Pharmacological and Social Smoke Exposure as Differential Predictors of Smoking Risk in Never-Smoking Youth
|
Référence bibliographique [1721]
Racicot, Simon. 2008. «Pharmacological and Social Smoke Exposure as Differential Predictors of Smoking Risk in Never-Smoking Youth». Mémoire de maîtrise, Université Concordia, Département de psychologie.
Intentions : « The aim of the present study was to simultaneously investigate whether social smoke exposure and pharmacological exposure to nicotine both uniquely contribute to greater smoking risk among never-smoking youth. » (p. iii)
Questions/Hypothèses : « First, it was hypothesized that greater pharmacological exposure [...] would predict greater smoking risk factors (expectancies, smoking susceptibility, perceived nicotine dependence). Second, it was hypothesized that greater social smoke exposure (parent, sibling, peer, school) would predict greater smoking risk factors. Third, it was hypothesized that both greater pharmacological exposure and greater social exposure would each uniquely contribute to the model to predict smoking risk factors in youth. » (p. 50)
2. Méthode
Échantillon/Matériau : 338 never-smoking youth aged 11-13 years
Instruments : Self-report questionnaires on smoking behaviours, social smoke exposure and known risk factors for eventual smoking
Type de traitement des données : Analyse statistique
3. Résumé
This study focused on two possible factors contributing to smoking risk among children and adolescents : social smoke exposure (parents, peers, siblings, school) and physiological exposure to nicotine. The results showed that « [p]harmacological exposure was not associated with smoking risk [...] (p. iii), whereas «[s]ocial smoke exposure of parental and peer smoking were significantly associated with smoking risk. When considered simultaneously, despite having models with acceptable to good fit, pharmacological and social smoke exposure together largely explained only a small proportion of the variance in smoking risk [...], with exception to peer smoking which explained considerable variance.» (pp. iii-iv) These results do not support the possibility of a physiological pathway from second-hand exposure to smoking behavior. Rather, [they] suggest biomarkers may actually be a good proxy for social smoke exposure. » (p. iv)