Effects of pro- and anti-tobacco advertising on nonsmoking adolescentsʼ intentions to smoke

Straub, Diane M.; Hills, Nancy K.; Thompson, Pamela J.; Moscicki, Anna Barbara

doi:10.1016/s1054-139x(02)00451-2

Cited by 48 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these students, 193 (4.5%) were classified as susceptible never smokers and 2,285 (53.3%) were classified as non-susceptible never smokers; the remaining 1,808 (42.2%) students reported that they had tried smoking and were excluded from the analysis. Although the proportion of susceptible never smokers in this study is smaller than proportions reported in previous studies (Evans et al, 1995;Pierce et al, 1996;Distefan et al, 1998;Feighery et al, 1998;Kaufman et al, 2002;Gritz et al, 2003;Straub et al, 2003), this was expected considering that this sample consisted entirely of students in grades 6 and 7. Average age was 13.0 ( ± 0.6) years.…”

Section: Demographicscontrasting

confidence: 61%

“…This is consistent with existing evidence for older students (Evans et al, 1995;Pierce et al, 1996 al., 1998;Feighery et al, 1998;Kaufman et al, 2002;Gritz et al, 2003;Straub et al, 2003). Having a smoking parent or friend exposes a student to the immediate positive outcomes associated with smoking, such as the 'buzz', cool image, maturity, or group membership (Fieghery et al, 1998;Anderson et al, 2002), and enhances the expectation that smoking is socially attractive, acceptable and normative (Ajzen, 1991;Hussong, 2002); factors which may cause a young person to consider trying smoking (Bandura, 1986).…”

Section: Influence Of Student Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Empirical evidence exists to support those theoretical assumptions. For instance, it is well documented that adolescent smoking susceptibility is influenced by smoking friends and family members (Evans et al, 1995;Pierce et al, 1996;Distefan et al, 1998;Feighery et al, 1998;Kaufman et al, 2002;Gritz et al, 2003;Straub et al, 2003). There is also growing evidence that adolescent smoking susceptibility is influenced by characteristics in the broader environment at school, such as school smoking restrictions (Wakefield et al, 2000), and student smoking around school property .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Multi-Level Analysis Examining how Smoking Friends, Parents, and Older Students in the School Environment are Risk Factors for Susceptibility to Smoking Among Non-Smoking Elementary School Youth

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine how social models for smoking are related to smoking susceptibility among a sample of non-smoking elementary school students. The Tobacco Module of the School Health Action, Planning and Evaluation System (SHAPES) was administered to 6,431 students (grades 6 to 8) in 57 elementary schools in the province of Ontario, Canada. Multi-level logistic regression analysis was used to examine how smoking friends, parents, and the prevalence of smoking among grade 8 students at a school were related to smoking susceptibility among the 2,478 non-smoking grade 6 and 7 students. Findings indicate that non-smoking grade 6 and 7 students are more likely to be susceptible to smoking if they have (a) smoking friends, (b) a mother who smokes, or (c) two or more close friends who smoke and attend a school with a relatively high smoking rate among the grade 8 students. Sub-populations of non-smoking youth may be at increased risk for smoking because of the elementary school they attend. Future school-based smoking prevention programs might benefit from targeting prevention programming activities to the schools that are putting students at the greatest risk for smoking.

show abstract

Section: Demographicscontrasting

confidence: 61%

Section: Influence Of Student Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Multi-Level Analysis Examining how Smoking Friends, Parents, and Older Students in the School Environment are Risk Factors for Susceptibility to Smoking Among Non-Smoking Elementary School Youth

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, it has been shown that adolescent' smoking intentions 28 and behavior 29 are heavily influenced by the multimedia smoking campaigns launched by the tobacco industry. This is supported in part by our results showing significant differences in risk perceptions for light versus regular cigarettes in smoking outcomes most countered by pro-tobacco campaigns marketing light cigarettes (eg, healthier or a first step to cessation), whereas adolescents perceived less difference in outcomes not focused on by tobacco media (eg, cough and wrinkles), although the effects of media exposure were not specifically evaluated in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adolescents’ Beliefs About the Risks Involved in Smoking “Light” Cigarettes

Kropp

Halpern‐Felsher

2004

Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Background. Light cigarettes have been marketed by the tobacco industry as being a healthier smoking choice, a safe alternative to cessation, and a first step toward quitting smoking altogether. Research, however, has failed to show a reduction in smoking-related health risks, an increase in rates of smoking cessation, a decrease in the amount of carbon monoxide or tar released, or a reduction in the rates of cardiovascular disease or lung cancer associated with light cigarette use, compared with regular cigarette use. Nevertheless, more than one-half of adolescent smokers in the United States smoke light cigarettes. This study is the first to investigate adolescents' perception of the risks associated with smoking light cigarettes, as well as adolescents' attitudes and knowledge about the delivery of tar and nicotine, health risks, social effects, addiction potential, and ease of cessation with light cigarettes, compared with regular cigarettes.Design. Participants were 267 adolescents (mean age: 14.0 years) who completed a self-administered questionnaire during class time. After reading scenarios in which they imagined that they smoked regular or light cigarettes, participants estimated the chances that they would personally experience 7 smoking-related health risks and 3 addiction risks. Participants also responded to 14 items concerning their attitudes and knowledge about light cigarettes versus regular cigarettes.Results. Participants thought that they would be significantly less likely to get lung cancer, have a heart attack, die from a smoking-related disease, get a bad cough, have trouble breathing, and get wrinkles when smoking light cigarettes, compared with regular cigarettes, for the rest of their lives. Furthermore, when participants were asked how long it would take to become addicted to the 2 cigarette types, they thought it would take significantly longer to become addicted to light versus regular cigarettes. Adolescents also thought that their chances of being able to quit smoking were higher with light versus regular cigarettes. Similarly, when participants were asked how easy it would be to quit smoking the 2 cigarette types, they thought it would be significantly easier for them to quit smoking light cigarettes than regular cigarettes. Adolescents agreed or strongly agreed that regular cigarettes deliver more tar than light cigarettes and that light cigarettes deliver less nicotine than regular cigarettes. Conclusions.Overall, the results of this study show that adolescents hold misperceptions in both their personal risk estimates and their general attitudes about the health risks, addictive properties, and ease of cessation associated with light cigarettes. With a variety of light and ultralight cigarettes on the market, adolescents are led to think that there is a progression of safety levels to choose from when deciding which cigarettes to smoke. This illusion of control over health outcomes contributes to an underestimation of risks associated with smoking light cigarettes and s...

show abstract

“…With regard to risk-positive cognitions, measures were employed for the cognitive accessibility of risk-positive cognitions (e.g., Fischer et al, 2008); attitudes toward risky behaviors and risk taking (such as sexual attitudes; Chapin, 2000;Straub, Hills, Thompson, & Moscicki, 2003); and intentions to make risky decisions (Fischer et al, 2008). Measures of risk-positive emotions were feelings of thrill and excitement (e.g., Guter, 2006), as well as sensation seeking (Fischer et al, 2009).…”

Section: Measurement Of Risk Takingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of risk-glorifying media exposure on risk-positive cognitions, emotions, and behaviors: A meta-analytic review.

Fischer¹,

Greitemeyer²,

Kastenmüller³

et al. 2011

Psychological Bulletin

150

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, there has been a surge in the quantity of media content that glorifies risk-taking behavior, such as risky driving, extreme sports, or binge drinking. The authors conducted a meta-analysis involving more than 80,000 participants and 105 independent effect sizes to examine whether exposure to such media depictions increased their recipients' risk-taking inclinations. A positive connection was found for overall, combined risk taking (g ϭ .41); as well as its underlying dimensions: risk-taking behaviors (g ϭ .41), risk-positive cognitions and attitudes (g ϭ .35), and risk-positive emotions (g ϭ .56). This effect was observed across varying research methods (experimental, correlational, longitudinal); types of media (video games, movies, advertising, TV, music); and differing risk-related outcome measures (e.g., smoking, drinking, risky driving, sexual behavior). Multiple moderator analyses revealed 2 theoretically new boundary conditions for sociocognitive models. First, the effect was stronger for active (i.e., video games) than for passive (e.g., film, music) exposure to risk-glorifying media content. Second, the effect was stronger when there was a high degree of contextual fit between the media content and type of risk-taking measure. The theoretical, practical, and societal implications of the present research synthesis are discussed.

show abstract

Effects of pro- and anti-tobacco advertising on nonsmoking adolescentsʼ intentions to smoke

Cited by 48 publications

References 57 publications

A Multi-Level Analysis Examining how Smoking Friends, Parents, and Older Students in the School Environment are Risk Factors for Susceptibility to Smoking Among Non-Smoking Elementary School Youth

A Multi-Level Analysis Examining how Smoking Friends, Parents, and Older Students in the School Environment are Risk Factors for Susceptibility to Smoking Among Non-Smoking Elementary School Youth

Adolescents’ Beliefs About the Risks Involved in Smoking “Light” Cigarettes

The effects of risk-glorifying media exposure on risk-positive cognitions, emotions, and behaviors: A meta-analytic review.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About