ABSTRACT

 

The study investigated the predictive roles of substance abuse and personality in being victim of spousal bullying among secondary school teachers. A total of 200 teachers (123 females and 87 males) were purposively selected from two secondary schools in Uyo metropolis. Simple Screening Instrument for Substance Abuse (SSI-Sa), a brief version of the Big Five Personality Inventory (BFI-10), and Intimate Partner’s Violence (IPV) Scale were used to gather data. The study was a survey, utilizing ex-post facto design. The t-test results (t (198) =-3.13, P<.05) showed that teachers who abused substances were more prone to being victims of spousal bullying than those who did not. Also, the result [R=0.217; R2=0.47; F(5, 182)=1.69, P>.05] showed that the Big Five Personality Factors did not jointly predict the incidence of being victim of spousal bullying among couples sampled. The results further showed that demographic factors jointly predicted incidences of being victims of spousal bullying, accounting for 31% of the variance observed[R=0.356; R2=.031; F(5, 182)=.34, P>.05]. It was suggested that substance abuse should be avoided among couples while personality factors should be should be considered in premarital counseling.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Contents                                                                                                                     Pages

Title page        -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           i

Certification    -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           ii

Dedication      -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           iii

Acknowledgement      -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           iv

Abstract          -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           v

Table of Contents       -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           vi

List of Tables -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           ix

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction               -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           1

Background of the Study       -           -           -           -           -           -           -           1

Statement of Problem             -           -           -           -           -           -           -           10

Purpose of the Study  -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           11

Significance of the Study       -           -           -           -           -           -           -           10

CHAPTER TWO

Review of Literature             -           -           -           -           -           -           -           13

Theoretical Review     -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           13

Empirical Review        -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           20

Operational Definition of Terms         -           -           -           -           -           -           32

Statement of Hypothesis        -           -           -           -           -           -           -           34

CHAPTER THREE

Method           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           35

Design             -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           35

Setting -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           35

Sampling Technique    -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           35

Instrument       -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           35

Procedure        -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           37

Statistics          -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           38

 

CHAPTER FOUR

Result of the Study     -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           39

 

CHAPTER FIVE

Discussion of Results             -           -           -           -           -           -           -           46

Conclusion      -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           47

Implication of Findings          -           -           -           -           -           -           -           48

Recommendation        -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           49

Limitation of the Study          -           -           -           -           -           -           -           49

Suggestion for Further Study -           -           -           -           -           -           -           50

References      -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           51

Appendices     -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           -           60

LIST OF TABLES

 

Table 1:           Table of mean and Standard Deviation          -           -           -           39

Table 2:           t-test showing summary table showing difference in proneness to

being victim of spousal bullying between couples who abuse

substances and those who do not abuse         -           -           -           42

Table 3:           Summary table of multiple regression showing relative contribution

of Big Five Personality Factors to being victim of spousal bullying  43

Table 4:           Summary table of multiple regression showing relative contributions

of demographic variables on incidences of spousal bullying              44

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Drug use and abuse have undoubtedly become one of the prevailing social ills of our modern society. The use of drugs has long been associated with several behaviours and conditions that are seen as disruptive to the normal functioning of individuals and society at large these includes, but are not limited to, increase in disease like HIV and Hepatitis and sexual risk behaviours. Temporary physical impairment leading to auto accidents, increase in frequency of partner violence, work impairment as well as substantial legal and financial burden on persons and society (Maccaule, 1995).

            Substance abuse also known as drugs abuse is a patterned use of drug in which the user consumes the substance in amounts or with methods which are harmful to themselves or others and is a form of substance related disorder, (Moore, 2008).

            Differing definitions of drugs abuse are used in public health and anti-social behaviour occurs when the person is under the influence of a drug and long term personality changes in individuals may occurs as well (Nutt & Blakemore, 2007). In addition to possible physical, social and psychological harm use of some drugs, it may also lead to criminal penalties, although these vary widely depending on the locality (Oakley &Charles, 2002).

            Drugs most often associated with this term includes; Alcohol, Barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cannabis, Cocaine, Methaquentone, Opioids, and substituted amphetamines etc. the exact cause of substance  abuse is not clear with theories include one of the two; Either a genetic disposition which if addiction develop it manifests itself as a chronic debilitating or the environment (Mosby, 2002).

            According to Jenkins (2013), there are two issues with the term “Drug Abuse” first what constitutes the word “use” standard of use for any substance. Drinking an occasional glass of wine is considered acceptable in most western countries, while drinking several bottles is seen as an abuse. Strict temperance advocates, who may or may not be religiously motivated would see drinking of even one glass as an abuse, some even condemn caffeine use in any quantity.

            Similarly, adopting the view that any recreational use of cannabis or substituted amphetamines constitutes drug abuse implies a decision made that the substance is harmful, even in minute quantities. In the United State of America, drugs have been legally classified into five categories: Schedule I, ii, iii, iv, or v in the Controlled Substance Act. The drugs are  classified on their potential for abuse, usage of some drugs is strongly correlated, for example the consumption of seven illicit drugs amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine, ecstably, nicotine, LSD, and Magic mushrooms is correlated and the Pearson Correlation Coefficient r’0.4 in every pair of them. Consumption of cannabis is strongly correlation coefficient r’0.5 with usage of nicotine (tobacco), herein correlated with cocaine r’00.4, Methadone r>0.45 and strongly correlated with Crack r>0.5. National Commission on Drug Abuse in America, 1999).

            In 1932 American Psychology Association defined the term Drug Abuse as applied to the illegal, non medical use of a limited number of substance, most of them have properties of altering the mental state in a way that are considered by social norms and defined by statute to be inappropriate, undesirable, harmful threatening  or at minimum, culture-alien (Machoney, 2009).

            In 1996, the American medical Association’s committee on Alcoholism and addiction defined abuse of stimulant in terms of medical supervision as the proper place of stimulants in medical practice “misuse” applies to the physician’s role in initiating a potentially dangerous course of therapy and abuse refers to self-administration of these drugs without medical supervision and particularly in large doses that may lead to psychological dependency, tolerance and abnormal behaviour.

            In 1973, the National Commission on Merijuana and Drugs Abuse said Drugs Abuse may be refer to any type of drug or chemical without regard to its pharmacologic actions. It is an electric concept having only one uniform connotation; societal disapproval. The commission believes that the term drug abuse must be deleted from official pronouncement and public policy dialogue.

            In 1987, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM) III recategory “Psychoactive substances abuse which includes former concepts of drug abuse is defined as a maladaptive pattern of use indicated by continued use despite knowledge of having a persistent or recurrent social, occupational, psychological or physical problem that is caused or exacerbated by the use (or big) recurrent use in situations in which it is physically hazardous. It is a residual category, with dependence taking precedence when applicable (Barry, 1989). 

An interest in personality types is quite natural, people who have several traits in common are said to have the same personality type (Potkay & Allen, 1986). Informally, it is quite common to speak of personality types; our common thinking might include famous, unique, intelligent and strongly silent type (Gallagher, 1998).

According to American Psychological Association APA (1987), personality refers to individual differences in characteristics patterns of thinking, feeling and behaviouring. It is the combination of characteristics or qualities that from an individual’s distinctive character. Personality is a set of individual characteristics that are affected by the developing of an individual values, attitudes, personal memories, social relationships habits and skills (Ryckman, 2004). Personality is what makes an individual who he/she is the individual differences in the way people tend to think, feel and behave (Pappas, 2013).

There are many ways to measure personality but psychologists have mostly focus on personality traits. The more widely accepted of these traits are the Big five personality trait which are;

-          Openness

-          Conscientiousness

-          Extraversion

-          Agreeableness

-          Neuroticism

Openness is shorthand for “openness to experience”. People who are high on enjoy adventure. They are curious and appreciate art, imagination and new things, the motto of open individual might be variety is the spice of life. People less in openness are just the opposite, they prefer to stick to their habits, avoid new experiences and probably aren’t the most adventurous eaters. Changing personality is usually considered a tough process, but openness is a personality trait that has been shown to be subject to change in adulthood.

People who are conscientious are organized and have a strong sense of duty. They are dependable, disciplined and achievement focused. A conscientious type does not of jet on round-the-world journey with only a back pack, they are planners. People low in conscientiousness are more spontaneous and free welling, they may tend toward carelessness.

Extroverts are social butterflies. Extroverts are chatty, sociable and draw energy from crowds. They tend to be assertive and cheerful in their social interactions. Shyness implies a fear of social interaction or an inability to function socially, introverts can be perfectly charming at parties. They just prefer solo or small group activities.

Agreeableness measures the extent of a person’s warmth and kindness. The more agreeable someone, is, the more likely they are to be trusting, helpful and compassionate. Disagreeable people are cold and suspicious of others and they are less likely cooperate.

            People high in neuroticism worry frequently and easily slip into anxiety and depression. If all is going well, neurotic people tends to find things to worry about. One 2012 study found that neurotic people with good salaries earned raises, the extra income actually made them less happy (Ignatius, 2013).

            In contrast, people who are low in neuroticism tend to be emotionally stable. Neuroticism is linked with plenty of bad health outcome; they die younger than the emotionally stable possible because they turn to tobacco and alcohol to ease their nerves (Stephanie, 2013).

&

---