Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics: Correlations and Means of Key Variables

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
1. Intention	—
2. Attitude	.72	—
3. Subjective norm	.46	.54	—
4. Self-efficacy	−.37	−.33	−.20	—
5. Σbe	.49	.50	.40	−.29	—
6. Σnb(mc)	.48	.52	.47	−.30	.48	—
7. Physical costs	−.46	−.44	−.36	.23	−.91	−.42	—
8. Positive outcomes	.43	.49	.36	−.27	.43	.36	−.30	—
9. Social costs	−.51	−.53	−.40	.26	−.89	−.50	.87	−.38	—
10. Self-esteem costs	−.51	−.51	−.40	.27	−.92	−.46	.91	−.37	.88	—
11. Peer norms	.57	.66	.53	−.22	.43	.65	−.37	.45	−.50	−.42	—
12. Authority norms	.40	.48	.48	−.25	.29	.56	−.27	.28	−.32	−.30	.44	—
13. Risk measure	.62	.57	.39	−.16	.44	.46	−.39	.45	−.48	−.45	.61	.28	—
M	1.54	−2.12	−1.63	1.32	−46.39	−25.98	0.87	−0.68	0.70	0.86	−1.06	−1.80	−3.53
SD	0.96	1.27	0.76	1.05	56.82	15.33	1.03	0.84	1.10	1.05	0.88	0.48	1.70

Note. To save space, we did not include the belief evaluations and motivation to comply items. Range of measures: intention = 1 to 4; risk measure is a continuous measure with insignificant range; attitude = −3 to +3; Σbe = −144 to +144; Σnb(mc) = −60 to +60; all other constructs = −2 to +2. For self-efficacy, higher scores indicate a stronger perceived ability to say “No” to marijuana. For beliefs about costs and positive outcomes, higher scores reflect a higher perceived likelihood that marijuana leads to the particular outcome. For the risk measure, higher scores indicate being at higher risk for using marijuana. For all other constructs, higher scores indicate a more favorable position toward marijuana use.