Melody Noland1, Melinda J Ickes1, Mary Kay Rayens2, Karen Butler3, Amanda T Wiggins2, Ellen J Hahn4. 1. a Department of Kinesiology and Health Promotion , College of Education, University of Kentucky , Lexington , Kentucky , USA. 2. b Tobacco Policy Research Program, College of Nursing, University of Kentucky , Lexington , Kentucky , USA. 3. c College of Nursing, University of Kentucky , Lexington , Kentucky , USA. 4. d Tobacco Policy Research Program, College of Nursing, University of Kentucky , Lexington , Kentucky , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: (1) Compare social norms and perceived peer use between college student cigarette, e-cigarette, and/or hookah users and nonusers; and (2) determine variables associated with social influences. PARTICIPANTS: Undergraduate students attending a large university in the Southeast United States (N = 511). METHODS: An April 2013 online survey assessed use of 3 types of tobacco, social norms, perception of peer use, number of smokers in life, exposure to secondhand smoke, and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Participants indicated greater acceptance of emerging tobacco products than for cigarettes and consistently overestimated the percent of peers who use various tobacco products. Males and current users had higher social norm scores for all 3 forms of tobacco. CONCLUSION: To counter marketing of alternative tobacco products, education about the dangers of their use needs to be implemented across college campuses as part of a comprehensive tobacco control strategy that also includes tobacco-free campus policies.
OBJECTIVES: (1) Compare social norms and perceived peer use between college student cigarette, e-cigarette, and/or hookah users and nonusers; and (2) determine variables associated with social influences. PARTICIPANTS: Undergraduate students attending a large university in the Southeast United States (N = 511). METHODS: An April 2013 online survey assessed use of 3 types of tobacco, social norms, perception of peer use, number of smokers in life, exposure to secondhand smoke, and demographic characteristics. RESULTS:Participants indicated greater acceptance of emerging tobacco products than for cigarettes and consistently overestimated the percent of peers who use various tobacco products. Males and current users had higher social norm scores for all 3 forms of tobacco. CONCLUSION: To counter marketing of alternative tobacco products, education about the dangers of their use needs to be implemented across college campuses as part of a comprehensive tobacco control strategy that also includes tobacco-free campus policies.
Entities:
Keywords:
College students; social influences; tobacco prevention
Authors: Erin L Sutfin; Thomas P McCoy; Holly E R Morrell; Bettina B Hoeppner; Mark Wolfson Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2013-06-07 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Wolfgang Schober; Katalin Szendrei; Wolfgang Matzen; Helga Osiander-Fuchs; Dieter Heitmann; Thomas Schettgen; Rudolf A Jörres; Hermann Fromme Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 5.840
Authors: Adriana Pérez; Arnold E Kuk; Meagan A Bluestein; Melissa B Harrell; Cheryl L Perry; Baojiang Chen Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Erin A Vogel; Danielle E Ramo; Mark L Rubinstein; Kevin L Delucchi; Sabrina M Darrow; Caitlin Costello; Judith J Prochaska Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Paula Lozano; Edna Arillo-Santillán; Inti Barrientos-Gutíerrez; Luz Myriam Reynales Shigematsu; James F Thrasher Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2019-01-04
Authors: Alexandra Loukas; Sherman Chow; Keryn E Pasch; Xiaoyin Li; Josephine T Hinds Iii; C Nathan Marti; Melissa B Harrell; MeLisa R Creamer; Cheryl L Perry Journal: Am J Health Behav Date: 2016-07