Abstract
Recent studies have suggested that a prevention program that addresses the social influences that encourage smoking can be effective in deterring cigarette use by adolescents. This study presents 4- and 5-year follow-up results from two studies which evaluated three variations of this social influences model and compared them to a health consequences program and an existing-curriculum condition. The results suggest that a seventh-grade program, built around the social influences model and taught jointly by same-age peer leaders and local classroom teachers, may reduce 4-year weekly- and daily-smoking cumulative incidence rates, providing the first evidence for any long-term effects for the social influences model. However, the results also suggest that any long-term effects from such interventions are probably limited and may depend heavily on the manner in which the social influences model is translated during the intervention. Additional follow-up studies are needed to clarify the long-term effects of these intervention programs.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ajzen, I., and Fishbein, M. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific behaviors.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 27(1): 41–57.
Arkin, R. M., Roemhild, H. F., Johnson, C. A., Luepker, R. V., and Murray, D. M. (1981). The Minnesota smoking prevention program: A seventh-grade health curriculum supplement.J. School Health 51(9): 611–616.
Bauman, K. E., Koch, G. G., and Bryan, E. S. (1982). Validity of self-reports of adolescent cigarette smoking.Int. J. Addict. 17: 1131–1136.
Best, J. A., Thomson S. J., Santi, S. M., Smith, E. A., and Brown, K. S. (1988). Preventing cigarette smoking among school children.Annu. Rev. Public Health 9: 161–201.
Biglan, A., and Ary, D. V. (1985). Methodological issues in research on smoking prevention. In Bell, C. S., and Battjes, R. (eds.),Prevention Research: Deterring Drug Abuse Among Children and Adolescents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Biglan, A., Severson, H., Ary, D., Faller, C., Gallison, C., Thompson, R., Glasgow, R., and Lichtenstein, E. (1987). Do smoking prevention programs really work? Attrition and the internal and external validity of an evaluation of a refusal skills training program.J. Behav. Med. 10: 159–171.
Bishop, Y. M. M., Feinberg, S. E., and Holland, P. W. (1975).Discrete Multivariate Analysis, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 131–136.
Botvin, G. J. (1986). Substance abuse prevention research: Recent developments and future directions.J. School Health 56: 369–374.
Botvin, G. J., Renick, N. L., and Baker, E. (1983). The effects of scheduling format and booster sessions on a broad spectrum psychological approach to smoking prevention.J. Behav. Med. 6: 359–379.
Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (1979).Quasi-Experimentation. Design and Analysis Issures for Field Settings, Rand McNally, Chicago.
Dixon, W. J., Brown, M. B., Engelman, L., Frane, J. W., Hill, M. A., Jennrich, R. I., and Toperek, J. D. (1983).BMDP Statistical Software. 1983 Printing with Additions, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Evans, R. I., Hansen, W. B., and Mittelmark, M. (1977). Increasing the validity of self-reports of smoking behavior in children.J. Appl. Psychol. 62: 521–523.
Flay, B. R. (1985). Psychosocial approaches to smoking prevention: A review of findings.Health Psychol. 4: 449–488.
Hansen, W. B., Malotte, C. K., and Fielding, J. E. (1985). The bogus pipeline revisited: The use of the threat of detection as a means of increasing self-reports of tobacco use.J. Appl. Psychol. 3: 15–27.
Luepker, R. V., Pechacek, T. F., Murray, D. M., Johnson, C. A., Hund, F., and Jacobs, D. R. (1981). Saliva thiocyanate: A chemical indicator of cigarette smoking in adolescents.Am. J. Public Health 71: 1230–1324.
Murray, D. M., and Perry, C. L. (1987). The measurement of substance use among adolescents: When is the “bogus pipeline” method needed?Addict. Behav. 12(2).
Murray, D. M., Luepker, R. V., Johnson, C. A., and Mittelmark, M. B. (1984). The prevention of cigarette smoking in children: A comparison of four strategies.J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 14: 274–288.
Murray, D. M., O'Connell, C. M., Schmid, L. A., and Perry, C. L. (1987a). The validity of smoking self-reports by adolescents: A reexamination of the bogus pipeline procedure.Addict. Behav. 12: 7–15.
Murray, D. M., Richards, P. S., Luepker, R. V., and Johnson, C. A., (1987b). The prevention of cigarette smoking in children: Two- and three-year follow-up comparison of four prevention strategies.J. Behav. Med. 10: 595–611.
Pechacek, T. F., Murray, D. M., Luepker, R. V., Mittelmark, M. B., Johnson, C. A., and Shultz, J. (1984). Measurement of adolescent smoking behavior: Rationale and methods.J. Behav. Med. 7: 123–140.
Pirie, P., Murray, D. M., and Luepker, R. V. (1988). Smoking prevalence in a cohort of adolescents including absentees, dropouts, and transfers.Am. J. Public Health 78: 176–178.
Snow, W. H., Gilchrist, L. D., and Schinke, S. P. (1985). A critique of progress in adolescent smoking prevention.Children Youth Serv. Rev. 1: 1–19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was supported by grants from the National Institute for Child and Human Development (R01 HD 12801 and N01 HD 92831), National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA/HD 03205), and National Cancer Institute (R01 CA 38275).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Murray, D.M., Davis-Hearn, M., Goldman, A.I. et al. Four- and five-year follow-up results from four seventh-grade smoking prevention strategies. J Behav Med 11, 395–405 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00844938
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00844938