Cigarette use among migrant and nonmigrant Mexican American youth: A socialization latent-variable model.

Abstract

A self-report survey of cigarette use among 10th- and 12th-grade Mexican American students found no differences in rates of use by migrant status. Male students reported higher levels of lifetime, experimental, and daily smoking than female students, and 12th-grade students reported higher levels of daily smoking than 10th-grade students. A socialization model of cigarette use based on peer cluster theory was evaluated using structural equation methods, examining the effects of family strength, family tobacco use, school adjustment, religious identification, and peer tobacco associations. The basic latent-structure socialization model was supported in all groups, but final models including specific effects identified both unique and common relationships by gender and migrant status. Common patterns across groups suggest that completely different prevention programs may not be necessary for these youth. However, program elements based on subtle group differences may serve to tailor prevention efforts and make them more effective.

Theory‐Based Determinants of Youth Smoking: A Multiple Influence Approach1

“…It should be noted that because of the number of these exploratory moderating effects tested (in contrast to our primary tests of the influence of the hypothesized proximal and distal determinants on smoking outcomes), we were less confidant of the replicability of such effects yielding probability values greater than .01 (e.g., the gender by peer norm predictor of smoking). Additionally, there may be important cultural factors that operate as moderators among Latino youth (e.g., Carvajal et al, 1997;Marin et al, 1990;Swaim et al, 1996)-the largest subgroup of our study-that were not addressed in our current models.…”

“…Empirical research has strongly linked each of our central proximal constructs to adolescent smoking outcomes (e.g., Biglan, Duncan, Ary, & Smolkowski, 1995;Carvajal, Photiades, Evans, & Nash, 1997;Chassin, Presson, Sherman, Corty, & Olshavsky, 1984;Ennett & Bauman, 1994;Marin, Marin, Pkrez-Stable, Otero-Sabogal, & Sabogal, 1990;Pederson, Koval, & O'Connor, 1997;Swaim, Oetting, & Casas, 1996;Tyas & Pederson, 1998). Based on this research, we hypothesize that intentions and attitudes more favorable to smoking will predict increased smoking levels; and that greater perceived risks, norms against smoking, self-efficacy to avoid smoking, and increased smoking impediments will predict decreased smoking levels.…”

Putting the positive in health psychology: A content analysis of three journals

“…Although a multitude of studies have examined healthy populations, many remain focused on the experience of deficits, such as responses to stress (Park and Adler, 2003), potential health deterioration (Uchino et al, 1995), unhealthy behaviors (e.g. cigarette use; Swaim et al, 1996), and adaptation to negative events (Damschroder et al, 2008). Far fewer have examined how healthy individuals enhance or optimize their functioning.…”

Global Positive Expectancies of the Self and Adolescents' Substance Use Avoidance: Testing a Social Influence Mediational Model

“…Some theories primarily emphasize global intrapersonal constructs (e.g., Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992; Kaplan, 1986 ) because they should function as stable and underlying (“distal”) determinants of a range of behaviors. Alternately, social influence‐related theories (e.g., Chassin, Pressen, Sherman, 1990; Evans, Dratt, Raines, & Rosenberg, 1988; Swaim, Oetting, & Casas, 1996 ) have focused on the more specific factors—the immediate (“proximal”) predictors of behavior. However, conceptualizing both proximal and distal determinants may be necessary to fully express the complex mechanisms leading to substance use (Flay & Petraitis, 1994; Jessor, Turbin, & Costa, 1998; Wills et al, 1996) .…”