The mean age of participants was 24.63 ± 6.24 years (range, 17-34). Among 200 participants, 95 were male (47.5%) and 105 were female (52.5%). In addition, there were 86 participants (43%) with low, 65 (32.5%) with moderate, and 49 (24.5%) with high SES. Regarding highest familial literacy level (familial literacy mode), 12 participants (6%) lived in illiterate families, 16 (8%) in families with elementary literacy, 26 (13%) in families with guidance level, 35 (17.5%) in families with diploma level, 51 (25.5%) in families with graduate level, 40 (20%) in families with bachelor level, and 20 (10%) in families with Master of Art level or higher. In terms of marriage status, 141 participants (70.5%) were single and the remaining 59 (29.5%) were married.
Firstly, before the regression analysis, results revealed no violation of the hypothesis of homoscedasticity and normality, multicollinearity/collinearity, and linearity. Collinearity statistics by tolerance was between 0.69 and one and by variance inflation factor (VIF) was between one and 1.51. In addition, Durbin-Watson statistic for rejecting the hypothesis of residual correlates was equivalent to 2.52. These figures showed that hypothesis of linear regression were established. Correlation matrix among determinants and criterion variable and mean ± SD of continuous variables are presented in
Table 1.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|
| Attitude to substance abuse | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Male | 0.21 a | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Literacy | -0.07 | 0.20 a | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Marriage status | 0.08 | 0.07 | -0.26 b | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Socio-economic status | -0.25 b | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.06 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Age | 0.05 | -0.20 a | -0.35 b | 0.50 b | -0.07 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Neuroticism | 0.49 b | 0.06 | -0.05 a | -0.08 | -0.20 a | -0.07 | - | - | - | - |
| Extraversion | -0.25 b | -0.06 | -0.07 | -0.09 | 0.17 a | -0.15 a | -0.46 b | - | - | - |
| Openness | -0.43 b | 0.05 | -0.07 | 0.12 a | 0.14 a | 0.18 a | -0.21 a | 0.08 | - | - |
| Agreeableness | -0.54 b | 0.13 a | -0.08 | -0.17 a | 0.06 | -0.16 a | -0.41 b | 0.54 b | 0.19 a | - |
| Conscientiousness | -0.53 b | 0.12 a | -0.09 | 0.06 | 0.08 | -0.07 | -0.46 b | 0.39 b | 0.12 a | 0.52 b |
Regarding the associations of positive ASA in university students with Big Five personality traits, the Pearson correlation coefficients revealed the followings: association of positive ASA with neuroticism, r = 0.49, and P = 0.001; extraversion, r = -0.25, and P = 0.001; openness, r = -0.43, and P = 0.001; agreeableness, r = -0.54, and P = 0.001; and conscientiousness, r = -0.53, and P = 0.001. Moreover, there was a statistically significant correlation between positive ASA and categorical predictors of sex (r = 0.21 and P < 0.01) as well as SES (r = -0.25 and P < 0.001) (
Table 2).
| Attitude to Substance Abuse | Neuroticism | Extraversion | Openness | Agreeableness | Conscientiousness |
|---|
| Results | 84.90 ± 10.17 | 24.31 ± 7.05 | 27.32 ± 7.11 | 24.08 ± 4.67 | 29.22 ± 6.20 | 31.17 ± 8.61 |
a Data are presented as Mean ± SD.
Significant predictors were introduced in six steps into the linear regression model with stepwise method. Agreeableness was entered at first step that explained 42% of the variation in positive ASA (F1, 198 = 81.20, P < 0.001). In the step 2, agreeableness and conscientiousness were entered in the model, which explained 49% of the variation (F2, 197 = 59.27, P < 0.001). In the step 3, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism were entered in the regression model that communally explained 56% of the variation (F3, 196 = 47.15, P < 0.001). In the step 4, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness were entered in this model that collectively explained 62% of the variation (F4, 195 = 39.58, P < 0.001). In the step 5, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness, and SES were entered in the regression model that totally explained 68% of the variation (F5, 194 = 34.44, P < 0.001). At the final model (step 6), agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness, SES, and sex were entered in the regression model that totally explained 73% of variation in positive ASA in this sample of university students (F6, 193 = 30.51, P < 0.001). Thus, total variation that was generally explained by this model was 61% (R
2 = 0.03, F change 6, 193 = 6.212, and P < 0.004). Coefficients of regression model in prediction of positive ASA are presented in
Table 3.
| B | SEB | β | t | P Value |
|---|
| Step 1 | | | | | |
|---|
| Agreeableness | -3.347 | 0.360 | -0.56a | -9.01 | < 0.001 |
| Step 2 | | | | | |
| Agreeableness | - 2.814 | 0.383 | -0.40a | -6.70 | < 0.001 |
| Conscientiousness | - 2.055 | 0.304 | -0.36 b | -6.17 | < 0.001 |
| Step 3 | | | | | |
| Agreeableness | -2.377 | 0.381 | -0.34 a | -4.909 | < 0.001 |
| Conscientiousness | -2.124 | 0.308 | -0.28 b | -3.869 | < 0.001 |
| Neuroticism | 1.916 | 0.339 | 0.26 c | 3.832 | < 0.001 |
| Step 4 | | | | | |
| Agreeableness | -2.248 | 0.377 | -0.31 a | -4.50 | < 0.001 |
| Conscientiousness | -1.891 | 0.305 | -0.31 b | -4.34 | < 0.001 |
| Neuroticism | 1.807 | 0.336 | 0.24 c | 3.41 | < 0.001 |
| Openness | -1.410 | 416 | -0.20 c | -3.19 | < 0.001 |
| Step 5 | | | | | |
| Agreeableness | -2.003 | 0.372 | -0.30 b | -4.56 | < 0.001 |
| Conscientiousness | -1.668 | 0.301 | -0.29 b | -4.41 | < 0.001 |
| Neuroticism | 1.120 | 0.334 | 0.21 c | 3.03 | < 0.002 |
| Openness | -1.234 | 0.323 | -0.19 c | -2.97 | < 0.003 |
| Socio-Economic Status | -2.275 | 1.051 | -0.18 c | -2.84 | < 0.005 |
| Step 6 | | | | | |
| Agreeableness | -2.194 | 0.299 | -0.29 b | -4.43 | < 0.001 |
| Conscientiousness | -1.150 | 0.285 | -0.22 c | -4.26 | < 0.001 |
| Neuroticism | 0.953 | 0.232 | 0.20 c | 3.24 | < 0.002 |
| Openness | -0.901 | 0.308 | -0.18 c | -2.92 | < 0.003 |
| Socio-Economic Status | -2.874 | 1.103 | -0.18 c | -2.90 | < 0.004 |
| Sex | -3.007 | 1.812 | -0.15 a | -2.49 | < 0.004 |
a P < 0.001.
b P < 0.01.
c P < 0.05.
Six variables of agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness, SES, and sex significantly predicted the positive ASA. In this regression model by stepwise method, R2 was 0.42, 0.49, 0.56, 0.62, 0.68, and 0.73 for steps one through six, consecutively. In addition, R2 was equal to 0.12, 0.09, 0.06, 0.04, and 0.03 for step two through six, consecutively (P < 0.05). In this model, the variable of extraversion was excluded and did not have significant role in prediction of the ASA in university students (P > 0.05).