Introduction
Adolescence is an important transition/development period in an individual's life (Yüzbaşı, Yılmaz, 2022). According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is a period between the ages of 10—19. During adolescence, the individual experiences biological, cognitive, spiritual and social development and changes (Kaynak, Irgıt, Çakmak, 2022).
With the biological changes experienced during this period, the adolescent's body gains an adult body appearance with muscle increase, growth in the genitals and hair growth (Papadimitriou et al., 2010; Soliman et al., 2014). In addition, estrogen increases in girls to reach reproductive maturity and maturing eggs initiate the menstrual cycle. In men, testosterone hormone increases and sperm production occurs with the maturation of the erectile glands (Robeva, Kumanov, 2016; Blakemore 2019; Yoon et al., 2022).
According to Piaget, this period is the stage of abstract operations. With cognitive maturation in adolescents, individuals move from concrete thought to abstract thought. As a result, individuals gain the ability to think hypothetically, self-organize and evaluate (Kaplan, Sadock, 1989; Kaufman, Lichtenberger, 2005; Piaget, 1937). While solving their problems, they can judge the society by developing new thoughts, values and some beliefs with a broader perspective (Senemoğlu, 2010; Gander, Gardiner, 2015).
Adolescents are in a state of intense enthusiasm and novelty as a result of spiritual changes. They often go through a challenging process in their feelings, thoughts, decisions and relationships with the environment (Yıldız, 2021). The fact that individuals get sufficient satisfaction from this process and are in a cheerful mood helps individuals to develop healthier solutions to the problems they face (Biswar-Diener, 2006; Park, Peterson, 2008).
During this period, adolescents try to discover their own identity and self and acquire some social skills. In addition, they have started to get closer to the opposite sex and their plans and curiosity about professional skills have increased (Erikson, 1993; Yıldız, 2021). If individuals have undergone a healthy identity development, they can better gain their roles in transition to adulthood and develop stronger social relationships (Yüzbaşı, Yılmaz, 2022). Adolescents experience their first socialization processes in the family environment (Koç, 2004). The family provides a place for the individual in the society and prepares the adolescent for the culture and adulthood (Razon, 2003; Yavuzer, 2005). In the following processes, socialization that starts with the family expands further with the environment of friends and school (Koç, 2004).
Although adolescence is a healthy period in an individual's life, it also contains some risks (Yalçın, Koyuncu, Avşaroğlu, 2022). During adolescence, individuals may experience outbursts of anger, crisis, conflict with the family, confusion within themselves, embarrassment, isolation from society and some negative emotions (Ögel, 2010; Peterson et al., 2003; Raposo, Francisco, 2022) and physical and mental changes may cause the individual to experience difficulties and disrupt social interaction. Adolescents who have not yet reached social and psychological crisis skills may exhibit risky behaviors as a coping method (Jessor, 1992; Senemoğlu, 2010; Şimşek, Çöplü, 2018). Substance addiction can be behaviors that they frequently exhibit in dangerous situations (Yalçın, Koyuncu, Avşaroğlu, 2022). Addiction refers to any strong desire, passion or quest (Rosenthal, Faris, 2019). According to Snoek, addicted individuals are myopic and see the substance as a short-term relief or reward to get away from problems (Snoek, 2023). The substance reduces the pain of the individual, gives them a short-term pleasure and distracts them from negative emotions. With this short-term relief, it can lead to loss of self-control in the long term, loss of many skills, unhealthy state, deterioration in social relations and dangerous behaviors (Özcan, Gürhan, 2016). Addiction now becomes a chronic disease in the life of the individual and leaves a destructive effect that becomes a routine (Snoek, 2023). It is known that the most commonly used substance is cannabis and the average age of cannabis use is 17 years.
According to some studies, it has been determined that adolescents encounter risk factors does not mean that they will show a risky behavior (Balık-Okutan, 2017). The formation of addiction can be prevented by identifying the strong dynamics that keep the individual away from the addictive substance (Witkiewitz, Tucker, 2024). In our research, it was aimed to find some dynamics that make adolescents strong in protecting adolescents from substance addiction. Looking at the literature, the presence of high self-efficacy is a situation that makes the individual strong. Self-efficacy is the belief that an individual has the ability to implement the behaviors required to achieve a desired state (Kadden, Litt, 2011). It is thought that positive family environment and family relationships, friendship environment and school environment (Yıldız, 2021) are effective at the beginning of some of the social environments where the individual spends the most time to protect from substance addiction (Rowe, 2012; Wells et al., 2013). While individuals with a positive environment have a healthier adolescence period, the negative family environment negatively affects the development of the adolescent against risky situations (Yıldız, 2021). In addition, it has been determined that the financial opportunities of the adolescent, his/her positive view of himself/herself and course success are strong dynamics that protect the individual from substance addiction by supporting self-efficacy (Kirk, Schutte, Hine, 2008; Toraman et al., 2023).
In line with this purpose, the following questions were sought to be answered in the study:
- What is the self-efficacy of adolescents towards protection from substance addiction?
- What are the factors associated with adolescents' self-efficacy to protect substance addiction?
Materials and methods
Purpose and Method of the Study
The present study was conducted as a descriptive study to determine adolescents' self-efficacy and related factors for protection from substance addiction.
Sample and Inclusion Criteria
The sample of this study consists of a total of 450 students in a high school. The participants were between the ages of 14-18 and were enrolled in the 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th grades of the high school. Inclusion criteria:
- Being a high school student
- Being between 14 and 18 years of age
- Not having received any prior training on the research topic
Data Collection
The study’s data were collected between September 2024 and December 2024 in a high school located in a city in Turkey. Datas were collected by using face-to-face method. The study was started by first informing potential participants about the purpose and process of the research. Then, individual questionnaires were filled out with participants who agreed to participate in the study. It took approximately 10 minutes for each participant to fill out the questionnaires.
Data Collection Tools
Personal identification form and Self-Efficacy Scale for Substance Addiction Protection were used in the study.
Personal information form: The individual identification form was developed by the researcher. There are 14 questions in the form. The questions are about socio-demographic characteristics such as age, gender, class, family type, and subjective evaluations such as self-identification, relationship between parents, relationship with mother and father, course success, and relationship with friends (Teze, Ayhan, 2023; Uzun, Kelleci, 2018).
The Self-Efficacy for Adolescences Protecting Substance Addiction Scale [SEAPSAS]: The scale created by Eker, Akkuş & Kapısız can be applied to high school students in adolescence (Eker, Akkuş, Kapısız, 2013). A five-point Likert scale is used for scoring the scale. The responses to the items are evaluated as '1-I am not sure at all', '2-I am very little sure', '3-I am moderately sure', '4-I am quite sure', '5-I am extremely sure'. While 23 items in the scale are scored positively, the scoring in the control question is '5-I am not sure at all', '1-I am extremely sure'. The minimum score that can be obtained from the scale is 23 and the maximum score is 115. A high total scale score can be interpreted as indicating a high self-efficacy in protecting substance addiction. The scale consists of 4 sub-dimensions. Dimension A, abstinence from drugs/stimulants, has 12 items. Dimension B, abstaining from drugs/stimulants under pressure, has 4 items. Dimension C, seeking help about drugs/stimulants has 4 items. Dimension D, supporting a friend about drugs/stimulants consists of 3 items and the Control question: It is an item that can provide information about self-efficacy even alone. The total Cronbach’s alpha value of the scale was found to be 0.81. In this study, the total Cronbach’s alpha value of the scale was 0.89.
Data analysis
The suitability of the data for normal distribution was analyzed. Descriptive statistics such as number, percentage, mean values, T test and Anova tests in independent groups were used.
Ethical Principles of Research
This study was approved by a university Social Sciences Ethics Committee (session numbered E-76244175-050.04-392981 and decision numbered 2024/266). The participants were first given information about this study aims and details, and then their verbal and written consent were obtained. Participation was entirely on a voluntary basis. Participants were also informed that they could contact the research team at any time for questions or to discuss the study.
Results
The descriptive characteristics of the 448 students who participated in the study are given in Table 1. The average age of the students was 15,49 ± 1,16 years. It was determined that 53,6% of the students were male, 31,9% were 9th grade students and 64,1% had a nuclear family structure. It was determined that 42,4% of the students' mothers were primary school graduates, 38,6% of the students' fathers were secondary school graduates, 98,4% of the students' mothers were housewives and 34,4% of the students' fathers were farmers. It was determined that 61,6% of the student’s family had a medium income level, 79,7% of children evaluate their parents' relationship is good and 74,1% had a good relationship with their parents. It was determined that 61,2% of the students had moderate course success, 67,9% had good relationships with friends and 74,8% had a positive self-identification.
Table 1
Descriptive Characteristics of Secondary School Students Participating in the Study
|
Descriptive Characteristics
|
Mean
|
Min-Max
|
|
Age
|
15,49 ± 1,16
|
14—18
|
|
|
Number (n)
|
Percentage (%)
|
|
Gender
|
|
Female
|
208
|
46,4
|
|
Male
|
240
|
53,6
|
|
Classroom
|
|
9th grade
|
143
|
31,9
|
|
10th grade
|
138
|
30,8
|
|
11th grade
|
122
|
27,2
|
|
12th grade
|
45
|
10
|
|
Family type
|
|
Extended (nuclear family with grandparents)
|
97
|
21,7
|
|
Nuclear
|
287
|
64,1
|
|
Crowded (more than one nuclear family)
|
64
|
14,3
|
|
Mother's education level
|
|
Illiterate
|
171
|
38,2
|
|
Primary School
|
190
|
42,4
|
|
Middle School
|
74
|
16,5
|
|
High School
|
13
|
2,9
|
|
Father's education level
|
|
Illiterate
|
14
|
3,1
|
|
Primary School
|
141
|
31,5
|
|
Middle School
|
173
|
38,6
|
|
High School
|
105
|
23,4
|
|
University
|
15
|
3,3
|
|
Mother occupation
|
|
Housewife
|
441
|
98,4
|
|
Worker
|
7
|
1,6
|
|
Father occupation
|
|
Farmer
|
154
|
34,4
|
|
Worker
|
91
|
20,3
|
|
Unemployed
|
31
|
6,9
|
|
Self-employment
|
146
|
32,6
|
|
Officer
|
16
|
3,6
|
|
Retired
|
10
|
2,2
|
|
Perception of income level
|
|
Bad
|
108
|
24,1
|
|
Middle
|
276
|
61,6
|
|
Good
|
64
|
14,3
|
|
Evaluating the relationship between mother and father
|
|
Bad
|
13
|
2,9
|
|
Middle
|
78
|
17,4
|
|
Good
|
357
|
79,7
|
|
Evaluating his/her relationship with parents
|
|
Bad
|
23
|
5,1
|
|
Middle
|
93
|
20,8
|
|
Good.
|
332
|
74,1
|
|
Сourse success
|
|
Bad
|
17
|
3,8
|
|
Middle
|
274
|
61,2
|
|
Good
|
157
|
35
|
|
Evaluation of Friend relationship
|
|
Bad
|
20
|
4,5
|
|
Middle
|
124
|
27,7
|
|
Good
|
304
|
67,9
|
|
Self-identification
|
|
Positive
|
335
|
74,8
|
|
Negative
|
113
|
25,2
|
|
Total
|
448
|
100
|
The total scores of the adolescents who participated in the study are shown in Table 2. The SEAPSAS mean total score of the adolescents included in the study was 101,83 ± 14,82 and the sub-dimension scores of the adolescents included in the study were determined as follows; the Staying Away From Substance (General) was 55,14 ± 8,03, the Staying Away From Substance (Under Pressure) was 18,72 ± 2,78, the Help-Seeking about Substance was 16,11 ± 4,32 and the Supporting a Friend about Substance was 11,84 ± 3,31.
Table 2
SEAPSAS and subscale mean score
|
Scale
|
X ± SD
|
Participant’s min-max point
|
|
SEAPSAS Total
|
101,83 ± 14,82
|
23—115
|
|
Staying Away from Substance (General)
|
55,14 ± 8,03
|
12—60
|
|
Staying Away from Substance (Under Pressure)
|
18,72 ± 2,78
|
4—20
|
|
Help-Seeking about Substance
|
16,11 ± 4,32
|
4—20
|
|
Supporting a Friend about Substance
|
11,84 ± 3,31
|
3—15
|
Table 3 shows the relationship between the total and sub-dimension scores of the SEAPSAS and personal data. There was a significant difference between the total and sub-dimension scores of the SEAPSAS for female students compared to male students (p ˂ 0,05).
Table 3
Distribution of Total and Subscale Scores of SEAPSAS
and Some Demographic Characteristics
|
Features
|
SEAPSAS Total
Mean ± SD
|
SEAPSAS Staying Away from Drugs / Stimulant Drugs — General Mean ± S
|
SEAPSAS Staying Away From Drugs/ Stimulant Drugs — Under Pressure Mean ± SD
|
SEAPSAS Help-Seeking about Drugs/ Stimulant Drugs
Mean ± SD
|
SEAPSAS Supporting a Friend about Drugs / Stimulant Drugs
Mean ± SD
|
|
Gender
|
|
Female (208)
|
103,34 ± 12,11
|
55,88 ± 6,63
|
19,00 ± 2,22
|
16,27 ± 4,11
|
12,18 ± 2,94
|
|
Male (240)
|
100,52 ± 16,73
|
54,51 ± 9,04
|
18,48 ± 3,17
|
15,97 ± 4,49
|
11,55 ± 3,58
|
|
|
p = 0,040,
t = 2,061
|
p = 0,066,
t = 1,846
|
p = 0,046,
t = 2,000
|
p = 0,459,
t = 0,740
|
p = 0,041,
t = 2,051
|
|
Class type
|
|
9th grade (143)
|
100,03 ± 17,14
|
54,48 ± 9,45
|
18,33 ± 3,43
|
16,02 ± 4,34
|
11,18 ± 3,47
|
|
10th grade (138)
|
100,94 ± 14,04
|
54,63 ± 7,88
|
18,71 ± 2,67
|
15,90 ± 4,27
|
11,69 ± 3,29
|
|
11th grade (122)
|
103,95 ± 13,25
|
56,14 ± 6,71
|
19,03 ± 2,31
|
16,34 ± 4,36
|
12,42 ± 2,98
|
|
12th grade (45)
|
104,48 ± 12,38
|
56,13 ± 6,62
|
19,15 ± 1,59
|
16,40 ± 4,32
|
12,80 ± 3,30
|
|
|
F = 2,194,
p = 0,088
|
F = 1,369,
p = 0,252
|
F = 1,803,
p = 0,146
|
F = 0,309,
p = 0,819
|
F = 4,568,
p = 0,004
|
|
Family type
|
|
Extended (97)
|
102,03 ± 13,86
|
54,90 ± 7,39
|
18,64 ± 2,58
|
16,54 ± 4,08
|
11,92 ± 3,17
|
|
Nuclear (287)
|
101,85 ± 15,39
|
55,26 ± 8,45
|
18,73 ± 2,90
|
16,05 ± 4,39
|
11,79 ± 3,36
|
|
Crowded (64)
|
101,42 ± 13,79
|
54,98 ± 7,06
|
18,79 ± 2,53
|
15,68 ± 4,32
|
11,95 ± 3,32
|
|
|
F = 0,033,
p = 0,967
|
F = 0,089,
p = 0,915
|
F = 0,059,
p = 0,943
|
F = 0,820,
p = 0,441
|
F = 0,102,
p = 0,903
|
|
Mother's Education Status
|
|
Illiterate (171)
|
102,22 ± 15,12
|
55,53 ± 8,08
|
18,84 ± 2,84
|
16,13 ± 4,32
|
11,70 ± 3,52
|
|
Primary School (190)
|
100,91 ± 15,35
|
54,83 ± 8,09
|
18,68 ± 2,67
|
15,78 ± 4,66
|
11,60 ± 3,37
|
|
Middle School (74)
|
103,93 ± 11,76
|
55,60 ± 7,24
|
18,78 ± 2,63
|
16,98 ± 0,28
|
12,55 ± 2,59
|
|
High School (13)
|
98,15 ± 18,21
|
52,00 ± 10,52
|
17,30 ± 4,04
|
15,61 ± 3,88
|
13,23 ± 2,58
|
|
|
F = 1,047
p = 0,372
|
F = 0,975
p = 0,404
|
F = 1,261
p = 0,287
|
F = 1,438
p = 0,231
|
F = 2,362
p = 0,071
|
|
Father's Education Status
|
|
Illiterate (14)
|
102,00 ± 10,07
|
56,71 ± 6,42
|
19,42 ± 1,39
|
15,57 ± 3,52
|
10,28 ± 3,36
|
|
Primary School (141)
|
100,46 ± 14,64
|
54,48 ± 8,24
|
18,84 ± 2,50
|
15,51 ± 4,27
|
11,62 ± 3,31
|
|
Middle School (173)
|
102,64 ± 16,34
|
55,58 ± 8,51
|
18,66 ± 3,11
|
16,57 ± 4,42
|
11,82 ± 3,58
|
|
High School (105)
|
102,89 ± 12,76
|
55,48 ± 6,86
|
18,68 ± 2,58
|
16,37 ± 4,36
|
12,35 ± 2,81
|
|
University (15)
|
97,60 ± 15,13
|
52,53 ± 9,26
|
17,93 ± 3,49
|
15,13 ± 3,48
|
12,00 ± 2,92
|
|
|
F = 0,869
p = 0,482
|
F = 0,940
p = 0,441
|
F = 0,61
p = 0,651
|
F = 1,523
p = 0,194
|
F = 1,565
p = 0,183
|
|
Mother Occupation
|
|
Housewife (441)
|
101,88 ± 14,88
|
55,17 ± 8,05
|
18,73 ± 2,78
|
16,12 ± 4,33
|
11,84 ± 3,33
|
|
Worker (7)
|
98,57 ± 10,76
|
53,28 ± 6,62
|
18,42 ± 2,93
|
15,00 ± 3,36
|
11,85 ± 1,95
|
|
|
p = 0,558
t = 0,586
|
p = 0,537
t = 0,618
|
p = 0,774
t = 0,284
|
p = 0,493
t = 0,686
|
p = 0,991
t = –0,011
|
|
Father Occupation
|
|
Farmer (154)
|
100,22 ± 16,87
|
54,50 ± 9,12
|
18,51 ± 3,17
|
15,35 ± 4,66
|
11,85 ± 3,39
|
|
Worker (919)
|
102,97 ± 13,09
|
55,70 ± 6,93
|
19,07 ± 2,15
|
16,60 ± 4,19
|
11,59 ± 3,39
|
|
Unemployed (31)
|
99,25 ± 17,81
|
54,51 ± 8,93
|
18,61 ± 3,44
|
15,70 ± 5,04
|
10,41 ± 3,69
|
|
Selfemployment (146)
|
103,15 ± 13,39
|
55,58 ± 7,69
|
18,69 ± 2,65
|
16,58 ± 3,79
|
12,29 ± 3,07
|
|
Officer (16)
|
101,37 ± 9,44
|
54,75 ± 5,38
|
19,18 ± 1,93
|
16,37 ± 3,98
|
11,06 ± 2,71
|
|
Retired (10)
|
105,50 ± 11,52
|
56,40 ± 4,90
|
18,80 ± 2,14
|
17,20 ± 4,46
|
13,10 ± 3,10
|
|
|
F = 1,019
p = 0,406
|
F = 0,464
p = 0,803
|
F = 0,561
p = 0,730
|
F = 1,756
p = 0,121
|
F = 2,288
p = 0,045
|
|
Perception of income level
|
|
Bad (108)
|
100,63 ± 16,25
|
54,78 ± 8,59
|
18,56 ± 3,17
|
15,63 ± 4,53
|
11,64 ± 3,48
|
|
Medium (276)
|
103,11 ± 12,82
|
55,80 ± 7,17
|
18,96 ± 2,38
|
16,35 ± 4,14
|
12,00 ± 3,15
|
|
Good (64)
|
98,28 ± 19,23
|
52,93 ± 10,05
|
17,98 ± 3,45
|
15,85 ± 4,66
|
11,50 ± 3,67
|
|
|
F = 3,260
p = 0,039
|
F = 3,486
p = 0,031
|
F = 3,475
p = 0,032
|
F = 1,195
p = 0,304
|
F = 0,839
p = 0,433
|
|
Evaluating the relationship between mother and father
|
|
Bad (13)
|
91,84 ± 15,51
|
51,46 ± 9,48
|
17,84 ± 2,91
|
12,07 ± 3,66
|
10,46 ± 4,55
|
|
Medium (78)
|
99,05 ± 14,78
|
53,37 ± 8,53
|
18,38 ± 2,52
|
15,17 ± 4,57
|
12,11 ± 3,01
|
|
Good (357)
|
102,80 ± 14,63
|
55,67 ± 7,79
|
18,83 ± 2,82
|
16,46 ± 4,18
|
11,83 ± 3,32
|
|
|
F = 5,181
p = 0,006
|
F = 4,088
p = 0,017
|
F = 1,501
p = 0,224
|
F = 8,969
|p = 0,000
|
F = 1,397
p = 0,248
|
|
Evaluating his/her relationship with his/her parents
|
|
Bad (23)
|
86,47 ± 22,26
|
46,00 ± 12,60
|
17,08 ± 3,94
|
12,43 ± 5,30
|
10,95 ± 3,83
|
|
Medium (93)
|
100,05 ± 13,43
|
54,48 ± 7,31
|
18,51 ± 2,58
|
15,29 ± 4,46
|
11,76 ± 3,41
|
|
Good (332)
|
103,39 ± 13,92
|
55,96 ± 7,42
|
18,89 ± 2,70
|
16,59 ± 4,05
|
11,92 ± 3,24
|
|
|
F = 15,830
p = 0,000
|
F = 18,265
p = 0,000
|
F = 4,981**
p = 0,007
|
F = 12,737**
p = 0,000
|
F = 0,938
p = 0,384
|
|
Evaluation of course success
|
|
Bad (17)
|
97,47 ± 20,57
|
52,00 ± 11,02
|
17,76 ± 3,97
|
16,23 ± 4,08
|
11,47 ± 4,28
|
|
Medium (274)
|
100,73 ± 14,56
|
54,77 ± 7,76
|
18,66 ± 2,74
|
15,68 ± 4,51
|
11,62 ± 3,33
|
|
Good (157)
|
104,21 ± 14,31
|
56,15 ± 8,04
|
18,94 ± 2,68
|
16,84 ± 3,89
|
12,27 ± 3,13
|
|
|
F = 3,544
p = 0,030
|
F = 1,573
p = 0,209
|
F = 1,573
p = 0,209
|
F = 3,614
p = 0,028
|
F = 2,063
p = 0,128
|
|
Friend Relationship
|
|
Bad (20)
|
101,80 ± 13,78
|
55,40 ± 6,54
|
18,75 ± 2,29
|
15,65 ± 4,20
|
12,00 ± 3,87
|
|
Medium (124)
|
101,28 ± 13,50
|
55,54 ± 6,69
|
18,89 ± 2,16
|
15,38 ± 4,68
|
11,45 ± 3,32
|
|
Good (304)
|
102,05 ± 15,42
|
54,97 ± 8,62
|
18,65 ± 3,02
|
16,43 ± 4,14
|
11,99 ± 3,26
|
|
|
F = 0,120
|p = 0,887
|
F = 0,237
p = 0,789
|
F = ,329
p = 0,719
|
F = 2,744
p = 0,065
|
F = 1,202
p = 0,302
|
|
Self-identification
|
|
Positive (335)
|
103,07 ± 14,21
|
55,70 ± 7,69
|
18,90 ± 2,65
|
16,46 ± 4,11
|
11,99 ± 3,24
|
|
Negative (113)
|
98,13 ± 15,98
|
53,49 ± 8,79
|
18,18 ± 3,06
|
15,05 ± 4,72
|
11,39 ± 3,49
|
|
|
p = 0,025
t = 2,921
|
p = 0,001
t = 2,383
|
p = 0,017
t = 2,233
|
p = 0,003
t = 2,839
|
p = 0,098
t = 1,595
|
Note: bold — ; “**” —
A significant difference was found between the 12th graders' scores of supporting their friends about the substance, one of the sub-dimensions of the SEAPSAS, and the other grades branches (p ˂ 0,05).
No significant difference was found between family type and scale scores. There was no significant relationship between mother's education level and the scale. There was no significant relationship between father's education level and the scale. There was no significant relationship between the mother's occupation and the scale (p ˂ 0,05).
A significant difference was found between the scores of those whose fathers were retired and the sub-dimension scores of supporting friends about substance addiction (p ˂ 0,05). Students’ economic status was significantly associated with the total SEAPSAS score and the sub-dimensions of abstaining from drugs/stimulants and doing so under pressure (p < 0,05). A significant difference was found based on parent–child relationship quality in the total SEAPSAS score and the sub-dimensions of abstaining from substances and seeking help (p < 0,05). Differences were observed in the total SEAPSAS score and in all sub-dimensions, including abstaining under pressure and seeking help (p < 0,05). Academic success was significantly related to the total score and the help-seeking sub-dimension, while friendship quality showed no significant association (p < 0,05). Positive self-definitions were significantly associated with the total score and all SEAPSAS sub-dimensions (p < 0,05)."
Discussion
The findings of this study, which was conducted to examine adolescent high school students' self-efficacy to protect substance addiction and related factors, were discussed in line with the literature.
The mean total score of the students participating in our study from the self-efficacy scale for protection from substance addiction was 101.83 ± 14.82. When the literature was examined, it was determined that the scores obtained in studies conducted in similar groups were similar (Karaca, 2023; Uzun, Kelleci, 2018). When the literature was examined, the scores were lower in some study. The reason for the difference in scores is seen to be affected by the cultural differences of the participants (Ayhan, Çöplü, Türkmen, 2021).
The total score of the SEAPSAS was found to be associated with the scores of staying away from the substance when under pressure and supporting a friend about substance use among the sub-dimension scores of female students compared to male students. According to a study, when the frequency of substance use in adolescents is evaluated, it is seen that boys are more likely to use substances than girls. In this regard, it can be concluded that female students protect themselves more (Akkuş et al., 2016).
A significant difference was found between 12th graders' scores of supporting their friends about substances and the sub-dimensions of SEAPSAS compared to other grade levels. Towards the end of adolescence, 12th grade students can establish stronger friendship relationships and their awareness levels increase. Protection from substance addiction is higher with the presence of friends who show less risky behaviors by establishing stronger friendships, supporting each other and sharing in their friendship environments (Uludağlı, Sayıl, 2009).
It was found that students whose fathers are retired have significantly higher SEAPSAS substance addiction support sub-dimension scores. According to a study, a significant relationship was found between father relations and behavioral problems. The absence of the father in the family, his being present but uninterested, or his weak involvement in the family cause the children to have negative behavioral patterns by damaging their psychological well-being. The time spent by pensioners and fathers with their children, the closeness and support they provide to them reduce behavioral problems in adolescence (Aynacı, Kutlu, 2022).
In our study, it was determined that the families of the students were mostly middle-income. It was determined that the SEAPSAS total score, staying away from drugs/stimulants and staying away from drugs/stimulants under pressure scores of the middle-income children were significantly higher. The average income of the family may be a factor supporting the self-efficacy of the adolescents to protect themselves from substance abuse (Tilim, Murat, 2019).
In our study, students stated that their relationships with their parents were generally good. It was determined that students who stated that their parents had a good relationship had higher SEAPSAS total score averages. As a result of positive behavioral attitudes of parents during adolescence (Holden, Edwards, 1989) and strong bonds established with adolescents, adolescents feel closer to their parents and this can prevent many risky behaviors of adolescents (Aynacı, Kutlu,2022; Tunç, 2023).
There was a correlation between the average total score of the MBSQ and the sub-dimensions of the SEAPSAS, including abstaining from drugs/stimulants, abstaining from drugs/stimulants when under pressure, and seeking help for drugs/stimulants. The quality of the adolescent's relationship with his/her parents positively affects his/her self-efficacy for protection from substance addiction. Families cannot establish healthy communication with their children have difficulties in controlling the behavior of the adolescent, undermine their authority over the adolescent and reduce their guiding aspects (Aynacı, Kutlu, 2022; Baumrind,1991; Bornstein, 2002; Cüceloğlu, 2021).
In our study, correlations were found between the total scores of the SEAPSAS and the sub-dimension scores of seeking help for drugs/stimulants of the students who evaluated their course success as good. It is seen that as course success increases, they develop positive attitudes towards protection from substances (Akkuş et al., 2016). School is a place that prepares individuals for life. Most of the time, individuals can experience coping with difficulties in this environment. School success means that the student uses his/her time effectively and efficiently. This is mental occupation. It is an indication that they have plans for the future, which makes the individual conscious of taking purposeful and correct action. Naturally, it keeps them away from drugs (Niyazibeyoğlu, 2023). No significant relationship was found between the students' relationship with friends and the scale.
In our study, a relationship was found between the mean total score and all sub-dimension scores of the SEAPSAS when adolescents defined themselves with more positive characteristics. As a final result of these findings, it can be concluded that individuals who characterize themselves with positive definitions can stay away from substance addiction even under pressure, do not hesitate to seek help in this regard, and often support their friends (Şen, 2015). According to Kılınç, individuals who have a positive view of themselves have higher self-control, can cope more effectively with challenging situations, and this makes them psychologically stronger (Kılınç, Uz Baş, 2023). An individual with strong psychology can turn the negative situations and events in his/her life into a good and effective development factor for himself/herself and can also prevent the occurrence of this situation (Kılınç, Uz Baş, 2023; Santrock, 2014; Turgut, Eraslan-Çapan, 2017).
Conclusions
As a result of this study, which examined the effect of some related factors on the self-efficacy levels of adolescents to protect themselves from substance addiction, the self-efficacy levels of adolescents to protect themselves from substance addiction were found to be higher among female students and 12th graders, those whose fathers were retired, and those who stated that family income was at a medium level. There were relationships between the participants' evaluating the relationship between their parents as good, having a good relationship with their parents, having good academic achievement, and defining themselves with generally positive characteristics and their self-efficacy to protect themselves from substance addiction. However, there was no relationship between mother and father's education level, mother's occupation, family type and friendship and self-efficacy for protection of substance addiction.
As a result, it can be concluded that some demographic variables are effective in protecting adolescents from substance addiction, and positive dynamics such as positive family relationships, self-perception and high academic success are important variables.
- Protective/preventive interventions can be planned for adolescents before they reach high school, taking into account their individual, family and school characteristics.
- In improving adolescent mental health, studies can be conducted to strengthen basic family dynamics and increase the positive dynamics of the individual.
- It may be recommended to carry out protective projects with the cooperation of all relevant institutions at the local level, covering the family-school-living environment characteristics of students.
Limitations. The results of the study cannot be generalized to all adolescents in the city. The results of the study are limited to the adolescents in the specified high school.