Johnston, Lloyd D., Jerald G. Bachman, Patrick M. O'Malley, and John E. Schulenberg. Monitoring the Future: A Continuing Study of American Youth (12th-Grade Survey), 2007. ICPSR22480-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2008-10-29. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR22480.v1
Persistent URL: https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR22480.v1
- RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
- EndNote XML (EndNote X4.0.1 or higher)
high school students,
Date of Collection:
Unit of Observation:
High school seniors in the contiguous United States.
Data Collection Notes:
Conducted by the University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center.
Prior to 2005 the variable asking about race only
had categories for Black and White. In 2005, a change was made to
include a third category for Hispanic. This new format was implemented
on all six forms. This change has continued in 2007. Each form for
2007 allows for Black, White, and Hispanic on the race question.
To protect the privacy of respondents, all variables that could be
used to identify individuals have been collapsed or recoded in the
public use files. These modifications should not affect analytic uses
of the public use files.
Variables omitted from the Western region
questionnaires are noted in each codebook.
A user guide is
provided with the study documentation. It contains a year-to-year
cross-time question index for the MTF 12th-grade surveys, which is
sorted by subject area, item reference number, and questionnaire
MTF does not release detailed geography codes in its public use files because of the disclosure risk it would cause. The MTF sample is drawn to generate representative samples of the four Census Bureau regions of the country (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West), but it does not generate representative samples of smaller geographic areas such as states, counties, or cities. For additional information about data that is withheld from the public use files please contact MTF directly at email@example.com.
A multistage area probability sample design involving
three selection stages: (1) geographic areas or primary sampling
units (PSUs), (2) schools (or linked groups of schools) within
PSUs, and (3) students within sampled schools. Of the 72 PSUs, 8
were selected with certainty, 10 were selected with a probability
of .50, and the remainder were selected with a probability
proportionate to the size of the senior class. In schools with
more than 350 seniors, a random sample of seniors or classes was
drawn. In schools with less than 350 seniors, all seniors were
asked to participate. Each school was asked to participate for two
years so that each year one-half of the sample would be replaced.
Schools refusing participation were replaced with similar schools
in terms of geographic location, size, and type of school (e.g.,
public, private/Catholic, private/non-Catholic). The total sample
was divided into six subsamples consisting of an average of 2,522
respondents. Each subsample was administered a different form
of the questionnaire, although all respondents answered the "core"
drug and demographic questions. The participation rate among
schools has been between 66 and 85 percent since the inception of
Each of the seven parts contains a weight variable, V5.
They were originally varied by school but were modified to protect
respondent confidentiality. Users should use the weight variable for
all analyses, the results of which will differ slightly from published
data tables that used original data.
Mode of Data Collection:
The overall student response rate for 2007 was 81
Extent of Processing: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of
disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major
statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to
these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:
Performed consistency checks.
Standardized missing values.
Created online analysis version with question text.
Performed recodes and/or calculated derived variables.
Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.