Article Text

PDF
Predicting smokers’ non-compliance with smoking restrictions in public places
  1. L Lazuras1,
  2. J R Eiser2,
  3. A Rodafinos3
  1. 1
    South-East European Research Centre (SEERC), Thessaloniki, Greece
  2. 2
    University of Sheffield, Psychology Department, Sheffield, UK
  3. 3
    City College International Faculty of the University of Sheffield, Thessaloniki, Greece
  1. Dr L Lazuras, SEERC, 24 Prox. Koromila Street, 546 24, Thessaloniki, Greece; llazuras{at}seerc.org

Abstract

Objective: The present study aimed to identify the predictors of non-compliance with smoking restrictions among Greek college student smokers. Differences in attitudes to smoking bans and tobacco control policies between current smokers and non-smokers were also examined.

Methods: Data were collected from college students (n = 229, mean (SD) age 21.27 (3.15) years). Measures included tobacco dependence, attitudes to tobacco control policies, outcome expectancy and normative beliefs.

Results: The majority of current smokers reported non-compliance with existing restrictions. Logistic regression analysis showed that non-compliance was significantly predicted by (less) anticipated regret from tobacco-related health harm, tobacco dependence and perceived prevalence and social acceptability of smoking. Analysis of variance indicated that current non-smokers held significantly more positive attitudes to smoking bans and tobacco control policies than current smokers.

Conclusions: Smoking was highly prevalent, and more than half of current smokers reported not complying with existing regulations in public places. Smokers’ attitudes to smoking bans and tobacco control policies did not have an effect on compliance behaviour. Future policies to promote compliance with smoking restrictions in Greece should target health-related anticipated regret, and perceived social norms.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Funding: This study was financially supported by a Cancer Research UK grant, no. C3841/A8924.

  • Ethics approval: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Psychology Department, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.