Smoke-free policies and non-smokers’ reactions to SHS exposure in small and medium enterprises

Abstract

Introduction: Non-smoker employees can significantly improve the existing smoke-free policies in the workplace by asserting their right for smoke-free air and confronting smoker colleagues. The aim of the study was to assess the psychological and social drivers of non-smokers' readiness to assert their right for smoke-free air in the workplace. Materials and Methods: Twenty-six small-and-medium enterprises (SME) with diverse background were randomly selected, and 284 employees agreed to participate in the study. Our study focused on the responses of 85 non-smokers (M age = 34 years, SD = 7.98, 84.2% worked in indoor offices). A cross-sectional design was used and participants completed a structured anonymous questionnaire assessing background and demographic characteristics, and psychosocial predictors of assertiveness intentions. Results: Although more than half of non-smokers reported they were often/almost always bothered by exposure to SHS, roughly one third of them reported having asked their colleagues not to smoke at work. Regression analysis showed that the effects of distal predictors (i.e. annoyance due to SHS exposure) were mediated by past behaviour, attitudes (protection motivation beliefs), social norms, and self-efficacy. Conclusions: Health beliefs related to SHS exposure, and concerns about workplace health and job performance, social norms and self-efficacy can increase the assertiveness of non-smokers in workplace settings. Related campaigns should focus on communicating normative messages and self-efficacy training to empower non-smoker employees to act assertively towards protecting their smoke-free rights.

Non‐smoker assertive behaviour against smoke exposure: Chinese and Korean American non‐smokers

“…The relationship between single marital status and assertive behaviour is consistent with a previous study conducted in Korea and may suggest variability in the social contexts where individuals are exposed to SHS and feel empowered to ask smokers not to smoke . As has been found in previous research conducted in Western workplace settings , beliefs about the harms of tobacco exposure were associated with assertive behaviour. Therefore, efforts to educate non‐smokers, especially given that some Asian Americans hold inaccurate beliefs about the harms of tobacco use and SHS exposure , should help empower non‐smokers to be assertive.…”

Speaking up about Lighting up in Public: Examining Psychosocial Correlates of Smoking and Vaping Assertive Communication Intentions among U.S. Adults

“…Along those lines, studies have examined attitudes toward exposure to secondhand smoke, such as being annoyed by SHSe. Negative attitude toward SHSe was found to be associated with being more willing to voice objections to SHSe in work settings (Sivri et al, 2013). Based on these prior findings and in line with the logic in expectancy value theories, we hypothesized that those who have a more positive attitude toward SHSe and SHVe would generally be less likely to voice opposition to smoking and vaping.…”

“…In both cases, the person communicating seeks to influence behavior through direct interpersonal verbal intervention (i.e., assertive communication). Past research has examined correlates of asking others not to smoke in a general context (e.g., Brownson, Davis, Wilkerson, & Jackson-Thompson, 1994;Elder et al, 1992), and also focused on more specific locations, such as workplaces (Sivri, Lazuras, Rodafinos, & Eiser, 2013), homes (Spangler, Csákányi, Rogers, & Katona, 2014) and colleges (Brann & Sutton, 2009;Choo & Kim, 2011). However, to our knowledge, no published studies examine psychosocial correlates of intentions to ask others not to smoke or vape in the kinds of public venues that are increasingly smoke-free (e.g., bars, restaurants, and parks), nor have any studies directly compared communication intentions surrounding vaping and smoking.…”

“…Perceived SHVe risk is also associated with support for restrictions on vaping in public venues (Mello et al, 2016). Although some European studies that focused on the workplace context did not find perceived SHSe harm to be a factor in assertive communication among coworkers (Aspropoulos, Lazuras, Rodafinos & Eiser, 2010;Lazuras, Zlatev, Rodafinos & Eiser, 2012;Sivri et al, 2013), others have found beliefs about SHSe harm contribute to models of workplace assertive communication intentions (Willemsen & de Vries, 1996). Moreover, studies in Missouri and California found perceived harmfulness of SHSe to be associated with greater willingness to ask someone not to smoke, and to be an antecedent of assertive communicative behavior in a more general context (Brownson, Davis, Wilkerson, & Jackson-Thompson, 1994;Elder et al, 1992).…”

“…From a theoretical standpoint, a number of behavior theories and frameworks include efficacy or perceived behavioral control as a core explanatory factor, including Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 2004), the Attitudes-Social Influence-Efficacy model (Willemsen & de Vries, 1996), Risk Perception Attitude framework (Rimal & Real, 2003), and the Reasoned Action Approach/TPB (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). In the context of communication surrounding asking someone not to smoke, self-efficacy helped explain intentions to voice objections in the workplace (Sivri et al, 2013); however, there have been mixed findings for self-efficacy as a factor in explaining college students' assertive communication intentions (Brann & Sutton, 2009;Choo & Kim, 2011). Based on theory suggesting that self-efficacy is a factor in volitional behavior, we hypothesized that, if there is an association: H4a/H4b Greater self-efficacy will be associated with increased SHSe/SHVe ACI in public venues.…”