Association of Campus Tobacco Policies With Secondhand Smoke Exposure, Intention to Smoke on Campus, and Attitudes About Outdoor Smoking Restrictions

Fallin, Amanda; Roditis, Maria; Glantz, Stanton A.

doi:10.2105/ajph.2014.302251

Cited by 83 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Lee, Ranney, and Goldstein () find that the campuses with high‐strength policies have fewer cigarette butts near selected building entrances than campuses with medium‐ or low‐strength policies and report no significant difference in the number of cigarette butts collected across campuses with low‐ and medium‐strength policies. Similar results are observed in Fallin, Roditis, and Glantz () which demonstrates an inverse relationship between reported exposure to secondhand smoke and observed smoking on campus and tobacco policy strength.…”

Section: Previous Literaturesupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Lee, Ranney, and Goldstein (2013) find that the campuses with high-strength policies have fewer cigarette butts near selected building entrances than campuses with medium-or low-strength policies and report no significant difference in the number of cigarette butts collected across campuses with low-and medium-strength policies. Similar results are observed in Fallin, Roditis, and Glantz (2015) which demonstrates an inverse relationship between reported exposure to secondhand smoke and observed smoking on campus and tobacco policy strength. Lechner et al (2012) is quite similar to UCM's but, unlike our study, instead of counting the number of cigarette butts observed at a given hotspot, Lechner et al (2012) surveyed students over a 3-year period and compared smoking behavior to baseline survey results collected prior to the intervention.…”

Section: Previous Literaturesupporting

confidence: 82%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Decreasing Campus Smoking With Punishments and Social Pressures

Clemons¹,

Johnson

Kiger

et al. 2018

Contemporary Economic Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports the effectiveness of a Midwest state university's “100% tobacco‐free” policy. The policy used social pressures and punishments to incentivize tobacco users to no longer consume tobacco on campus. The policy had three distinct periods (Pre‐Promotion, Post‐Promotion, and Post‐Policy). Social pressures and punishments were introduced during the Post‐Promotion and Post‐Policy periods, respectively. Changes in cigarette consumption were inferred by counting the number of cigarette butts found at various locations on campus. A statistically significant decrease in the number of cigarette butts was observed during the Post‐Promotion period. After the initial drop, tobacco use remained constant for the remainder of the period. An additional decrease was observed once punishments were introduced in the third period. However, the number of cigarette butts observed on campus remained significantly above zero. Further research is needed to understand how smokers substitute across time, location, and tobacco products after the implementation of similar policies. (JEL I11, C99, I12)

show abstract

Section: Previous Literaturesupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Previous Literaturesupporting

confidence: 82%

Decreasing Campus Smoking With Punishments and Social Pressures

Clemons¹,

Johnson

Kiger

et al. 2018

Contemporary Economic Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…College campus smoke- and tobacco-free policies are being rapidly adopted nationwide. 8 These policies have been associated with reduced smoking rates 9 and exposure to secondhand smoke, 10 less cigarette butt litter, 11,12 and lower reported intention to smoke on campus. 10 Most faculty, students, 9 administrators, 13 and college and ‘university presidents support campus tobacco-free policies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The carrot and the stick? Strategies to improve compliance with college campus tobacco policies

Fallin‐Bennett

Roditis

Glantz

2016

Journal of American College Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Tobacco-free policies are being rapidly adopted nationwide, yet compliance with these policies remains a challenge. This study explored college campus key informants’ experiences with tobacco policies, and their perceived benefits, drawbacks, and outcomes. Participants The sample for this study was 68 key informants representing 16 different California universities with varying tobacco policies (no smoking indoors and within 20 feet of entrances, designated smoking areas, 100% smoke-free, and 100% tobacco-free). Methods Qualitative, descriptive study. Semistructured interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using content analysis. Results Strategies to improve compliance ranged from a social approach to a heavy focus on punitive enforcement. Key informants from campuses using a social approach alone reported barriers to improving compliance, including a perceived lack of efficacy of the approach. However, these campuses found it challenging to incorporate enforcement through campus police or security. Conclusions College campus decision makers should explore using a combined approach (social approach as well as formal enforcement), with enforcement primarily the responsibility of nonpolice university channels (eg, Student Affairs, employee supervisors).

show abstract

“…Furthermore, previous studies have shown that a complete smoking ban on campus reduces cigarette consumption and smoking prevalence twice as much as a partial ban. 21,22 …”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clearing the air: American Indian tribal college students' exposure to second hand smoke & attitudes towards smoke free campus policies

Pacheco

Wellever

Nazir

et al. 2018

Journal of American College Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The purpose of this study was to examine knowledge, awareness, and support for campus smoke-free policies. Participants 1,256 American Indian tribal college students from three tribal colleges in the Midwest and Northern Plains. Methods Data are from an observational cross-sectional study of American Indian tribal college students, collected through a web-based survey. Results Only 40% of tribal college students reported not being exposed to second hand smoke in the past 7 days. A majority of nonsmokers (66%) agreed or strongly agreed with having a smoke-free campus, while 34.2% of smokers also agreed or strongly agreed. Overall, more than a third (36.6%) of tribal college students were not aware of their campus smoking policies. Conclusions Tribal campuses serving American Indian students have been much slower in adopting smoke-free campus policies. Our findings show that tribal college students would support a smoke-free campus policy.

show abstract

Association of Campus Tobacco Policies With Secondhand Smoke Exposure, Intention to Smoke on Campus, and Attitudes About Outdoor Smoking Restrictions

Cited by 83 publications

References 5 publications

Decreasing Campus Smoking With Punishments and Social Pressures

Decreasing Campus Smoking With Punishments and Social Pressures

The carrot and the stick? Strategies to improve compliance with college campus tobacco policies

Clearing the air: American Indian tribal college students' exposure to second hand smoke & attitudes towards smoke free campus policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About