Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder - Research Paper Example

Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Introduction Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most diagnosed disorders in children between the ages of four and seventeen. Half of these cases have been prescribed stimulants to treat the disorder. As abuse with the medications were foreseen due to their commonality, the US Drug Enforcement Administration classified the stimulants as Schedule II substances (Woodworth, 2000). It is because of this that prompted researches to investigate the illegal use of these substances on American college campuses, which led to the discovery that the substances are indeed abused amongst students during certain times of the school year. The research problem was to see whether or not college students on American campuses illegally used prescription ADHD medications (Fritsvold et al, 2009). As these medications are fairly easy to come by - whether obtained illegally or prescribed without proper evaluations for ADHD. The researchers justified the scope of this issue as the illegal use of prescription medications has become an increased problem, especially amongst college students (Noar et al, 2008). It is vital to understand how many students partake in such illegal activities, as well as why they do so. The purpose of the research, as well as its hypothesis, were communicated clearly and concisely. The purpose of the research was to determine how many college students make use of illegally obtained prescription medication designated for the use of the treatment of ADHD. The hypothesis was that the use of prescription ADHD medications that were illegally obtained is quite common among college students, though ethnicity would be one of the greater determining factors, followed by the motivation for taking the drugs. The hypothesis of this study was directional as the researchers clearly made it known that they expected to find a relationship between ethnicity and motivation in regard to the illegal use of ADHD medications. There was no rationale given for the manner in which the hypothesis was stated. The hypothesis was also stated as a research hypothesis, finding relationships between the factors involved in the study. Strengths and limitations One of the biggest strengths of the study was that it focused on a variety of reasons as to why college students on American campuses illegally use ADHD medications. The researchers not only looked at academic issues, but they made sure to focus some of the effort of the study on issues unrelated to academia, most of which surrounded the social lives of the college students. Another strength was that students in varying levels of college made up the sample population of the study; undergraduates and graduates, and freshman through seniors were all studied. This provided a wider scope of understanding why ADHD medications were common among college students. One of the weaknesses of the study was the ethnic assumption that white and Latino students would misuse the medications more than African Americans or Asians. This greatly limited the study as more white and Latino students were involved in the research than other ethnicities. Furthermore, there was little to no reasoning as to why the ethnicities played roles in the research, or what the expectations were in regard to the outcomes of the use of ethnicity. If certain aspects of the research are not going to be explained or justified, then they have no purpose in the research. This is also regardless of the results of the research. Another limitation was the realization that the information had been taken from just one school, and that results would otherwise vary based on other schools around the United States and their competition in regard to other colleges (McCabe et al, 2006). However, the information does set up a foundation for other schools. The researchers should have taken into consideration during their research some of the methods of obtainment of the prescription medications. The study focused on students that had been diagnosed with ADHD being the sole suppliers for their fellow peers. It is curious to know how many of these students obtained their medications in other ways, such as faulty diagnoses, or taking them from another person off of campus. As the study has to deal with the obtainment and use of the prescriptions, it is fairly limited in the obtainment aspect. Indeed, those part of the sample population that had legal prescriptions were removed from the research. The interpretations of the results are consistent with the results themselves, with the exception of the purpose of ethnicity. 34% of the sample population admitted to using prescriptions illegally, which is larger than originally expected (Babcock & Byrne, 2000); this number was then split up to show the percentages of males and females, the various college grade levels, and even those in fraternities or sororities. The results were then split up in regard to usage, most of which had very little to do with academics, which had been an assumption from the start. The evidence offered by the researchers in support of these interpretations includes the surveys and interviews that were undergone to conduct the study, thus coming upon the conclusions of the study. As aforementioned, one of the generalizations that were not warranted on the basis of the sample used dealt with the ethnicity of the students. While the results of the study included a separate portion for ethnicity, the assumptions made had not been correct, nor were there reasons as to why ethnicity was thought to play a role in terms of who would or would not use illegally obtained ADHD medications. No connection was made between academics, prescription usage, social lives, and ethnicity; the latter aspect served no purpose in the overall study. The researchers offered implications of the research for practical purposes, most of which involve determining the likelihood of a college student misusing prescriptions for ADHD. They also offered up a list of reasons, all gained from the study, as to why students misuse the medications and what they hope to get out of using the medications. Finally, the researchers make it clear the ease of obtaining these medications, making them some of the most easily obtainable pills circulating college campuses. Ethical purposes There was no deception presented in the study. The roles that the sample population played were made clear prior to the start of the study. The students involved knew what was required of them and why. Due to the subject matter of the study, safeguard steps were undergone to ensure anonymity and unbiased responses from the researchers. The participants were allowed to back out of the study if they felt too uncomfortable with the subject matter or procedures; those that did participate were kept anonymous to avoid potential consequences of their actions. Furthermore, students were allowed to not answer questions that they were uncomfortable with, though many of these were thrown out for students that had opted to complete the research portion of the study. In regard to the interviews, all data was deleted after the transcripts were formed to continue the anonymity for the participants. The university’s institutional review board’s human subjects committee approved all quantitative and qualitative methods for the study to ensure that ethics were the primary concern of the sample population. There was no coercion or undue influences used in recruiting the participants. Those that were chosen were allowed to say no or back out of the study. Students were chosen unbiasedly to help move the study forward by having an assortment of participants. The study was a cross-sectional study as it involved observing a population - or sample population - at a specific time, which would be during the survey and interview stages of the study. The study used an appropriate amount of points of data collection, offering a wide variety of characteristics and possible results for the study. These data collection points were later viewed as comparisons between gender, level of college education, and reasons and purposes for using and obtaining illegal ADHD medication. Again, these comparisons gave the study the opportunity to present many different results and conclusions for the study. The methodology used consisted of quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews, all of which were justifiable. The surveys allowed the researchers to ask the questions or provide their subjects with the statements and topics that were relevant to the study (Creswell, 2008). The in-depth interviews that were then conducted helped to achieve the same thing, except that they allowed the interviewers to collect broader data. These two methods made it possible for the student samples to remain on topic and offer up only the information that the researchers felt were valid to the study. It is because of these two data collecting methods that the study is externally valid. The researchers took an assumption and turned it into a hypothesis, then went about collecting the needed information from their sample group. The students, being surveyed and interviewed directly, gave the accurate information needed to continue conducting the study. The limitations of the study were acknowledged by the researchers. Between the surveys and the interviews, the researchers were unable to properly collect enough information in regard to users’ behaviors, and their conceptions and choices, which put a slight strain on the conclusions of the study. While researchers were able to determine the commonality of illegal obtainment and use of ADHD medications on American college classes, the majority of the sample population remained mum on some of the finer details of their reasons and experiences with the medications. One limitation that was not acknowledged by the researchers but still exists is the lack of understanding of the ways of people who actually have prescriptions for ADHD medication. Though their medications were clearly not illegally obtained, they are still capable of abusing the medications or selling them to others. These students presented a different side to the study, one that had the potential to be relevant to the study. Another limitation that was not acknowledged was the purpose behind the relevance of ethnicity, which was not touched upon after its initial introduction to the study. If there had been a purpose behind this aspect, perhaps it could have altered the results or conclusions of the study. Unfortunately, the researchers did not acknowledge this lack of information as a limitation. Sampling designs The sampling plan used was adequate in that it involved a large variety of students, all with various characteristics and levels of education, which provided a unique array of sampling for the study. In essence, there were very few students that had similar characteristics, showing the diversity of the situation surrounding the illegal obtainment and use of ADHD medications. The sampling plan included males and females, the different educational levels of college (undergraduate and graduate), students that were part of fraternities or sororities, and whether or not the medications were used for academic or nonacademic reasons. The only bias identified in the study was done so by the researchers themselves, and this involved whether or not the students actually had a prescription for the ADHD medications (Blachford, 2002). However, this was not decided upon until the researchers realized that some of their sample population legally had prescriptions for these medications. Once they determined that legal prescriptions would not play a part in the study, they let go of those sample students. Afterwards, they made sure that students did not have a prescription for ADHD medications before continuing the surveys and interviews. A bias that was not identified by the researchers but existed nonetheless was the overall use of white and Latino students for the study, which was done based on the assumption that white and Latino students would misuse the medication more than any other ethnicity. The white and Latino populations were overwhelming in comparison to the other ethnicities used in the study. This made it seem that the researchers were trying to force their assumptions to have a relationship with the hypothesis, and that white and Latino students were more likely to use these medications. This could be accomplished by having more of specific ethnicities and less of others. Data quality The method used to estimate the reliability was similar to that of the Kuder-Richardson method, which involves measuring the consistency of each item in question during the study. This method was accurate as it required the researchers to ask the same questions and display the same statements to the entire sample population, and then determine the consistency of each answer or response. This helped to find a relationship between the hypothesis, the assumptions, and the potential result of the study. Though the report does not provide evidence of the validity of the measures, the data collection tools themselves - the surveys and interviews - provided the information needed straight from the sample population. Surveys and interviews are among the most useful tools of measurement in research studies due to their ability to pinpoint the precise information that is needed the continue the conduction of the study. However, despite the validity of the measures, there is still the chance that the data provided through the measures is incorrect. The trustworthiness of the data in this study is questionable, given the possibilities that some students may have lied during their surveys or interviews to avoid possible trouble if they were believed to be using illegally obtained medications. There could also have been cases of answers being given based on what the sample student believed the researcher or interviewer wanted to hear. There was truly no way of knowing or confirming the trustworthiness of the data, with the exception of comparing behavioral results between students. Analyses The results of the test had been significant, showing, for the most part, what researchers believed in regard to their hypothesis. There is a vast majority of American campus college students that misuse ADHD medication for a variety of reasons. Though it was believed that this was the case to begin with, the final results of the study came back with more than a quarter of the sample population had used, at one time or another, illegally obtained medication designated for ADHD sufferers. These results related back to the initial research question of whether or not there was a relationship between college students and the use of ADHD medications. The themes that emerged from the data were that students used ADHD medications more for academic purposes and less for purposes outside of academics; males were more likely to use than females, though these numbers were fairly close to one another; those involved in fraternities or sororities were more likely to use the illegally obtained drugs. Contrary to the beliefs of the researchers, while the white population did use the drugs more than others, they also largely comprised the group of people that did not use the drugs. The context of all of these phenomenon were adequately described in the extensive results portion of the report. Integrated designs The research design was described in detail, with the researchers explaining the purposes of their research tools, as well as what they hoped to accomplish with these methods. The quantitative data was collected by means of a survey that questioned demographics as well as the usage of ADHD-designated medications. The qualitative data was collected through in-depth interviews, which focused more on why the participants used the drugs. The surveys had been handed out to lecture-hall classes to provide a larger population, and the interviews, which were conducted by other students, were read from a script to ensure proper data. Data collection procedures During the survey, other students were present when the data was collected as the survey had been done as part of a class requirement. The survey took place in the lecture-hall of the college during the spring semester, when more students were in attendance. The interview only consisted of the person conducting the interview and the student they were interviewing. The collection of data may or may not have placed undue burdens, though nothing was outlined in the report. Some students may have answered based on what they thought the researchers wanted to hear, or they might have lied about their position to the study to avoid possible repercussions. Some of the data might be inaccurate for these reasons, causing the researchers information that might be contradicting to the research question. Conclusion It was believed that college students on American campuses would illegally obtain and use medication designated for sufferers of ADHD. The study undergone helped to prove the truth behind this assumption. The subjects came from all walks of college life. The results of the study revealed that approximately 34% of students on American campuses use ADHD medications to help with memory, concentration, or other academic purposes; some of the sample population also admitted to using the drug to increase drunkenness or to make life and work a little more interesting. References Babcock, Q., & Byrne, T. (2000). Student perceptions of methylphenidate abuse at a public liberal arts college. J Am College Health, 49, 143-145. Blachford, S. L. (2002). Drugs and controlled substances for students. Chicago: Thomson Gale. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Third Edition ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. Fritsvold, E. D., & Mohamed, A. R. (2009). Dorm room dealers: Drugs and the Privileges of race and class. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers. McCabe, S., Knight, J., Teter, C., & Wechsler, H. (2006). Non-medical use of prescription stimulants among US college students: prevalence and correlates from a national survey. Addiction, 99, 96-106. Noar, S., Webb, E., & DeSantis, A. (2008). Illicit use of prescription ADHD medications on a college campus: A multimethodological approach. Journal of American College Health, 57(3), 315-323. Woodworth, T. (2000, May 16). DEA Congressional Testimony. Drug Enforcement Agency. Retrieved September 12, 2010, from http://www.dea.gov/pubs/cngrtest/ct051600.htm Read More