During the last decades smoking has been marginalized. Current tobacco policy is characterized by a continuous denormalization of all forms of tobacco consumption. Yet, many people still use tobacco. This article highlights a possible cultural explanation for this: different tobacco products and uses are included in lifestyles of different social status and prestige, and vary in legitimacy. Using nationally representative data of the Norwegian adult population and drawing conceptually and methodologically on Bourdieu's cultural sociology, I show that differences in socio-cultural practices (including tobacco use) are manifested in a structured "space of lifestyles", homologous to the structure of the objective "space of social positions". The contents of the various lifestyles (as identified by multiple correspondence analysis) informs the cultural distinctions associated with tobacco use.
This study asks whether representations of different typical tobacco users vary in line with established stereotypes and by social group membership (especially tobacco user status). Social identity theory posits that representations differ due to varying identification with product users on the basis of personal use, while distinction theory suggests representations will be structured by proximity and distance to user groups. Using principal component analysis to identify representations and regression analysis to determine variances in representations, we find that four of five groups of typical tobacco users (snus users, pipe, cigarette, and cigar smokers) can be classified according to three similar representations: socially secure, culturally marginal and unappealing. Respondents who themselves use a certain tobacco product are more likely to consider a 'typical' user from their own group as more 'socially secure' and less 'culturally marginal' and 'unappealing' than non-users. Former smokers tend to side with non-smokers, which suggests their 'smoker identity' is on the wane. At the representational level, then, socio-historical distinctions between different tobacco products seem to have diminished in favour of a largely dual classification, with users expressing positive and non-users negative representations, of any typical user. This is a likely consequence of persistent tobacco denormalisation policies.
Even if smoking prevalence is declining in several western countries, continued smoking cessation is required to reduce tobacco-related harms and to achieve future goals of smoke-free societies or the tobacco endgame. But how many of the current smokers want to quit? Estimates vary and depend on the type of question asked. We investigate how a pooled sample of Norwegian smokers (
N
=
1321
) is distributed over four indicators of interest in quitting: (i) degree of desire to quit, (ii) prediction of future smoking status, (iii) reported plan for quitting smoking, and (iv) statements on previous attempts to quit. Based on these variables, we constructed an index. One-third of the smokers (32.6%) was categorized as having a high or very high interest in quitting. However, nearly half of the smokers (47.8%) had low or very low interest in quitting. Like several other countries, Norway has legislated a vision of a smoke-free society and, under the government’s plans; this goal will be achieved by intensified use of structural measures such as tax hikes, tighter restrictions on outdoor smoking, and reduced availability of cigarettes. For the third who want to quit smoking, such constraints on their behaviour may help them to pursue their desire to quit. However, for the half who want to continue smoking, these measures may not be helpful but instead be experienced as a loss of welfare, less freedom to act, and increased social disqualification.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.