 3 2 100 5 100 16 6.82 6.45 6.25 5.56 3.50 9.58 _?0'tclls pretest 184 78.30 8 3.40 0 0 0 0 3 1.28 40 17.02 235 100 11 4.68 postest 186 79.49 12 5.13 2 0.85 1 0.43 5 2.14 28 11.97 234 100 20 8.55 TABLE IX INCIDENCE OP HALLUCINOGENS (VARIABLE EIGHT) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST POR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Never No. % Hallucinogens Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test 1 or 2 times No. % 3 to 5 times No. % 6 to 8 times No. % 9 or more times No. % Missing data No. % Totals No. % 1 to 9 or more times No. % Treatment group A pretest 35 79.55 2 4.55 postest 25 80.65 0 0 Treatment group B pretest 37 77.08 2 postest 31 86.11 2 Control group pretest 113 79.02 4 2.80 postest 139 83.23 4 2.40 0 0 4.17 1 5.56 0 2 4 0 0 2.08 0 1.40 2.40 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3.23 0 2.08 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0.70 1.80 7 5 7 3 23 17 15.91 16.13 14.58 8.33 16.08 10.18 44 31 48 36 143 167 100 100 100 100 2 1 4 2 100 7 100 11 4.55 3.23 8.33 5. 56 4.90 6.59 ro as oo Totals n r e t e s t 185 78 72 8 3.40 3 1.28 1 0.43 1 0.43 37 15.74 235 100 13 5.53 £stest III ll.ll 6 2 56 4 1.71 1 0.43 3 1.28 25 10.68 234 100 14 5.98 TABLE X INCIDENCE OF INHALANTS (VARIABLE NINE) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Inhalants Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test 1 or 2 3 to 5 6 to 8 9 or more Missing 1 to 9 or Never times times times times data Totals more times No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment group A pretest 37 84.09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 15.91 44 100 0 0 postest 23 74.19 2 6.45 0 0 0 0 1 3.23 5 16.13 31 100 3 9.68 Treatment group B pretest 40 83.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 16.17 48 100 0 0 postest 32 88.89 1 2.78 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8.33 36 100 1 2.78 Control group pretest 118 82.52 1 0.70 0 0 0 0 1 0.70 23 16.08 143 100 2 1.40 postest 141 84.43 6 3.59 0 0 0 0 2 1.20 18 10.78 167 100 8 4.79 Totals pretest postest 195 82.98 1 0.43 0 0 0 0 1 0.43 38 16.17 235 100 2 0.85 196 83.76 9 3.85 0 0 0 0 3 1.28 26 11.11 234 100 12 5.13 TABLE XI INCIDENCE OF MARIJUANA OR HASHISH (VARIABLE TEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A,B & CONTRO Marijuana Or Hashish Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test Never No. % 1 or 2 times No. % 3 to 5 times No. % 6 to 8 times No. % 9 or more times No. % Missing data No. % Totals No. % 1 to 9 or more times No. % Treatment group A pretest postest Treatment group B pretest postest 32 22 39 29 72.73 70.97 81.25 80.56 2 3 3 2 4.55 9.68 6.25 5.56 3 3 3 1 6.82 9.68 6.25 2.78 1 1 1 0 2.27 1 3.23 0 2.08 0 0 2 2.27 5 0 2 0 2 5.56 2 11.36 44 6.45 31 4.17 48 5.56 36 100 100 100 100 7 7 7 5 i 15.91 w 22.58 o i 14.58 13.89 Control group pretest postest 105 121 73.43 72.46 4 13 2.80 7.78 7 6 4.90 3.59 4 2 ,2.80 1.20 3 10 2.10 20 5.99 15 13.99 143 8.98 167 100 18 100 31 12.59 18.56 Tor2tLt 176 74.89 9 3.83 13 5.53 6 2.55 4 1.70 27 11.49 235 100 32 13.62 j£stlst 172 7350 18 7.69 10 4.27 3 1.28 12 5.13 19 8.12 234 100 43 18.38 TABLE XII INCIDENCE OF OPIATES (VARIABLE ELEVEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Never No. % Opiate Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test 1 or 2 times No. % 3 to 5 times No. % 6 to 8 times No. % 9 or more times No. % Missing data No. % Totals No. 1 to 9 or more times No. % Treatment group A pretest postest Treatment group B pretest postest Control group pretest postest 35 24 40 32 114 140 79.55 0 77.42 0 83.33 0 88.89 1 79.72 1 83.83 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.78 0 0.70 1 1.20 0 0 0 0 0 0.70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0.70 1.20 9 7 8 3 26 23 20.45 22.58 16.67 8.33 18.16 13.77 44 31 48 36 143 167 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 1 100 3 100 4 0 0 0 2.78 2.10 2.40 Totals pretest 189 80.43 1 0.43 1 0.43 0 0 1 0.43 43 18.30 235 100 3 1.28 postest 196 83.76 3 1.28 0 0 0 0 2 0.85 33 14.10 234 100 5 2.14 TABLE XIII INCIDENCE OP TOBACCO (VARIABLE TWELVE) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Tobacco Incidence For Period Beginning Two Months Prior To Test 1 or 2 3 to 5 6 to 8 9 or more Missing 1 to 9 or Never times times times times data Totals more times No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment group A pretest 20 45.45 6 13.64 4 9.09 1 2.27 9 20.45 4 9.09 44 100 20 45.45 postest 18 58.06 2 6.45 1 3.23 3 9.68 6 19.35 1 3.23 31 100 12 38.71 Treatment group B pretest 29 60.42 4 8.33 3 6.25 2 4.17 7 14.58 3 6.25 48 100 16 33.33 postest 16 44.44 5 13.89 4 11.11 2 5.56 7 19.44 2 5.56 36 100 14 38.89 Control group pretest 77 53.85 22 15.30 2 1.40 3 2.10 25 17.48 14 9.79 143 100 52 36.36 postest 90 53.89 22 13.17 6 3.59 5 2.99 31 18.56 13 7.78 167 100 64 38.32 Totals pretest postest - 273 -TABLE XIV SUMMARY OF INCIDENCE OF DRUG VARIABLES FOUR TO TWELVE FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST. Variables Pretest % Postest % 4. Alcohol, Use of 62.13 62.24 5. Amphetamines, Use of 2.98 5.13 6. Barbiturates, Use of 1.28 4.27 7. Cocaine, Use of 4.68 8.55 8. Hallucinogens, Use of 5.53 5.98 9. Inhalants, Use of 0.85 5.13 10. Marijuana or hashish, Use of 13.62 18.38 11. Opiates, Use of 1.28 2.14 12. Tobacco, Use of 37.45 38.46 TABLE XV PRESENCE OP DRUGS NOT INCLUDING ALCOHOL OR TOBACCO AT SOCIAL GATHERINGS IN TWO MONTHS PRIOR TO TESTING (VARIABLE FOURTEEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL More 1 to more 1 or 2 3 to 5 6 to 10 than 10 Missing than 10 Never times times times times data Totals times No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment Group A pretest 33 75.00 6 13.64 3 6.82 0 0 1 2.27 1 2.27 44 100 10 22.73 postest Control group pretest postest 25 80.65 2 6.45 3 9.68 0 0 1 3.23 0 0 31 100 6 19.35 Treatment 9 p ? e t e s t 39 81.25 6 12.50 1 2.08 1 2.08 0 0 1 2.08 48 100 8 16.67 113 79.02 14 9.79 8 5.59 2 1.40 2 1.40 4 2.80 143 100 30 20.98 126 75.45 22 13.17 6 3.59 4 2.40 4 2.40 5 2.99 167 100 41 24.55 Totals pretest 185 78.72 26 11.06 12 5.11 3 1.28 3 1.28 6 2.55 235 100 48 20.43 postest 183 78.21 25 10.68 11 4.70 5 2.14 5 2.14 5 2.14 234 100 51 21.79 to TABLE XVI AVAILABILITY OP DRUGS NOT INCLUDING ALCOHOL OR TOBACCO (VARIABLE FIFTEEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Missing Very e a s i l y to Very e a s i l y E a s i l y Not e a s i l y Can't data Totals not e a s i l y No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment group A pretest 5 11.36 8 18.18 9 20.45 19 43.18 3 6.82 44 100 22 50.00 postest 3 9.68 11 35.48 6 19.35 9 29.03 2 6.45 31 100 20 14.52 Treatment group B pretest 7 14.58 10 20.83 10 20.83 18 37.50 3 6.25 48 100 27 56.25 postest 4 11.11 10 27.78 13 36.11 8 22.22 1 2.78 36" 100 27 75.00 Control rroup pretest postest 23 16.08 35 24.48 39 27.27 59 41.26 11 7.69 167 100 97 58.08 grost 16 11.19 33 23.08 32 22.38 54 27.76 8 5.59 143 100 81 56.14 * . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ , — -i —» _> A •* _ * #w i yv J»N w r» r\ r\ r\ Totals pretest 28 11.91 51 21.70 51 21.70 91 38.72 14 5.96 235 100 130 55.32 postest 30 12.82 56 23.93 58 24.79 76 32.48 14 5.98 234 100 144 61.54 TABLE XVII PARENTAL AWARENESS OF DRUG USE NOT INCLUDING ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO (VARIABLE SIXTEEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Don't know Know and Know and Don't know i f they want me give Missing Don't use use know to stop approval data Totals No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment group A pretest 36 81.82 4 9.09 2 4.55 1 2.27 1 2.27 0 0 44 100 postest 25 80.65 5 16.13 1 3.23 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 100 Treatment group B pretest 41 85.42 1 2.08 2 4.17 2 4.17 0 0 2 4.17 48 100 postest 30 83.33 2 5.56 0 0 0 0 1 2.78 3 8.33 36 100 Control group pretest 123 86.01 9 6.29 5 3.50 2 1.40 2 1.40 2 1.40 143 100 postest 131 78.44 14 8.38 7 4.19 2 1.20 5 2.99 8 4.79 167 100 Totals pretest postest 200 85.11 14 5.96 9 3.83 5 2.13 3 1.28 4 1.70 235 100 186 79.49 21 8.97 8 3.42 2 0.85 6 2.56 11 4.70 234 100 TABLE XVIII RATIONALE POR DRUG USE BY DRUG USERS AND NON-DRUG USERS (WHY THEY BELIEVE USERS USE DRUGS) NOT INCLUDING ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO (VARIABLE SEVENTEEN) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Relieve or escape ten- Fun',: Kicks sion or or t h r i l l s worries No. % No. % To f e e l at home Some C u r i o s i t y with, a other group reason No. % No. % No. % Missing data No. % Totals No. % Treatment group A pretest postest Treatment group B pretest postest Control group pretest postest 7 10 9 6 17 19 15.91 32.26 18.75 16.67 11.89 11.38 15 9 18 8 44 59 34.09 7 15.91 8 18.18 4 9.09 3 6.82 44 100 29.03 7 22.58 3 9.68 1 3.23 1 3.23 31 100 37.50 9 18.75 4 8.33 2 4.17 6 12.50 48 100 22.22 6 16.67 3 8.33 6 16.67 7 19.44 36 100 30.77 32 22.38 21 14.69 16 11.19 13 9.09 143 100 35.33 29 17.37 29 17.37 12 7.19 19 11.38 167 100 Totals pretest 33 14.04 77 32.77 48 20.43 33 14.04 22 9.36 21 8.94 235 100 postest 35 14.96 76 33.76 42 17.95 36 15.39 19 8.12 27 11.54 234 100 TABLE XIX RATIONALE POR STOPPING DRUG USE BY EX-DRUG USERS (MARK AS MANY AS APPLY) (VARIABLE TWENTY) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Have not stopped or do not use No. Bad experience No. Saw harm i t does to friends No. Outgrew i t No, Fear of Influenced Some getting by parents other Missing caught or friends reason data No. No. No. No, Treatment group A — pretest 21 3 7 0 2 3 3 10 postest 21 2 3 0 3 3 3 4 Treatment group B pretest 26 2 2 1 1 1 1 14 postest 21 1 2 0 0 1 2 12 Control group pretest 83 1 10 2 4 6 6 42 postest 99 4 10 3 7 6 12 48 Totals pretest 130 6 19 3 7 10 10 66 postest 141 7 15 3 10 10 17 64 TABLE XX DRUG EDUCATION PROGRAMS (VARIABLE TWENTY-ONE) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST POR TREATMENT GROUPS A,B AND CONTROL None Films Literature Lecture Group Discussion Other Missing data Treatment group A pretest postest 2 0 40 29 13 25 16 25 19 23 4 7 1 1 Treatment group B pretest postest 6 2 36 34 17 14 16 16 23 22 2 7 2 2 Control group pretest postest 17 22 117 128 36 75 36 69 58 75 11 29 4 13 Totals pretest postest 25 24 193 191 66 114 68 110 100 120 17 43 7 16 TABLE XXI EVALUATION OF DRUG EDUCATION PROGRAMS (VARIABLE TWENTY-TWO) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Have not received Excellent Very good Good Poor Very poor Missing Totals any data No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Treatment group A pretest 2 4.55 9 20.45 9 20.45 19 43.18 4 9.09 0 0 1 2.27 44 100 postest 0 0 6 19.35 7 22.58 11 35.48 4 12.90 2 6.45 1 3.23 31 100 Treatment group B pretest 5 10.42 2 4.17 8 16.67 26 54.17 3 6.25 1 2.08 3 6.25 48 100 postest 1 2.78 4 11.11 3 8.33 19 52.78 6 16.67 0 0 3 8.33 36 100 Control group pretest 18 12.59 15 10.49 25 17.48 66 46.15 9 6.29 4 2.80 6 4.20 143 100 postest 16 9.58 24 14.37 24 14.37 69 41.32 13 7.78 6 3.59 15 8.98 167 100 Totals pretest 25 10.64 26 11.06 42 17.87 111 47.23 16 6.81 5 2.13 10 4.26 235 100 postest 17 7.26 34 14.53 34 14.53 99 42.31 23 9.83 12 5.13 19 8.12 234 100 TABLE XXII DRUG INFORMATION DESIRED (VARIABLE TWENTY-THREE) AT PRETEST AND POSTEST FOR TREATMENT GROUPS A, B AND CONTROL Don't want What drug Determine Long range Laws about Missing any inform- does to purity of e f f e c t s of drugs data ation mind and drug drugs . body Treatment group A pretest 6 25 11 19 15 0 postest 8 16 7 12 10 0 Treatment group B pretest 12 25 9 15 15 1 postest 4 25 11 14 15 1 Control group pretest 45 77 20 40 36 4 postest 49 77 37 52 53 12 pretest 63 127 40 74 66 5 postest 61 118 54 78 78 13 APPENDIX F: TABULATION OF DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL - 282 -SELECTED CONCEPTS THAT REPRESENT ATTITUDE DOMAIN ON DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL 1. my education 2. hanging around with people who take drugs 3. taking drugs once 4. people who t r y to get others to do drugs 5. my teacher 6. kids who come to school stoned 7. smoking grass 8. people who do soft drugs once or twice a month 9. parents 10. kids who never take drugs 11. dropping acid 12. people my age who use soft drugs s t e a d i l y 13. marks i n school 14. kids who quit taking drugs 15. drinking alcohol 16. people who use heroin 17. taking speed 18. people who use grass and hashish 19. hard drugs 20. soft drugs - 283 -RESPONSES FROM SIXTY-FOUR GRADE EIGHT STUDENTS IN DEVELOPING THE DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL AS TO CONCEPTS THAT REPRESENT THE ATTITUDE DOMAIN, k i d s who take drugs (37)* people my age who use hard o r s o f t drugs s t e a d i l y k i d s who do s o f t drugs once or twice a month people who use g r a s s and hash (3) people who use hard drugs (6) people who shoot up o r drop p i l l s k i d s who use s o f t drugs (5) k i d s k i d s my age k i d s who smoke pot the guy who uses them drugs (4) hard s t u f f (10) s o f t s t u f f (9) smoking dope a c i d and LSD window pane weed speed pot c ocaine drugs i n a d r i n k chemicals a d d i c t i v e drugs a l c o h o l a s p i r i n t o smoke g r a s s (3) more c h a l l e n g i n g drugs t o take drugs (14) t o t r y t o get o t h e r s t o do i t t o get hooked and go on t r i p s t o k i l l someone d u r i n g a t r i p t a k i n g a c e r t a i n amount t o make bread s e l l i n g i t t o be too h i g h f o r s c h o o l i n the morning t o take drugs too long t o become a vandal o r a t h i e f t o t r y drugs somebody who wants t o take i t t o take drugs f o r the fun o f i t t o hang around w i t h people who use drugs t o come i n c o n t a c t w i t h drugs the thought o f a l l the drugs going around the k i d I knew Who took drugs o l d e r k i d s who take drugs everyone e l s e who uses drugs k i d s who have done i t what everyone e l s e says about drugs * Bracketed numbers represent i n c i d e n c e o f response. - 284 -the problem society people my age l i f e , l i v e s (15) marks i n school the teacher w i l l power kicks something to do parents the movie "Go Ask A l i c e " I (64) brain the state today nice people bodies correct dosage young people adults school work fa u l t a straight money own good the mind (4) dying of an overdoes kids who quit kids with problems kids who are freaked out people who love them one who doesn't take drugs friends who are high on drugs kids who s i t at the back of the room stoned people who are hooked friends that do (3) friends that don't people that are s e l l i n g i t what I have read the way he acted at school what i t does upper or downer what happens to them (3) what they are getting into r e a l rotten mood a better mood - 285 -SELECTED EVALUATIVE BIPOLAR ADJECTIVE SCALES APPROPRIATE TO SELECTED CONCEPTS ON DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL. 1. fun - d u l l 2. strong - weak 3. matters - doesn't matter 4. good - bad 5. s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d - undisciplined 6. nice - nasty 7. responsible - irresponsible 8. a l l right - a l l wrong 9. smart - stupid 10. l i k e - d i s l i k e 11. helped - hurt 12. f r i e n d l y - unfriendly - 286 -RESPONSES PROM SIXTY-FOUR GRADE EIGHT STUDENTS IN DEVELOPING THE DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL AS TO EVALUATIVE BIPOLAR ADJECTIVE SCALES APPROPRIATE TO SELECTED CONCEPTS. a l l r i g h t (4) OK (4) s t u p i d (15) nuts c u r i o u s f r i e n d l y stuck f r e e q u i e t e r e n t e r t a i n i n g r e t a r d e d s i l l y r u i n e d c r a z y damaging l o n e l y t o t a l l y unnecessary i r r e s p o n s i b l e p l e a s a n t c h a l l e n g i n g tough i d i o t i c w e i r d very p a t i e n t neat g r e a t c a r e f r e e f o r t u n a t e s t r a i g h t bad weak s t i n k f i n e i l l e g a l harmless d i s a g r e e s u f f e r t e r r i f i c r e s p e c t f u l dumb (3) * funny k i l l (3) no s e l f - c o n t r o l no d i s c i p l i n e good str o n g l e g a l harmful agree smart s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d d i s c i p l i n e d * Bracketed numbers rep r e s e n t i n c i d e n c e o f response. - 287 -have done i t have not done i t go around attacking people don't want want endangering others' l i v e s endangering own l i f e won't t e l l cracks me up can't understand f e e l sorry don't think much waste of time don't help you don't use t h e i r head should lay o f f should keep them away from me shouldn't influence others shouldn't t r y to t a l k others into i t up to the i n d i v i d u a l (4) doesn't bother me don't care (3) don't mind shouldn't be bugged r e a l l y doesn't matter i t ' s t h e i r l i f e (3) t h e i r own business (6) doesn't influence me l e t them do i t t h e i r choice they don't care don't have anything against them no one thinks much of i t c a l l you l i t t l e goodies r e a l l y big (4) laugh t h e i r heads o f f bug you show o f f s (3) want more and more tough beans something wrong should know better want to be i n with the crowd need something just a mess don't do schoolwork something drove them to i t led into i t depends on how they behave should be sent to prison fucked up say dumb things don't hang around with does not know what's going to happen shouldn't use them - 288 -aren't any d i f f e r e n t (4) don't think about them destroying themselves is n ' t enjoying l i f e has a problem w i l l associate with should be put away just act the same nice guys are good friends don't quit should be allowed fa r out ruins kids mentally handicaps kids for the future should l e g a l i z e no one cares are the s h i t s as much as possible more worthwhile doesn't ruin t h e i r brain not a very good idea make you do queer things don't know helps them scares me couldn't handle steering away too heavy for me don't l i k e (7) l i k e (3) make your mind go screwy wreck t h e i r minds (8) fuck up t h e i r minds fuck you up they should do i t need something d i f f e r e n t i s to blame can be solved nuts know too much don't get mad too e a s i l y hard to get i t together f e l l to pieces t h e i r own f a u l t p i t y throwing away would never have guessed - 289 -TRANSFORMED MATRIX TO TWO FACTORS AT PRETEST Concepts Concept S t r u c t u r e Concept S t r u c t u r e One o f the Domain Two o f the Domain 1. my e d u c a t i o n .151502 2. hanging around w i t h people who take drugs -.644859 3. t a k i n g drugs once -.655044 4. people who t r y t o get o t h e r s t o do drugs -.583929 5. my t e a c h e r .092607 6. k i d s who come t o s c h o o l stoned -.690679 7. smoking g r a s s -.865499 8. people who do s o f t drugs once or twice a month -.835965 9. parents .044553 10. k i d s who never take drugs -.012992 11. dropping a c i d -.682365 12. people my age who use s o f t drugs s t e a d i l y -.844980 13. marks i n s c h o o l -.009878 14. k i d s who q u i t t a k i n g drugs -.435724 15. d r i n k i n g a l c o h o l -.702324 16. people who use h e r o i n -.800290 17. t a k i n g speed -.833890 18. people who use g r a s s and h a s h i s h -.852918 19. hard drugs --.833040 20. s o f t drugs -.877817 -.587940 .177887 .167406 .145353 -.667622 .185777 .088262 .111305 -.647633 -.448283 -.101038 -.008317 -.647302 -.344050 .074748 -.147500 -.121713 .098098 -.142693 .172394 - 290 -TRANSFORMED MATRIX TO TWO FACTORS AT POSTEST Concepts Concept S t r u c t u r e Concept S t r u c t u r e One o f the Domain Two o f the Domain 1. my e d u c a t i o n -.125744 2. hanging around w i t h people who take drugs .691617 3. t a k i n g drugs once .591716 4. people who t r y t o get o t h e r s t o do drugs .619942 5. my t e a c h e r -.155651 6. k i d s who come t o s c h o o l stoned .716354 7. smoking g r a s s .698458 8. people who do s o f t drugs once o r t w i c e a month .717532 9. parents -.095062 10. k i d s who never take drugs -.225204 11. dropping a c i d .562558 12. people my age who use s o f t drugs s t e a d i l y .868033 13. marks i n s c h o o l .021675 14. k i d s who q u i t t a k i n g drugs .148177 15. d r i n k i n g a l c o h o l .592486 16. people who use h e r o i n .646748 17. t a k i n g speed .746684 18. people who use g r a s s and h a s h i s h .826221 19. hard drugs .736178 20. s o f t drugs .787233 .728707 .228028 .160593 .065087 .692515 .031749 .040195 -.034351 .574891 .351930 -.036065 -.108081 .687001 .252950 -.000302 .168034 -.068905 -.200857 - .047743 -.291429 CORRELATION MATRIX FOR TWO FACTOR C - 1 R- 1 1 .000000 2 R- 2 — .086523 1 .000000 3 R- 3 .114387 .675694 1 .000000 4 R- 4 _ .086418 .587927 .528220 1 .000000 R- 5 .531716 — .063772 - .097897 - .071707 R- 6 .125730 .586732 .468220 .546518 R- 7 _ .169917 .607092 .647302 .497132 R- 8 _ .173267 .643373 .542416 .536876 R- 9 .348012 _ .176146 — .168484 - .179218 R- 10 .191477 — .064996 - .097798 - .054205 R- 11 .046391 .403582 .437303 .393085 R- 12 _ .169864 .566907 .492188 .534342 R- 13 .484371 — .061849 - .054926 - .119285 R- 14 .136610 .208584 .216726 .186023 R- 15 _ .144863 .460146 .484955 .389592 R- 16 _ .094604 .410276 .431857 .476701 R- 17 — .101006 .430034 .525129 .431602 R- 18 _ .168072 .546439 .554455 .450083 R- 19 _ .077692 .431386 .475212 .443505 R- 20 - .250976 .550590 .612436 .470442 9 1 .000000 10 10 .307883 1 .000000 11 11 .041984 .070865 1 .000000 12 12 .010576 .040253 .618198 1 .000000 13 .478544 .248619 - .008344 - .013559 14 .158995 .367698 .355097 .383529 15 — .001617 — .085997 .399808 .591035 16 .019752 .147521 .575357 .734685 17 _ .009629 .054194 .661426 .647153 18 _ .065407 — .088793 .508753 .720693 19 .001676 .065713 .599560 .683015 20 - .173679 i & - .078793 .562747 .701262 16 1 -LO .000000 17 17 .756775 1 .000000 18 18 .660109 .719839 1 .000000 19 19 .738779 .819798 .672066 1 .000000 20 .647110 .737465 .815515 .744351 OF AGFAP AT PRETEST 1.000000 6 -.208139 1.000000 7 -.141576 .575274 1.000000 8 -.127852 .643386 .774287 1.000000 .471597 -.178622 -.026542 -.080917 .221162 -.114576 -.038465 -.011648 -.042131 .408392 .597440 .540002 -.065703 .620195 .726540 .763383 .438439 -.060335 -.044691 -.059096 .158883 .232948 .354895 .363846 -.119589 .519686 .667363 .610757 -.014672 .508287 .624486 .648687 -.003052 .537315 .679174 .593976 -.157538 .619479 .737936 .737557 .001121 .533551 .688469 .622185 -.201958 .596984 .790311 .730723 13 1.000000 .203369 -.018772 .038626 .065235 -.020559 .101218 -.076298 14 1.000000 .349568 .437313 .359065 .320749 .384561 .303580 15 1.000000 .512050 .538379 .598962 .545748 .659214 20 1.000000 CORRELATION MATRIX POR TWO FACTOR ANALYSIS OF AGFAP AT POSTEST R- 1 1 .000000 2 R- 2 .222482 1 .000000 R- 3 _ .144591 .632755 R- 4 — .033962 .655140 R- 5 .586247 -.318529 R- 6 _ .176664 .528953 R- 7 _ .172771 .497636 R- 8 — .147454 .556857 R- 9 .438615 - .211422 R- 10 .215725 — .234271 R- 11 _ .060805 .382491 R- 12 — .167314 .699108 R- 13 .536358 -.120551 R-^  14 .019838 -.051163 R- 15 — .129951 .385401 R- 16 — .066679 .385986 R- 17 — .068310 .449931 R- 18 _ .260388 .555283 R- 19 — .102703 .412606 R- 20 - .314927 Q .526458 R- 9 1 .000000 10 R- 10 .343115 1 .000000 R- 11 — .134319 -.130659 R- 12 — .102487 -.185155 R- 13 .389134 .132634 R- 14 .174405 .257266 R- 15 — .054270 -.208561 R- 16 — .058652 -.109141 R- 17 — .174590 -.153218 R- 18 — .183136 -.288704 R- 19 — .089434 - .172420 R- 20 — .241240 -.259412 16 R- 16 1 .000000 17 R- 17 .515762 1 .000000 R- 18 .436683 .715422 R- 19 .501747 .783670 R- 20 .357863 .696181 3 1.000000 4 .527179 1.000000 5 -.244104 -.203106 1 .000000 .450262 .425811 - .141179 .480857 .377478 - .168269 .492239 .396713 - .129686 -.095061 -.078608 .401965 -.166533 -.150733 .364221 .296309 .504558 - .148939 .533792 .613588 - .215832 -.139527 -.081336 .423368 .020493 -.097288 .194451 .328026 .267414 - .157665 .318916 .415730 - .023181 .399525 .493877 - .148039 .472108 .415192 - .210927 .370145 .504175 - .122894 .448671 .381394 — .256974 11 1.000000 12 .549940 1.000000 13 -.064582 -.101584 1 .000000 .013247 .109795 .186024 .271641 .464304 .076961 .443781 .520455 .237858 .532740 .616473 - .035039 .368969 .714749 -.081550 .481933 .592900 - .016201 .386896 .709677 — .199920 18 1.000000 19 .688256 1.000000 20 .875505 .684815 1 .000000 6 1.000000 7 .645458 1.000000 8 .660948 .618770 1.000000 -.071879 -.071970 -.092068 -.186636 -.281904 -.174791 .402934 .329207 .360410 .643784 .602599 .684688 -.027095 .033532 -.038033 .090803 .159340 .254928 .536557 .521308 .570079 .534446 .516368 .463117 .453202 .363779 .373402 .505864 .568696 .555831 .453477 .445772 .361177 .501973 .517084 .528499 14 1.000000 15 .174378 1.000000 .239902 .480504 -.028508 .355961 .122463 .509344 -.005356 .353915 .082275 .429867 APPENDIX Gs INSTRUCTION TO ADMINISTRATORS OF THE DRUG BEHAVIOR QUESTIONNAIRE AND THE DRUG ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL AT PRETEST AND POSTEST - 293 -AN ANONYMOUS VANCOUVER DRUG QUESTIONNAIRE AND ATTITUDE SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL I n s t r u c t i o n s t o A d m i n i s t r a t o r s 1. Schedule The a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i s being run on a t i g h t s chedule. We have o n l y one hour f o r the admin-i s t r a t i o n and completion o f the q u e i s t i o n n a i r e . There i s no a v a i l a b l e time f o r c a r l e s s n e s s . 2. D i s c i p l i n e The q u e s t i o n n a i r e needs t o be completed i n an exam-like s e t t i n g . Students c o n v e r s i n g or a c t i n g out need t o be d i s -couraged. P e r s i s t e n t v i o l a t i o n o f the exam-like s e t t i n g should be met by s e p a r a t i n g the s e a t i n g o f the students i n v o l v e d . 3. Procedure Tnere are nine grade e i g h t c l a s s e s i n t h i s h i g h s c h o o l . Each c l a s s w i l l have one a d m i n i s t r a t o r f o r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . At the a p p r o p r i a t e time, proceed t o the c l a s s t h a t you have been a s s i g n e d . Teachers are requested t o remain i n the classroom. However, s i n c e anonymity and c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y need t o be guaranteed, t h e y must not p a r t i c i p a t e i n admin-i s t r a t i o n . Place the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s face down on the desk. Begin the i n s t r u c t i o n s as soon as p o s s i b l e . Students have been asked t o b r i n g p e n c i l s . I f t h e y do not have p e n c i l s , pens are a c c e p t a b l e . Introduce the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o the c l a s s as o u t l i n e d . Do not d e v i a t e u n n e c e s s a r i l y from the i n s t r u c t i o n s . E n f o r c e an exam-like s e t t i n g i n the classroom. Do not t a l k n e e d l e s s l y w i t h the students nor w i t h the classroom t e a c h e r . C o l l e c t the completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s without l o o k i n g at the responses. Do not permit the classroom t e a c h e r to h e l p i n q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o l l e c t i o n . Place them i n the f o l d e r p r o v i d e d . Record the room number on the o u t s i d e o f the f o l d e r . Leave the classroom w i t h the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n the f o l d e r . 4. I n s t r u c t i o n t o students "These are anonymous and c o n f i d e n t i a l drug q u e s t i o n n -- 294 -a i r e s . Do not write your name on the questionnaires. However, write your mother's maiden name on both questionn-air e s so that the researchers w i l l be able to i d e n t i f y the responses made at a l a t e r date. At no time w i l l you ever be i d e n t i f i e d with the responses made by you on the questionnaires. There i s no way that the researchers can i d e n t i f y you from your mother's maiden name. Complete the questionnaires honestly and quickly. Inaccurate or incomplete questionnaires w i l l hinder the results of the questionnaires. The questionnaires w i l l be seen by researchers only and w i l l not be seen by teachers, police or parents. If you have any questions, please raise your hand and we w i l l answer them i n d i v i d u a l l y . Please begin." 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0053763/manifest

Comment

Related Items