Characterizing and Comparing Young Adult Intermittent and Daily Smokers

Abstract

To examine young adult smoking patterns, we interviewed 732 smokers (from five U.S. upper Midwestern states) via telephone in 2006. We first defined two groups of intermittent smokers-low (smoked 1-14 days in past 30) and high (smoked 15-29 days in past 30), and then analyzed differences between these two groups and daily smokers. Low intermittent smokers were much less likely than high intermittent smokers to consider themselves smokers, feel addicted, or smoke with friends. Daily smokers were more likely than high intermittent smokers to feel addicted and have trouble quitting. Implications, limitations and ideas for future studies are discussed.

Cigarette Smoking Among College Students: Longitudinal Trajectories and Health Outcomes

“…Our empirically derived smoking trajectories support the notion that there are at least three types of intermittent smokers: those in transition to heavier patterns of use, those in transition to lighter patterns, and those capable of sustaining a low level of smoking for several years or longer. This fi nding supports and extends the work of other investigators who have speculated about the possible existence of stable light smoking patterns but were limited by cross-sectional designs and shorter or fewer follow-up intervals ( Lenk et al, 2009 ;Wetter et al, 2004 ;White et al, 2009 ). Far from being a rarity, in our sample, the l ow-s table smoking pattern was the norm, outnumbering both i ncreasers and h igh-s table s mokers by 2:1 and d ecreasers by 4:1.…”

“…Daily smoking (3.4% overall, 14.2% of smokers) was less prevalent than in prior samples of young-adult smokers ( Lenk et al, 2009 ;Nguyen & Shu, 2009 ), which is not surprising given our sampling design and prior evidence that smoking is less prevalent in college students than their nonstudent counterparts ). Nevertheless, smoking trajectories predicted health outcomes.…”

“…Past-month smoking frequency at Y 1 was later recoded into nonsmokers (0 days), daily smokers (30 days), and three mutually exclusive groups of intermittent smokers: infrequent-intermittent smokers (1 -3 days), moderateintermittent smokers (4 -13 days), and frequent-intermittent smokers (14 -29 days). Our choice of cutpoints was infl uenced by Lenk et al (2009) , who divided intermittent smokers into two groups, and we added the third " infrequent " category to set apart the relatively large number of individuals whose smoking frequency approximated a pattern of less-than-weekly use. The count variable was used for the trajectory analysis, and the categorical variable was used in subsequent analyses predicting smoking trajectory group membership (see Statistical Analysis below).…”

“…Third, following students from their fi nal year in high school to 2-years post-high school, White et al (2009) found that heavy smoking was much more stable than light smoking, in that 79% of heavy smokers remained heavy smokers 2 years later, but less than half of light smokers remained light smokers. The latter two studies grouped all intermittent users together, rather than differentiating between higher and lower levels of intermittent smoking, as suggested by Lenk et al (2009) . Moreover, they raised important questions about the relationship between alcohol use and changes in smoking behavior.…”

“…Light or intermittent smoking is common among young adults ( Lenk, Chen, Bernat, Forster, & Rode, 2009 ;Wetter et al, 2004 ;White, Bray, Fleming, & Catalano, 2009 ) and typifies a pattern of smoking in social situations ( Moran, Wechsler, & Rigotti, 2004 ;Waters, Harris, Hall, Nazir, & Waigandt, 2006 ). Among current smokers, intermittent smoking is more common among minorities (relative to Whites), young adults age d 18 -24 (relative to 45 -64 year olds), and individuals with a college education (relative to those with less education; Trinidad et al, 2009 ;Wortley, Husten, Trosclair, Chrismon, & Pederson,Cigarette smoking among college students Buyske, 2000 ;White, Nagin, Replogle, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 2004 ;White, Pandina, & Chen, 2002 ).…”