Pengukuran Implicit Association terhadap Istilah yang Berkaitan dengan Narkoba pada Kelompok Remaja Beresiko
Abstract
Abstract. This study aims to determine the level of implicit association with the terms narkoba, NAPZA, pecandu, and penyalahguna in at-risk adolescent groups. The study employs a quantitative method tested on 11 adolescent participants using convenience sampling technique for sample collection. The measurement instrument used in this research is the GNAT (Go No-Go Association Task), which measures the strength of implicit association with the target words narkoba, NAPZA, pecandu, and penyalahguna, and pairs them with positif and negatif evaluatif attributes. The data analysis for this study employs d-prime (d), which measures the sensitivity of each term, where higher sensitivity indicates a stronger association between the target category and evaluatif attributes. The analysis of mean score differences is performed using the Jamovi program. The results show that there are differences in the level of implicit association with the terms narkoba and NAPZA, with the strongest to weakest association sequence being NAPZA + positif (d=3.00) > narkoba + negatif (d=2.80) > NAPZA + negatif (d=2.75) > narkoba + positif (d=2.16). Furthermore, there are differences in the level of implicit association with the terms pecandu and penyalahguna, with the strongest to weakest association sequence being pecandu + negatif (d=3.14) > penyalahguna + negatif (d=2.85) > penyalahguna + positif (d=2.72) > pecandu + positif (d=2.67). Additionally, the analysis of d-prime based on relationship type reveals that there are differences in the level of implicit association based on relationship type in at-risk adolescent groups regarding the terms narkoba, NAPZA, pecandu, and penyalahguna.
Abstrak. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui level implicit association terhadap istilah narkoba, NAPZA, pecandu, dan penyalahguna pada kelompok remaja beresiko. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kuantitatif yang diujikan pada 11 partisipan remaja dengan metode pengambilan sampel menggunakan teknik convenience sampling. Alat ukur yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini menggunakan GNAT (Go No-Go Association Task) yang mengukur kekuatan implicit association pada kata target narkoba, NAPZA, pecandu, dan penyalahgunadan dipasangkan dengan atribut evaluatif positif dan negatif. Analisis data penelitian ini menggunakan d-prime (d) yaitu mengukur sensitivitas dari setiap istilah dimana sensitivitas yang lebih besar menunjukkan asosiasi yang lebih kuat antara kategori target dan atribut evaluatif .Analisa perbedaan skor mean dilakukan menggunakan program Jamovi. Diperoleh bahwa terdapat perbedaan level implicit association pada istilah narkoba dan NAPZA dengan urutan asoasi terkuat hingga terendah yaitu NAPZA + positif (d=3.00 ) > narkoba + negatif (d=2.80 ) > NAPZA + negatif (d=2.75 ) > narkoba + positif (d=2.16 ). Dan terdapat perbedaan level implicit association pada istilah pecandu dan penyalahguna dengan urutan asosiasi terkuat hingga terendah yaitu pecandu + negatif (d=3.14 ) > penyalahguna + negatif (d=2.85 ) > penyalahguna + positif (d=2.72 ) > pecandu + positif (d=2.67 ). Selain itu, hasil analisa d-prime yang dilakukan berdasarkan jenis relasi ditemukan bahwa terdapat perbedaan level implicit association berdasakan jenis relasi pada kelompok remaja beresiko terhadap istilah narkoba, NAPZA, pecandu, dan penyalahguna.
References
[2] Badan Narkotika Nasional, “Indonesia Drug Reports 2022,” Jakarta, 2022.
[3] J. K. Das, R. A. Salam, A. Arshad, Y. Finkelstein, and Z. A. Bhutta, “Interventions for Adolescent Substance Abuse: An Overview of Systematic Reviews,” Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. S61–S75, Oct. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.06.021.
[4] A. A. Robertson, P. L. Dill, J. Husain, and C. Undesser, “Prevalence of mental illness and substance abuse disorders among incarcerated juvenile offenders in Mississippi,” Child Psychiatry Hum Dev, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 55–74, 2004.
[5] T. Nicholson, D. F. Duncan, J. White, and C. Watkins, “Focusing on abuse, not use: A proposed new direction for US drug policy,” Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 303–308, Aug. 2012, doi: 10.3109/09687637.2012.682231.
[6] M. Rosenbaum, “New Perspectives on Drug Education/Prevention,” J Psychoactive Drugs, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 28–30, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1080/02791072.2015.1117690.
[7] J. Cohen, “Drug education or drug propaganda? In Harm reduction in substance use and high risk behavior,” in Harm Reduction in Substance Use and High-Risk Behaviour, R. Pates and D. Riley, Eds., 1st ed.John Wiley & Sons, 2012, pp. 17–29.
[8] R. D. Ashford, A. M. Brown, and B. Curtis, “‘Abusing Addiction’: Our Language Still Isn’t Good Enough,” Alcohol Treat Q, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 257–272, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1080/07347324.2018.1513777.
[9] R. D. Ashford, A. M. Brown, and B. Curtis, “Substance use, recovery, and linguistics: The impact of word choice on explicit and implicit bias,” Drug Alcohol Depend, vol. 189, pp. 131–138, 2018.
[10] L. Litman and A. S. Reber, Implicit Cognition and Thought. Cambridge University Press, 2005.
[11] P. Christiansen and M. Field, “Implicit Cognition,” in The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Addiction Psychopharmacology, Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013, pp. 489–514. doi: 10.1002/9781118384404.ch18.
[12] U. Alifia, Apa itu Narkotika dan NAPZA?, 1st ed., vol. 1. Semarang: Alprin, 2007.
[13] P. Simanungkalit, “MODEL PEMIDANAAN YANG IDEAL BAGI KORBAN PENGGUNA narkoba DI INDONESIA,” Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, vol. 1, no. 3, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.20961/yustisia.v1i3.10090.
[14] BPK, “Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan tentang Upaya Kesehatan Anak,” peraturan.bpk.go.id, 2014. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/117562/permenkes-no-25-tahun-2014 (accessed Jan. 11, 2023).
[15] V. Ariyanti, “Kedudukan Korban penyalahgunaan Narkotika dalam Hukum Pidana Indonesia dan Hukum Pidana Islam,” Al-Manahij: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 247–262, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.24090/mnh.v11i2.1300.
[16] L. M. Broyles et al., “Confronting Inadvertent Stigma and Pejorative Language in Addiction Scholarship: A Recognition and Response,” Subst Abus, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 217–221, Jul. 2014, doi: 10.1080/08897077.2014.930372.
[17] C. M. Kodjo and J. D. Klein, “Prevention and risk of adolescent substance abuse,” Pediatr Clin North Am, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 257–268, Apr. 2002, doi: 10.1016/S0031-3955(01)00003-7.
[18] M. Asni, R. Rahma, and M. Sarake, “Faktor Yang Berhubungan dengan penyalahgunaan Narkotika dan Bahan Adiktif (narkoba) Pada Remaja di SMA Kartika Wirabuana XX-1 Makassar,” Media Kesehatan Masyarakat Indonesia, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 190–196, 2013.
[19] B. A. Ewing, K. C. Osilla, E. R. Pedersen, S. B. Hunter, J. N. V. Miles, and E. J. D’Amico, “Longitudinal family effects on substance use among an at-risk adolescent sample,” Addictive Behaviors, vol. 41, pp. 185–191, Feb. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.10.017.
[20] J. P. Hoffmann and F. G. Cerbone, “Parental substance use disorder and the risk of adolescent drug abuse: an event history analysis,” Drug Alcohol Depend, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 255–264, May 2002, doi: 10.1016/S0376-8716(02)00005-4.
[21] S. H. W. Mares, A. Lichtwarck-Aschoff, W. J. Burk, H. van der Vorst, and R. C. M. E. Engels, “Parental alcohol-specific rules and alcohol use from early adolescence to young adulthood,” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 798–805, Jul. 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02533.x.
[22] W. A. Mason and R. L. Spoth, “Sequence of alcohol involvement from early onset to young adult alcohol abuse: differential predictors and moderation by family-focused preventive intervention,” Addiction, vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 2137–2148, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03987.x.
[23] N. Wongtongkam, P. R. Ward, A. Day, and A. H. Winefield, “The influence of protective and risk factors in individual, peer and school domains on Thai adolescents’ alcohol and illicit drug use: A survey,” Addictive Behaviors, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 1447–1451, Oct. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.05.026.
[24] J. De Houwer, “Implicit Bias Is Behavior: A Functional-Cognitive Perspective on Implicit Bias,” Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 835–840, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1177/1745691619855638.
[25] B. A. Nosek and M. R. Banaji, “The Go/No-Go Association Task,” Soc Cogn, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 625–666, Dec. 2001, doi: 10.1521/soco.19.6.625.20886.
[26] BNN, “Pencegahan penyalahgunaan narkoba di Kalangan Remaja,” yogyakarta.bnn.go.id, 2021. https://yogyakarta.bnn.go.id/pencegahan-penyalahgunaan-narkoba-kalangan-remaja/ (accessed Jan. 11, 2023).
[27] J. F. Kelly and C. M. Westerhoff, “Does it matter how we refer to individuals with substance-related conditions? A randomized study of two commonly used terms,” International Journal of Drug Policy, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 202–207, May 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.10.010.
[28] J. F. Kelly, “Toward an Addictionary,” Alcohol Treat Q, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 79–87, Jun. 2004, doi: 10.1300/J020v22n02_07.
[29] R. D. Ashford, A. M. Brown, and B. Curtis, “The language of substance use and recovery: Novel use of the go/no–go association task to measure implicit bias,” Health Commun, vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 1296–1302, 2019.
[30] R. D. Ashford, A. M. Brown, J. McDaniel, and B. Curtis, “Biased labels: An experimental study of language and stigma among individuals in recovery and health professionals,” Subst Use Misuse, vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 1376–1384, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1080/10826084.2019.1581221.
