DRUG ABUSEavailability of data that can show the effects of the
program over time.
One development that will likely allow much
better utilization of social research is the availabili-
ty of sophisticated methodologies. Thus, for exam-
ple, meta-analytic techniques are now available
that permit the synthesis of data across multiple
studies, allowing us to amalgamate multiple small-
scale tests of programs. In addition, new analytic
strategies are being developed to allow construc-
tion of multilevel statistical models. Such hierar-
chical linear modeling permits one to take account
of the fact that programs are conducted in particu-
lar settings and facilitates the segregation of com-
munity effects from overall program effects. Qualita-
tive ethnographic techniques have been used to
track the life cycle of substance abuse and the
structure of the illegal markets.
FUTUREThe war on drugs is far from being ‘‘won,’’ but
drug abuse appears to have stabilized, with use
remaining nearly constant. Two trends, that could
be counterreactions, have emerged and may help
to shape future use of illicit drugs. The first is the
call for legalization or decriminalization of the
possession of drugs such as marijuana. Several
national organizations have emerged to promote
this goal and to urge a harm reduction approach.
The second trend is the increased licit use of
mood-altering prescription substances, such as
Prozac and Ritalin. Such powerful psychotropic
agents are being prescribed by physicians for de-
pression, difficulties in concentration, and similar
problems. As the medical options increase, misuse
of prescription drugs will likely increase and it may
be more difficult to control the sale of less power-
ful nonprescription drugs.
(SEE ALSO: Alcohol)
REFERENCES
Ball, J. C. , and A. Ross 1991 The Effectiveness of Metha-
done Maintenance Treatment. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Beveridge, A., C. Kadushin, L. Saxe, D. Rindskopf, and
D. Livert forthcoming ‘‘Survey Estimates of Drug
Use Trends in Urban Communities: General Princi-
ples and Cautionary Examples.’’ Substance Use and
Misuse.
De Leon, G. (ed.) 1997 Community As Method: Therapeu-
tic Communities for Special Populations and Special
Settings. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
Evans, R., and I. Berent 1992 Drug Legalization: For and
Against. La Salle, Ill.: Open Court Press.
Falco, M. 1994 The Making of A Drug Free America:
Programs That Work. New York: Times Books.
Gerstein, D. R., and H. J. Harwood (eds.) 1990 Treating
Drug Problems. Washington, D.C.: National Acade-
my Press.
Heather, N., A. Wodak, E. Nadelmann, et al. 1998
Psychoactive Drugs and Harm Reduction. London, U.K.:
Whurr Publishers.
Johnson, B. D., P. Goldstein, E. Preble, et al. 1985
Taking Care of Business: The Economics of Crime by
Heroin Abusers. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
Kleiman, M. A. R. 1992 Against Excess: Drug Policy for
Results. New York: Basic Books.
Musto, D. F. 1987 The American Disease: Origins of Narcot-
ic Control. New York: Oxford University Press.
Office of Applied Studies 1999 National Household Sur-
vey on Drug Abuse Main Findings 1997. Rockville,
Md.: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration.
Office of National Drug Control Policy 1999 The Nation-
al Drug Control Strategy 1999. Washington D.C.: The
White House.
Pentz, M. A., J. H. Dwyer, D. P. MacKinnon, et al. 1989
‘‘A Multi-Community Trial for Primary Prevention of
Adolescent Drug Use: Effects on Drug Use Preva-
lence.’’ Journal of the American Medical Association
261:3259–3266.
Perry, C. L., C. L. Williams, S. Veblen-Martenson, et al.
1996 ‘‘Project Northland: Outcome of A Community
Wide Alcohol Use Prevention Program for Early
Adolescence.’’ American Journal of Public Health
86:956–965.
Rindskopf, D., and L. Saxe 1998 ‘‘Zero Effects in Sub-
stance Abuse Programs: Avoiding False Positives and
False Negatives in the Evaluation of Community-
based Programs.’’ Evaluation Review 22:78–94.
Robins, L. N., J. E. Helzer, M. Hesselbrook, et al. 1980
‘‘Vietnam Veterans Three Years After Vietnam.’’ In
L. Brill and C. Winick, eds., Yearbook of Substance Use
and Abuse, vol. 2, 213–232.New York: Human Sci-
ences Press.
Saxe, L., E. Reber, D. Halfors, C. Kadushin, D. Jones, D.
Rindskopf, and A. Beveridge 1997 ‘‘Think locally, act
globally: Assessing the impact of community-based
substance abuse prevention.’’ Evaluation and Pro-
gram Planning 20:357–366.