In urban Kano, drug abuse incidences cut across all sexes and ages taking a different dimension. This makes control measures rather difficult. The aim of this article is to highlight the common reality of the problem so that the concerned community could have a lasting solution. Respondents were purposively selected while questionnaire remained the data collection tool. Analysis was made using Smart2.0M3variance based partial least square structural equation modelling (VB-PLS-SEM). The results indicated that, except for parenting style, all the three independent variables of peer group influence, broken homes, and law enforcement corruption have a direct strong positive effect on personality maladjustment as a mediator. However, all the four independent variables; peer group influence, parenting style, broken homes and law enforcement corruption possessed a direct positive effect on drug abuse as the dependent variable. Meanwhile, when personality maladjustment mediates the independent and dependent variables’ relationship, only peer group influence and law enforcement corruption maintained an indirect effect. Therefore, to curtail drug abuse menace in urban Kano, parents, religious scholars, security agencies, NGOs, entertainment industries and all community members should design some systemic, effective, collaborative measures that could provide a lasting solution to the problem if the society is to stay safe and future secured.
Keywords: drug abuse, broken home, law enforcement corruption, parenting style, peer group influence, personality maladjustment.
The issue of drug abuse is a common global phenomenon in the contemporary times (Siro, 2008). Majority of the crimes being committed today are directly or indirectly connected to substance abuse (Karofi, 2005). With proliferation of drug abuse, criminal behaviour and insecurity persistence are sought to have a direct link. A number of studies such as those of Haladu (2003), Siro (2008), and Mba (2008) were conducted to vindicate this relationship as the behaviour continues to exist overtime. However, the socio-economic development of any society depends on the quality of its population categories which the drug abuse always strives to destroy.
Unfortunately, urban Kano is being affected by drug abuse menace. This is justified as the state occupied the first position in drug/substance abuse for three consecutive years (NDLEA, 2015). However, between November and December of 2015 alone, the media release confirmed that, illicit drugs worth 1.2 billion naira were impounded by the police in the area. This was achieved through what the police agency termed as operation gida-gida1. The report added that over 95% of the drugs’ consumers were Kano indigenes. Ironically, over 95% of the suppliers were immigrants or non-Kano indigenes. Also, more than 200 suspects were arrested during the raid. Meanwhile, Marijuana alone from the impounded drugs cost over
100 million naira. In another recent NDLEA statistics report, it was indicated that, the study area suffers from a serious drug abuse dilemma. Thus, it showed that, over
11,678.93kg of illicit drugs were impounded between January and November 2015. In addition, 556 people were arrested by the agency during this period2. The most precarious issue is that, drug abuse behaviour in urban Kano becomes systemic. It cuts across all sexes, ages and other human potentialities (Siro, 2014). This scenario is quite unfortunate looking at the cosmopolitan nature and the economy of Kano population.
In general, it can be speculated that, drug abuse incidences affect the socio-economic and political well-being of the study area. In view of this, a study of this kind is very much desirable. It is therefore hoped that, the obtained result will influence the formulation of public policies vis-a-vis drug abuse, crime and security not only urban Kano but the state.
1House by house search
2 Sourced from the National Drugs Law Enforcement Agency, Kano State Headquarters.
The persistence of drug abuse behaviour in urban Kano becomes a universal phenomenon not only among the teeming youth but across all population segments. Preliminary investigations revealed that, peer group influence, parenting style, broken homes and law enforcement corruption are some of the factors responsible for drug abuse menace. Meanwhile, the situation results to individual’s personality maladjustment and subsequently to involvement in drug abuse. However, vindicating this postulation is what formed the basis of this research.
The tragic drug abuse element turns common on daily basis despite the alleged efforts being made by both public and relevant authorities. To manage the situation, the problem must first be seen as systemic within all public quarters. Hence, there should be resuscitation of efforts that demands contribution from all spheres of society to make security management a reality. The strategy must in addition incorporate religious scholars, parents, community leaders, NGOs, entertainment industry, etc. The general idea is that, this research will assist in combating drug abuse problem in urban Kano and beyond if well utilised. This is because, most of the previous studies were unable to provide a generic drug abuse analysis comprising these stated factors herein. Therefore, this research fills the gap created to fit the societal dynamism and reintegration.
Abdullahi (2003) argued that, drugs are mainly substances that are taken to sedate, excite, slim, arouse, and put to sleep or cure. People usually ingest or inject those drugs into their bodies to achieve these goals. Radda (2005) referred to drugs as psychoactive substances while Watt (1997) referred to drugs as substances that affect
the way the body works either physically or mentally. Synchronising these definitions, drug can be seen as any substance other than food, which due to its chemical nature affects the structure and functioning of the human body.
Sullivan and Thompson (1994) referred to drug abuse as the continued use of psychoactive substances at a level that violates approved social practices. Abdullahi (2009) viewed drug abuse as the use of drugs to the extent that interferes with the health and social function of an individual. In essence, drug abuse may be defined as the arbitrary overdependence or misuse of a particular drug with or without a prior medical diagnosis from a qualified health practitioner. It can also be viewed as the unlawful overdose of drug(s). Odejide (2000) in a cautionary presentation warned that drug abusers who exhibit symptoms of stress, anxiety, depression, behaviour changes, fatigue and loss or increase in appetite should be treated by medical experts and counsellors to save them from deadly diseases.
Most common Abused Drugs in Nigeria
In the Nigerian context, the most common types of abused drugs according to
NAFDAC (2000) as cited by Oluremi (2012) are categorized as follows:-
i. Stimulants: Are substances that act directly and stimulate the central nervous system of a human body. Users experience pleasant effects such as energy increase at the initial stage. The major sources are cannabis caffeine substances.
ii. Hallucinogens: These are drugs that alter the sensory processing unit in the brain. Thus, producing distorted perceptions, feeling of anxiety, euphoria, sadness, inner joy, and other abnormal behaviour are always observed. A typical example is lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and cannabis. These
substances are considered as the most powerful mind-altering drugs commonly known in the contemporary world.
iii. Narcotics: These drugs relieve pains, induce sleeping and they are addictive.
They are found in heroin, codeine and opium/opiates.
iv. Sedatives: These drugs are among the most widely abused. This is largely due to their power of relieving stress and anxiety. Some members of this drugs’ family induce sleep, ease tension and cause relaxation. They also provide amnesia (temporary loose of memory) for users to be able to forget their problems. Their sources include Valium 5/10, alcohol, promethazine, chloroform and cannabis.
v. Inhalants: Consist of volatile solvents that provide euphoria, emotional and perpetual distortion of thoughts to the user. The main sources are glues, spot removers, tube repair, perfumes, gums, rubber solutions to mention but a few.
vi. Minor tranquilizers: This group of drugs produce calmness without bringing drowsiness; they are chiefly derived from Librium, Valium etc.
Causes of Drug Abuse
Haladu (2003) gave some reasons as the main causes of drug abuse in the contemporary Nigeria.
i. Experimental Curiosity: Driven out of motivation to unveil the hidden facts about drugs. This is common among adolescents who live in environments where drug abuse is neither restricted or carelessness has been attached. Usually, the first experience produces a state of arousal such as happiness and pleasure which motivate further abuse. This is always liable to addiction.
ii. Peer Group Influence: This plays a major role in pushing a number of adolescents into drug abuse. Thus, peer pressure is a fact of teenage and
youth life. And, it is what the psychologists believed as the most delicate and dangerous age one passes through.
iii. Lack of parental supervision: Part of parenting style is their carelessness to adequately and appropriately supervise their children. Some parents have little or no interaction with family members to caution the psychological effect and external pressures mounted on their children.
iv. The Need for Extra Energy: This behaviour is most common among labourers to work for long hours. The primary motive is to minimize cost and maximize profit for personal economic motives/gains.
v. Prevention of Withdrawal symptoms Occurrence: This is most common among the addicted willing to withdraw from the drug abuse circle. Hence, “withdrawal symptoms” arise when drug abuse is stopped. These include; pain, anxiety, excessive sweating, convulsion, delusions and death. These symptoms disallow these addicts to discontinue.
vi. Availability of the Drugs: Market availability readily for abusers is the backbone of a habitual perpetuation of drug abuse menace. In many countries including Nigeria, drug business is the most profitable which make marketers and abusers hard to quit the circle. [
The Effects of Drug Abuse
A number of effects were established by a number of researches. One of the alluring studies is that of Mba (2008). The author summarized drug abuse negative effects as: i. Physical Effects: Consist of liver cirrhosis, pancreatic, peptic ulcer,
hypertension, neurological disorder, tuberculosis, etc. and
ii. Mental Effects: Largely consist of retardation, growth deformity, nervous system deficiency, delayed motor development, amnesia and dementia among others.
Also, it has been established that, drugs are widely being abused across the globe. A
1996 UK survey reported in Watt (1997) found that over 5 million people used cannabis, 1 million amphetamines, 900,000 LSD and over 500,000 ecstasies. This is an indication that, toward the end of 20th century, a number of countries incur certain economic effects due to drug abuse incidences which appeared scary for any socio- economic development.
In another study, it was indicated that, the cost of impounded illicit drugs range between $108 and $171million. In this course, the most common drug identified was cannabis. In addition, the socioeconomic impact of the relationship between drugs and crime was determined to have claimed $268.4 million (Fernandez, 2012). This is disastrous considering the dwindling socio-economic effects over different time periods that still prevail across nations.
Sutherland et al., (2015)found that, drug abuse correlates with property and violent offending. In some earlier studies in the 1990s, it was revealed that, Afghanistan has become a major transit region for opiates. Similarly Russia has become the main heroine domain. This serves as a combination of conducive geographical and political-economic factors that contributed to make the region a fertile ground for the establishment of drug trafficking activities. Hence, political and criminal actors connive in the establishment of favourable routes vis-à-vis crime nexus (De Danieli,
Alcohol as another drug has potentials of being abused by criminal offenders. In another analysis, the drug was at best interpreted as a contributing factor to the commitment of crimes (Zimmerman & Benson, 2007). Similarly, the most three commonly abused drugs associated with drugs–crime connection in another study are heroin, crack and cocaine. This means that, these drugs are established to be the most dangerous in human life considering the modern developments currently being faced(Bennett, Holloway, & Farrington, 2008).
Another result on drug abuse in Vancouver and Montreal indicated that, heroin usage is not connected to perpetration of violent offences. Meanwhile, cannabis play a vital role in this course (Lasnier, Brochu, Boyd, & Fischer, 2010). As a topic of public concern, the general assumption is that drug addiction might have some causal effects on increasing crime rates. The conclusion of the econometric panel analysis indicated that, many drug users are more likely to face incessant arrests and incarcerations (Entorf & Winker, 2008).
In a nutshell, drug abuse is seen as a problem that is causing serious concern to both individuals and government the world over. It is prevalent among adolescents who in most cases are ignorant about the inherent dangers in drug abuse. Many of the abusers engage in the act out of frustration, poverty, lack of parental supervision, peer influence, pleasure, etc. However, with effective counselling programme, the problems can be tackled (Oluremi, 2012). Based on this literature, the following hypotheses were developed.
Many theories were developed to explain societal social issues. In an attempt to indicate how peer influence, parenting style, broken homes, and law enforcement
corruption influence personality maladjustment and subsequently drug abuse, the paper adopts social bond (control) theory developed by Travis Hirschi in 1969. He links the onset of criminality to the weakening of the ties that bind people to society. Hirschi assumes that all individuals are potential law violators, but they are kept under control because they fear that illegal behaviour will damage their relationship with friends, parents, neighbours, teachers and employers. Without these social ties or bonds, a person is free to commit criminal acts: On this basis therefore, he identified four fundamental elements of social bond, weakness of which pushes individuals to deviate.
1. Attachment: Refers to a person sensitivity to and interest in others. Without this, a person becomes a psychopath and loses ability to relate to the world. Parents, friends, and schools are important institutions which a person should maintain ties with.
2. Commitment: Involves time, energy, and effort expended in conventional line of action. If people build a strong commitment to conventional society, they will be less likely to engage in acts that will jeopardize their hard –won position. Conversely, lack of commitment to conventional values may foreshadow a condition in which crime becomes a reasonable behaviour alternative.
3. Involvement: Heavy involvement in conventional activities leaves little time for illegal behaviour. When people become involved in school, recreation, and family, Hirschi believes it insulates them from the potential lure of criminal behaviour, whereas idleness enhances it.
4. Belief: People who live in the same social setting often share a common moral belief. If these beliefs are absent or weakened, individuals are more
likely to participate in anti social or illegal acts.
Looking at these theoretical principles, it can be clearly understood that, poor or absence of attachment, commitment, involvement and belief leave individuals with unguided effects of peer influence, parenting style, broken homes and allows law enforcement corruption to dominate. Consequently, personality maladjustment characterises individuals’ life and subsequently to drug abuse behaviour.
H1: Peer group influence has a direct positive effect on personality maladjustment of drug abuser.
H2: Parenting style has a direct positive effect on drug abuser’s personality
H3: Broken homes have a direct positive effect on drug abuser’s personality
H4: Law enforcement corruption has a direct positive effect on drug abuser’s
H5: Personality maladjustment incurred always push individual to drug abuse. H6: Peer group influence has a direct positive effect on individual’s drug abuse. H7: Parenting style has a direct positive effect on a person’s drug abuse.
H8: Broken homes have a direct effect on individual’s drug abuse potentialities.
H9: Law enforcement corruption has a direct effect on individual’s drug abuse
H10: Peer group influence has an indirect effect on individual’s drug abuse. H11: Parenting style has an indirect effect on individual’s drug abuse.
H12: Broken homes have an indirect effect on individual’s drug abuse potentialities. H13: Law enforcement corruption has an indirect effect on individual’s drug abuse.
The study is purely quantitative. Three hundred and twenty (320) drug abusers were selected using purposive sampling technique. This was adopted because; the sampling frame was not readily available (Chakraborty, 2009). In each of the eight (8) local government areas making up the study area, two (2) drug abuse joints were visited. In each of these joints, twenty (20) respondents were interviewed. Therefore, forty (40) respondents represent each of these local governments. The mode of administering the questionnaire consists of both self and researcher’s administrative approaches. This was employed because; the literacy levels of the respondents vary. Table 1 presents a summary of this information. The analysis was done utilising variance based structural equation modelling smart M2.0 (VB-PLS-SEM) software.
Table 1: Research Sample Description
LGA Joints No. of Respondents
Municipal i. Hauren Balago (filin Joker) 20 ii. Filin kofar Na’isa 20
Gwale i. Mandawari/Dandago/Hausawa 20 ii. Kofar Kabuga 20
Dala i. Filin Dalar Gyada 20 ii. Mayanka 20
Fagge i. Riga primary school 20 ii. Kurna primary school 20
Nassarawa i. Kaura Goje 20 ii. Kawon Kudu 20
Tarauni i. Unguwa Uku 20 ii. Marhaba Cinema 20
Kumbotso i. Sheka Qarshen Kwalta 20 ii. Fanshekara primary 20
Ungogo i Ungogo Kasuwa 20 ii Kwanar Fanisau 20
Total 16 320
The modelled studied variables comprise of peer group influence, parenting style, broken homes and law enforcements corruption as the independent variables. Personality maladjustment is the model’s mediator. Owing to these collective
factors, individuals are pushed to drug abuse behaviour as the model’s dependent
A PLS Paths Modelling of Urban Kano Drug Abuse Incidence
The model comprised of measurement and the structural sub models. The measurement model consists of latent and their manifest variables’ relationships. On the other hand, the structural model contains only latent variables’ relationships (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Figure 1 represents the algorithm graph with PLS parameter estimates.
Figure1: Algorithm Graph with Parameter Estimates of PLS Analysis
Assessment of the Measurement Model
This evaluation establishes the indicators’ reliability and constructs’ accuracy (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2014). That is to confirm, items used in measuring the constructs are reliable and the constructs are valid for further analysis. [
(a) Reliability Analysis
PLS-SEM prioritized Composite Reliability that depicts individual item’s reliability rather than their collectivity. Therefore, items or indicators offer a better variance
estimate shared by respective manifest variables. As a thumb rule, Composite reliability coefficients must have a minimum of 0.7, while on the other hand, individual indicator reliability coefficients must have a minimum of 0.5 (0.708)2 (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2014). Indicator reliability coefficients are obtained as the squared values of the individual outer loading of each indicator. The presentation in Table 2 indicated that, both coefficients have complied with the thumb rule depicting that, all indicators are reliable.
(b) Construct Validity
Convergent and discriminant validities are examined. The former is examined through the outer/main loadings of the manifest variables and the average variance extracted (AVE). On the other hand, the latter is assessed by examining the cross loadings of the indicators using most commonly utilised method of Fornell-Larcker Criterion.
(b) (i) Convergent Validity
Hair, Hult, Ringle and Sarstedt (2014) suggested 0.7 as the minimum outer loading coefficient. Considering the average variance extracted (AVE) that measures the amount of variance captured by the indicators relative to the measurement error, its coefficients must be 0.50 (0.7082) or higher. The presentation in Table 2 portrays that, all outer loadings and AVE coefficients achieved the minimum coefficient requirement across all scholarly arguments.
Table. 2: Parameter Estimates of the Measurement Model
LV MV Main Loading IR CR CA AVE BRH brh2 0.789 0.623 0.834 0.722 0.626
brh4 0.803 0.645
brh5 0.780 0.608
DRA dra1 0.809 0.809 0.873 0.806 0.634 dra2 0.706 0.500
dra3 0.858 0.736 dra4 0.804 0.646
LEC lec3 0.766 0.587 0.806 0.529 0.676 lec4 0.875 0.766
PGI pgi1 0.923 0.852 0.872 0.714 0.773 pgi4 0.833 0.694
PRS prs2 0.888 0.789 0.812 0.551 0.685 prs3 0.763 0.582
PSM psm3 0.745 0.555 0.904 0.836 0.760 psm4 0.941 0.885
psm5 0.917 0.841
LV = latent variable, MV= manifest variable, IR = indicator reliability, CR =
composite reliability, CA = Cronbach Alpha, AVE = average variance extracted
(b) (ii) Discriminant Validity
This implies that, a construct is unique and captures phenomena not represented by other varying constructs in the model. To achieve discriminant validity, the square root of the AVE of each construct should be higher than the construct’s highest correlation with any other construct in the model. Therefore, the AVE square roots are compared with the latent variables’ correlation coefficients. The figures in bold in Table 3 (AVE square roots) are all greater than each of the coefficients on which they have been placed. This indicates that, discriminant validity has been fully achieved (Hair, Hult, Ringle and Sarstedt, 2014). Therefore, all the constructs are proved valid for further analysis.
Table.3: Discriminant Validity: Fornell-Larcker Criterion
BRH DRA LEC PGI PRS PSM BRH 0.791
DRA 0.195 0.796
LEC 0.129 0.337 0.822
PGI 0.161 0.215 0.019 0.879
PRS 0.067 0.221 0.264 -0.081 0.828
PSM 0.156 0.280 0.202 0.159 0.100 0.872
Diagonals (in bold) represent square roots of AVE while off diagonals represent correlations. BRH = Broken homes, DRA = Drug Abuse, LEC = law enforcement corruption, PGI = Peer group influence, PRS = Parenting style, PSM = Personality maladjustment.
Assessment of the Structural Model
Four issues are evaluated; path coefficient (β); coefficient of determination (R2);
effect size (�2) and predictive relevance (�2).
(a) Structural Model Paths Coefficients for Hypotheses Testing
These consist of direct and indirect effects between the latent variables in the model. Urbach and Ahlemann (2010) argued that, paths coefficients should exceed 0.1 to account for a strong impact within the model. As such, the significance levels were set at p< .10 with critical value 1.65 (significance level = 10%), p< .05 with critical value 1.96 (significance level = 5%) and also, p< .01 with critical value 2.57 (significance level = 1%). The confidence levels are therefore, 90%, 95% and 99% respectively. The statistical details of both direct and indirect effects are contained in Tables 4 and 5, while the bootstrapping graph effect is presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2: A 5000 sample bootstrap effect graph
(a) (i) Direct Effects
This indicates a direct relationship between the independent, mediating and the dependent variables in the model. As depicted in figure 2 above, the regression explained the effects of independent to mediating, mediating to dependent and independent to dependent variables. Table 4 shows that, peer group influence (PGI), has a direct positive effect on personality maladjustment (PSM) (β = 0.144, p< .01, t
= 2.620). Parenting style (PRS) does not have any effect on personality maladjustment (PSM) (β = 0.059, p< .10, t = 0.947). Broken homes (BRH) has a direct positive effect on personality maladjustment (PSM) (β = 0.107, p< .05, t =
1.997). Law enforcement corruption (LEC) has a direct positive effect on personality maladjustment (PSM) (β = 0.170, p< .01, t = 2.689). Personality maladjustment as a mediator has a direct positive effect on drug abuse (β = 0.171, p< .01, t = 3.103). Therefore, H1, H3, H4 and H5 are strongly supported while H2 is not.
Similarly, peer group influence (PGI), has a direct positive effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.179, p< .01, t = 3.917). Parenting style (PRS) has a direct effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.147, p< .01, t = 2.597). Broken homes (BRH) has a direct effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.098, p< .10, t = 1.881). Law enforcement corruption (LEC) has a direct positive effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.247, p< .01, t =
3.796).Hence, H6, H7, H8 are strongly supported while H9 is weakly supported.
Table.4: Direct Effect for One tail Hypotheses Testing
Hyp Path Beta SE p value t value Decision H1 PGI -> PSM 0.144 0.055 0.005 2.620*** Supported
H2 PRS -> PSM 0.059 0.063 0.172 0.947(ns) Not supported
H3 BRH -> PSM 0.107 0.054 0.023 1.997** Supported H4 LEC -> PSM 0.170 0.063 0.004 2.689*** Supported H5 PSM -> DRA 0.171 0.055 0.001 3.103*** Supported H6 PGI -> DRA 0.179 0.046 0.000 3.917*** Supported H7 PRS -> DRA 0.147 0.056 0.005 2.597*** Supported H8 BRH -> DRA 0.098 0.052 0.030 1.881* Supported H9 LEC -> DRA 0.247 0.065 0.000 3.796*** Supported
Beta = regression weight, SE = standard error, t values are computed through bootstrapping standard procedure of 5000 sub samples and 320 cases, p values obtained in excel “TDIST(t value;df;tails)” significance at *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p
(a) (ii) Indirect Effects
To establish an indirect relationship, Baron and Kenny (1986) argued:
i. The predictor (independent) variable (X) must have effect on the mediating variable (M).
ii. The predictor (independent) variable (X) must also significantly influence the criterion variable (Y).
iii. The mediator (M) must significantly influence the criterion (dependent) variable (Y) when predictor (independent) variable (X) is also included in the regression equation.
McKinnon, (2008) added that, the path coefficients shrunk when a mediator is introduced between the predictor (independent) and criterion (dependent) variables.
That is why, all the Beta (β) indirect coefficients in Table 5 are lower compared with the direct paths’ in Table 4. Thus, the presentation in Table 6 indicates that, peer group influence (PGI) has an indirect effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.025, p< .10, t = 1.894). Parenting style (PRS) does not possess any indirect effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.010, p< .10, t = 0.923). Also, broken homes (BRH) indicates no indirect effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β = 0.018, p< .10, t = 1.530). However, law enforcement corruption (LEC) has an indirect effect on drug abuse (DRA) (β =
0.029, p< .10, t = 1.938).Thus, H10 and H13 are supported while H111 and H12 are
Table. 5: Indirect Effect for Two tail Hypotheses Testing
Hyp Path Beta SE p value t value Decision H10 PGI -> PSM->DRA 0.025 0.013 0.059 1.894* Supported
H11 PRS ->PSM->DRA 0.010 0.011 0.356 0.923 Not Supported
H12 BRH->PSM->DRA 0.018 0.012 0.127 1.530 Not Supported
H13 LEC ->PSM->DRA 0.029 0.015 0.054 1.938* Supported
Beta = regression weight, SE = standard error, t values are computed through bootstrapping standard procedure of 5000 sub samples and 320 cases, p values obtained in excel “TDIST(t value;df;tails)” significance at *p < .10.
(b) Coefficient of Determination (�2)
This is a measure of model’s predictive accuracy. It represents the exogenous latent variables’ combined effects on the endogenous latent variable(s). There is no specified rule for its acceptability as lower �2 values make substantial impact especially in social science researches (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2014). In the structural model as presented in figure 1 above, three exogenous variables; peer group influence, broken homes and law enforcement corruption explained 8.0% of variance in personality maladjustment. On the other hand, personality maladjustment, peer group influence, parenting style, broken homes and law enforcement corruption explained 22.1% variance in drug abuse.
(c) Effect Size (𝒇2)
The substantive impact of exogenous construct on the endogenous constructs is measured by means of Cohen’s (�2) formula when the former is omitted from the model (Cohen, 1988). Effect size is substantiated by the following formula.
[�2 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙�𝑠𝑖�� − �2 �𝑥𝑐𝑙�𝑠𝑖��]
[1 − �2 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙�𝑠𝑖��]
R2Inclusive = Variance explained coefficient when the variable is included in the model.
R2Exclusive = Variance explained coefficient when the variable is excluded
1 = constant
In this analysis, five effect sizes were computed; four independent and one mediating variables’ effects sizes. Chin (2010), argued that, in Social Science oriented researches, 2% effect sizes are small but acceptable, 5-10% moderate, while 11% and above are substantial. The effect sizes are presented in Table 6. It consists of three small, one weak and one moderate effect.
Table. 6: Effect Size
2 2 Effect (� 2 ) Size
PGI 0.221 0.192 0.037 Small
PRS 0.221 0.202 0.024 Small BRH 0.221 0.212 0.012 Weak LEC 0.221 0.167 0.069 moderate PSM* 0.221 0.195 0.033 moderate
*represents the mediation effect size in the model
(d) Predictive Relevance
Stone (1974) and Geisser (1975) argued that, this accurately predicts the data points of indicators in reflective measurement models of endogenous constructs. Cross- Validated Redundancy is used. It omits every dth data point in the construct‘s indicators and estimates the parameters with the remaining data points. The omission distance D is chosen between 5 and 10 so that the number of observations used in the
model estimation divided by D is not an integer (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt,
2014). In this study, nine was chosen. Following thumb rule, �2 values must be > 0. This information is presented in Table 7.
Table. 7: Predictive Relevance (�𝟐)
Number of Rounds Personality Maladjustment Drug Abuse
Case 1 0.103 0.193
Case 2 0.056 0.113
Case 3 0.082 0.142
Case 4 0.017 0.149
Case 5 0.044 0.129
Case 6 0.065 0.057
*All cases were obtained by 1- SSE/SSO using blindfolding technique. SSE = sum of squared errors.
SSO = sum of squared observations.
From these analyses, it is evident that, broken homes, peer group influence, and law enforcement corruption strongly influence personality maladjustment in drug abuser. That is to say, if divorces occur in various families, if children join bad company, and if security system becomes corrupt, a number of adolescence fall victims of abnormal personality favourable for drug abuse effects. On the other hand, parenting style has less to do with distorting individual personality. Meanwhile, personality maladjustment when occurred in individual strongly determines how he/she falls into drug abuse.
Likewise, peer group influence, parenting style and law enforcement corruption strongly push individuals to drug abuse while the effect of broken homes is not. That is to say, broken homes cause personality maladjustment but weak in resulting to drug abuse behaviour. Although the result does not indicate relationship between
parenting style and personality maladjustment, individuals directly fall into drug abuse due to poor parenting styles adopted in the family. In addition, as law enforcement corruption persists, its effects on the security system may lead to drug abuse proliferation. Building upon the previous literature on drug abuse causes (Haladu, 2003), its physical and mental effects (Mba, 2008) or its prevalence among adolescence (Oluremi, 2012), the current analyses added literature on a factorial effects/relationships among other things which have not been covered in the past studies. Apart from opening ways for further scholarly explorations, the study is sought to influence effective public management policies vis-à-vis drug abuse disaster affecting not only urban Kano but the larger population at both national and international levels.
Many issues were highlighted in this research. It has now been established that, urban Kano drug abuse menace persists across periods due to influence of numerous factors. It is vindicated that, the presently utilised management policies are weak and ineffective. The situation could be explained by weak and ineffective social ties within the population. The lackadaisical attitude is argued to be multifaceted involving community members and relevant authorities. Therefore, to achieve maximum success needed in this trend, additional strategies should be put in place to ameliorate the current dilemma amidst the public. Thus, parents, religious leaders, media houses, entertainment industry, other community members and NGOs must blend together to make this dream a reality. This should be done through the provision of an effective management of drug abuse situation which currently disturbs the public.
Abdullahi, S. A. (2003). The use of Traditional Drugs Amongst the Kano Youth: The Case of ‘Gadagi” in A. Garba (Ed) Youth and Drug Abuse in Nigeria: Strategies for Counselling, Management and Control, Kano: Matasa press.
Abdulahi, Z. (2009). Drug Abuse among youths: Strategies for school counseling”,
The Nigerian Society of Educational Psychologists, Jos: Nigeria, 131-136.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator Mediator Variable distinction in Social Psychological research: Conceptual, Strategic and Statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51, 1173-1182.
Bennett, T., Holloway, K., & Farrington, D. (2008). The statistical association between drug misuse and crime: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13(2), 107-118. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2008.02.001.
De Danieli, F. (2014). Beyond the drug-terror nexus: drug trafficking and state-crime relations in Central Asia. Int J Drug Policy, 25(6), 1235-1240. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2014.01.013.
Entorf, H., & Winker, P. (2008). Investigating the drugs–crime channel in economics of crime models.International Review of Law and Economics, 28(1), 8-22. doi:10.1016/j.irle.2007.12.004.
Fernandez, M. (2012). The socioeconomic impact of drug-related crimes in Chile.
Int J Drug Policy, 23(6), 465-472. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.03.007.
Geisser, S. (1975). The reductive samples reuse method with applications. Journal of the
American Statistical Association, 7(10), 320-328.
[Hair, J. F., Tomas, G., Hult. M., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares, Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publication.
Haladu, A.A. (2003). Outreach strategies for curbing drug abuse among out of school youth in Nigeria: A challenge for Community Based Organization (CBOS), in A. Garba (Ed). Youth and Drug Abuse In Nigeria: Strategies for Counselling, Management and Control, Kano: Matasa Press.
Hirschi, T. (1969): Causes of Delinquency (Berkley: University of California Press,
Lasnier, B., Brochu, S., Boyd, N., & Fischer, B. (2010). A Heroin Prescription Trial: Case Studies from Montreal and Vancouver on Crime and Disorder in the Surrounding Neighbourhoods, Int J Drug Policy, 21(1), 28-35. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.04.003.
Mba, A.I. (2008). “Counselling techniques for the rehabilitation of drug addicts in
Nigeria, The Counsellor, 18(1) 10-18.
McKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. Taylor & Francis Group, New York, London.
Odejide, A.O. (2000).“Research, prevention and treatment of alcohol and drug abuse in Nigeria: Problem and prospects”, Paper Presented at the 10th Anniversary Lecture of CRISA. Jos (5th October).
Oluremi F. D. (2012). Drug Abuse Among Nigerian Adolescents Strategies for
Counselling. The Journal of International Social Research, 5 (20), 341-347.
Radda S.I. (2005). A Discourse on Drug Abuse and its Consequences to the youth, a Seminar paper delivered at a 2 day conference, Theatre 1
(B.U.K) Old Site, February 2005.
Siro, A. A. (2008). A Sociological Study of Drug Abuse among the Youth in Kano Metropolis: An Unpublished MSc Dissertation submitted to the department of Sociology, Bayero University, Kano.
Siro, A. A. (2014). Drug Abuse and Political Thuggery among the Youth in Kano Metropolis: A Modern Civilization or Resource Mismanagement?Siro.pdf>. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences, 7(2), 144-163.
Stone, M. (1974). Cross – validated choice and assessment of statistical predictions.
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 36(2), 111-133.
Sullivan, T.J. and Thompson, K.S. (1994): Introduction to Social Problems
(3rd ed) New York: Macmillan publishing Company.
Sutherland, R., Sindicich, N., Barrett, E., Whittaker, E., Peacock, A., Hickey, S., & Burns, L. (2015). Motivations, substance use and other correlates amongst property and violent offenders who regularly inject drugs. Addict Behav, 45,
Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural Equation Modelling in information system using Partial Least Square. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), 5-40.
Watt, F. (1997): A Journal on Drug abuse Viewpoints; 96 Leonard Street London
EC2A First Published 1997.
Zimmerman, P. R., & Benson, B. L. (2007). Alcohol and rape: An “economics-of-
crime” perspective. International Review of Law and Economics, 27(4), 442-
Ali Ado Siro email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
Department of Criminology and Security Studies, Federal University Dutse, P.M.B.
7156, Jigawa State, Nigeria.
edited by Bappi Kabir