Markers of the denormalisation of smoking and the tobacco industry: Table 1

Chapman, Simon; Freeman, Becky

doi:10.1136/tc.2007.021386

Cited by 239 publications

(198 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

185

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At a general level, the pro-non-smoker biases on the self-report measures shown by both groups of non-smokers in the current study support the perception that attitudes toward smokers have become more negative in recent decades (Chapman & Freeman, 2008). Interestingly, bias scores on the IRAP were relatively neutral for both non-smoking groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Response Biases on the IRAP for Adults and Adolescents with Respect to Smokers and Nonsmokers: The Impact of Parental Smoking Status

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current research aimed to examine the implicit biases of smokers and non-smokers to others who did or did not smoke. Study 1 presented adult smokers and non-smokers with an Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) that assessed bias toward or against smokers and non-smokers. Study 2 replicated this with adolescent smokers and non-smokers. Both studies also presented self-report measures. Both adult and adolescent smokers produced IRAP effects that indicated pro-smoker biases; non-smokers' biases were relatively neutral. Trends in the data from Studies 1 and 2 led to a post hoc analysis of the non-smoker data to investigate the potential impact of parental smoking status on nonsmokers' biases. Both the IRAP and self-report measures data suggested that parental smoking status increased positivity in attitudes toward smokers among non-smokers. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses indicated that the IRAP data in Study 1, but not Study 2, predicted smoking status above and beyond the self-report measures. The post-hoc analyses showed a similar trend. The consistency of the findings with the only existing IRAP study of attitudes toward smokers, as well as with the broader literature, supports the view that response biases toward smokers may not change fundamentally from adolescence to adulthood, and that parental smoking status may having a moderating influence on these biases. KEYWORDS IRAP, Smokers Attitudes, Parental InfluenceAttitudes toward smokers have changed considerably in recent decades (Chapman & Freeman, 2008). The traditional positive characteristics of smokers as glamorous and independent have been replaced with malodorous and selfish stereotypes (Farrimond & Joffe, 2006). Goldstein (1991), for example, found that non-smokers favored non-smokers over smokers as measured by self-report.Indeed, the literature on attitudes toward smokers has relied extensively on questionnaires, which have been criticized for their potential sensitivity to extraneous sources of influence (e.g., self-presentation, see Barnes-Holmes et al., 2006;de Jong, 2002). In contrast, there are now numerous latency-based behavioral measures, assumed by some to reveal implicit attitudes. The most common of these measures is known as the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998).The basic idea is that participants should be faster when pairing two closely associated than weakly associated categories. However, while much research in this regard has investigated attitudes toward smoking, little has employed these measures when investigating attitudes toward smokers.Of the limited research on attitudes toward smokers, Swanson, Rudman, and Greenwald (2001) found that while smokers demonstrated anti-smoking biases, they identified themselves as being a "smoker" on an IAT. In other words, smokers engaged in behavior they did not appear implicitly positive toward, but this did not impact negatively on their self-esteem levels (measured by another IAT). This basic effect was replicated in a study...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…Attitudes toward smokers have changed considerably in recent decades (Chapman & Freeman, 2008). The traditional positive characteristics of smokers as glamorous and independent have been replaced with malodorous and selfish stereotypes (Farrimond & Joffe, 2006).…”

Section: Abstract Irap Smokers Attitudes Parental Influencementioning

confidence: 99%

Response Biases on the IRAP for Adults and Adolescents with Respect to Smokers and Nonsmokers: The Impact of Parental Smoking Status

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3,8 Possible reasons for this increasing trend are a decreasing prevalence of smoking and a decreasing social acceptability of smoking. 5,9 Certain events can potentially trigger sudden increases in support for smoke-free laws. For example, a review of Australian studies showed that population support for smoke-free laws increased significantly after extensive media attention about a court case on disease due to second-hand smoke.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Population Support Before and After the Implementation of Smoke-Free Laws in the United States: Trends From 1992–2007

Nagelhout

Wolfson

Zhuang

et al. 2014

Nicotine &Amp; Tobacco Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Now that tobacco control policy draws in the direction of denormalization of all tobacco consumption, and categorization of tobacco use and users is steered towards marginalization (Chapman & Freeman, 2008), the differences in tobacco user status will be even more affected by their overall lifestyle. This relates also to tobacco consumption as potential signs of different lifestyles: in the contemporary tobacco culture, it seems "better" to smoke a cigar than to smoke rolling tobacco, in the sense that social elites may well allow themselves to be photographed with a cigar, but not with a hand rolled cigarette.…”

Section: Distinction Differences Between Various Tobacco Products Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cigarettes, snus and status: differences in lifestyle of different tobacco user groups in Norway

Sæbø

2016

Health Sociology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Markers of the denormalisation of smoking and the tobacco industry: Table 1

Cited by 239 publications

References 44 publications

Response Biases on the IRAP for Adults and Adolescents with Respect to Smokers and Nonsmokers: The Impact of Parental Smoking Status

Response Biases on the IRAP for Adults and Adolescents with Respect to Smokers and Nonsmokers: The Impact of Parental Smoking Status

Population Support Before and After the Implementation of Smoke-Free Laws in the United States: Trends From 1992–2007

Cigarettes, snus and status: differences in lifestyle of different tobacco user groups in Norway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About