Mosbach & Leventhal (1988) examined the relation of cigarette smoking to peer-group identification in rural Wisconsin adolescents. They found that among dirts (problem-prone youth), regulars (average youth), hot-shots (good social or academic performers), and jocks (athletes), youth most likely to smoke were dirts and hot-shots. We performed a replication with a Southern California cohort and also for use of smokeless tobacco. We hypothesized that jocks would be the main users of smokeless tobacco. We identified the same groups and an additional one, skaters (skateboarders or surfers). As Mosbach & Leventhal found, cigarettes were used most by dirts. Contrary to their results, but consistent with other research, we found that hot-shots were least likely to smoke. Contrary to our prediction, we found that skaters and dirts were more likely to use smokeless tobacco than were jocks. Our data show that both tobacco forms are used by problem-prone youth.

Acculturation was positively associated with never smoking among men but not with smoking cessation. However, knowledge of tobacco-related health risks was associated with both. Results indicate a need for language-specific educational interventions.

No abstract

This study investigated the moderating influence of expectancy accessibility on the relation between outcome expectancies and drug use intentions. Specifically, it was hypothesized that expectancies made temporarily more accessible would predict smokeless tobacco intentions to a greater degree than would less accessible expectancies. In addition, it was anticipated that expectancies regarding positive outcomes of smokeless tobacco use would be better predictors of intention than would expectancies about negative outcomes. Results partially supported the accessibility hypothesis, but this effect occurred for positive outcome expectancies only. In addition, the anticipated prepotency of positive over negative expectancies in predicting drug use intentions was strongly supported. These findings are consistent with theories of problem behavior which differentiate between positive and negative outcome expectancies and which postulate that accessibility of expectancies plays an important role in expectancy‐behavior relations.