Are anti-smoking parenting practices related to adolescent smoking cognitions and behavior?

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explain the effects of anti-smoking parenting practices on adolescent smoking cognitions and behavior by showing the mediating effects of cognitions. Data were gathered among Dutch high school students in the control condition of the European Smoking prevention Framework Approach (ESFA). Anti-smoking parenting practices were measured by parental reactions to smoking, house rules, and frequency and content of communication about smoking. Attitudes, perceived social influences and self-efficacy made up for smoking cognitions. Additionally, intention to smoke was measured. Relations between practices and cognitions were mostly significant. While some practices were associated with less smoking (communication about health risks of smoking, health risks of breathing in smoke, addictive qualities of smoking and attention for smoking in school), others were related to increased chances of smoking (rewards for not smoking, frequency of communication about smoking, communication about being allowed to smoke, price of cigarettes and friends smoking). The effects of parenting hardly varied by parental smoking status or adolescent gender. Several practices operated through cognitions, which was more pronounced in older adolescents. Counter-productive effects of practices and the few effects in the longitudinal analyses indicate that the order in which parents and adolescents influence each other should be examined more closely.

Parent–child connectedness and communication in relation to alcohol, tobacco and drug use in adolescence: An integrative review of the literature

“…When parents only talk to their children about rules and tell them not to use substances, adolescents feel threatened and report increased rates of alcohol, tobacco and drug use (Chaplin et al, 2014;Huver et al, 2006;Kam, 2011), although in one study the results were positive but not statistically significant (Nonnemaker et al, 2012). In a qualitative study, adolescents reported that when their parents use such communication, they tend to ignore what is said (Maggi et al, 2014).…”

“…Softer communication, however, is viewed more positively (Guilamo-Ramos et al, 2008;Kulbok et al, 2010;Maggi et al, 2014). When parents include messages about health risks and potential consequences of use, adolescents are less likely to use substances (Chaplin et al, 2014;Huver et al, 2006). However, in one study, discussion of consequences had no effect on alcohol use (Reimuller, Hussong, & Ennett, 2013) and in another had a detrimental effect on cannabis use initiation (Nonnemaker et al, 2012).…”

“…More frequent communication is associated with higher rates, more positive attitudes towards and lower self-efficacy to refuse cigarette use (de Leeuw et al, 2008(de Leeuw et al, , 2010Harakeh, Scholte, de Vries, & Engels, 2005, Harakeh, Engels, Den Exter Blokland, Scholte, & Vermulst, 2009Harakeh et al, 2010;Hiemstra, Otten, & Engels, 2012;Huver, Engels, & de Vries, 2006; Otten, van der Zwaluw, van der Vorst, & Engels, 2008); higher rates of alcohol use and associated problems (van den Eijnden, van de Mheen, Vet, & Vermulst, 2011;Koning et al, 2013;Spijkerman, van den Eijnden, & Huiberts, 2008;van der Vorst et al, 2005van der Vorst et al, , 2010; and higher rates of cannabis use initiation (Nonnemaker et al, 2012). It is unclear as to the direction of this relationship: parents' frequent communication may be ignored and adolescents start using substances; or parents communicate more frequently when they believe their adolescents are using substances.…”

“…It is unclear as to the direction of this relationship: parents' frequent communication may be ignored and adolescents start using substances; or parents communicate more frequently when they believe their adolescents are using substances. The authors have suggested that the latter may be the case but longitudinal studies are required to examine the direction of the relationship (Harakeh et al, 2005(Harakeh et al, , 2009(Harakeh et al, , 2010Huver et al, 2006;van der Vorst et al, 2005). High quality communication, conversely, is associated with lower rates of smoking, more negative attitudes and higher self-efficacy to refuse cigarette use (de Leeuw et al, 2008;Harakeh et al, 2005Harakeh et al, , 2010Otten et al, 2008;Ringlever, Otten, de Leeuw, & Engels, 2011;; lower rates of alcohol use and higher self-efficacy to refuse (van den Eijnden et al, 2011;Koning et al, 2013;Mares, Lichtwarck-Aschoff, & Engels, 2013;Spijkerman et al, 2008).…”

“…In one study, adolescents noted that their parents frequently discussed alcohol use, but rarely discussed cannabis use, with discussions only occurring after they had been caught using (Highet, 2005). Permissive messages and inconsistent rules around alcohol use can be confusing and increase use (Koning et al, 2013;Reimuller et al, 2013), while forbidding the use of tobacco and drugs can also increase use (Chaplin et al, 2014;Huver et al, 2006;Kam, 2011). More research is required to examine communication around drug use, with Highet (2005) stressing that parents need to talk to young people about drugs before problematic use occurs.…”