4.2 Article

Social Norms, Perceptions and Dual/Poly Tobacco Use among Texas Youth

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH BEHAVIOR
Volume 40, Issue 6, Pages 761-770

Publisher

PNG PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.5993/AJHB.40.6.8

Keywords

tobacco use; adolescents; dual use; poly-tobacco use; adolescent tobacco use

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration, Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) [1 P50 CA180906]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: We assessed risk perceptions and social norms about tobacco use across adolescent non-users of tobacco, single-product users, and dual/poly-product users. Methods: Use behaviors specific to e-cigarettes, cigarettes, hookah, cigars, and smokeless tobacco were assessed among 6th, 8th and 10th grade students (sample [n] = 3907 from a population of [N] = 461,069 students). Multivariate regression was used to examine differences in these factors across use categories, adjusted for demographic factors. Results: Results highlight differences between non-users and single-or dual/poly-product users for most tobacco products. Dual/poly-product users differed from single-product users most notably in their higher perceived use of tobacco products by close friends and dating partners, and a higher proportion of single-product users reported most products were not harmful and not addictive compared to non-users. Few differences were seen between dual/poly-product users and single-product users in their perceptions of harm and addictiveness. Conclusions: Findings demonstrate the importance of proximal social influences (ie, close friends and dating partners) for adolescent dual/poly-tobacco product users. Understanding similarities and differences in risk factors between these adolescent groups can guide effective public health prevention and treatment programs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available