4.0 Article

Psychological correlates of smoker's identity in adults reporting mental health diagnoses

期刊

JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE USE
卷 26, 期 5, 页码 558-565

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/14659891.2020.1862324

关键词

Tobacco; mental health problems; meaning; purpose; smoker’ s identity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found a link between smoker's identity and lower levels of purpose in life and self-efficacy, as well as increased anxiety symptoms. However, smoker's identity was also associated with higher confidence in quitting tobacco and concern that quitting could worsen mental health.
Objective: Smoking and tobacco use co-occur with mental health problems. We examined the relationships between smoker's identity and positive factors in smokers with mental health problems. We also examined the associations between smoker's identity and psychopathology. Methods: We distributed an anonymous electronic survey to individuals participating in the National Alliance on Mental Illness e-mail list. Participants self-reported mental health diagnoses. Constructs assessed were meaning in life, purpose in life, self-efficacy, social support, smoker's identity, depression, anxiety, stress, confidence in being able to quit tobacco, and concern that quitting tobacco would worsen mental health. Results: Participants endorsing a perception that smoking was part of their identity reported decreased purpose in life and self-efficacy. Smoker's identity was negatively and positively associated with confidence in quitting tobacco and concern that quitting could worsen mental health, respectively. Individuals who endorsed a smoker's identity reported increased anxiety symptoms. Conclusions: Our study shows a link between smoker's identity and various positive and psychopathological factors in smokers reporting mental health diagnoses. Future research and treatment should consider transdiagnostic factors within the context of individuals with co-occurring smoking and mental health problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据