Skip to Content

Narrow Your List

Publications & Research Products

Products found: 170
  • Smoke-free policies in homes and cars among U.S. adults: What exceptions exist regarding products and situations?

    Background: How individuals address the use of emerging tobacco products and marijuana or the other exceptions made to personal smoke-free policies has received limited attention. Thus, we examined what exceptions exist regarding types of tobacco product and marijuana emissions, locations within the home, and situational factors. Design/Methods: In 2013, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among 2,500 U.S. adults recruited through an online survey panel, oversampling tobacco users. We assessed tobacco/marijuana use, smoke-free policies in homes and cars, types of emissions from tobacco products and marijuana allowed in the home, locations/rooms where smoking was allowed, and situational exceptions to smoke-free policies. We conducted descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses to examine prevalence and correlates of these nuances. Results: In the past month, 36.7% had used cigarettes, 5.7% large cigars, 6.6% little cigars, 4.9% cigarillos, 3.5% hookah, 7.6% e-cigarettes, and 9.9% marijuana. In homes, 71.1% reported a full ban (not allowed anywhere), 15.0% reported a partial ban (allowed some places/times); and 15.9% reported to ban (allowed anywhere). In cars, 61.0% reported a full ban, 13.2% reported a partial ban, and 17.0% reported no ban. When asked about which types of emissions were allowed in the home, 24.5% allowed cigarette smoke, 16.4% cigar smoke, 33.8% e-cigarette vapor, 11.4% hookah emissions, and 12.6% marijuana smoke. In addition, 18.7% allowed smoking in the family/living room, 14.8% in the kitchen, 13.0% in the bathroom, 13.0% in an adult bedroom, and 2.2% in a child’s bedroom. In terms of situational exceptions, 21.6% made exceptions when the weather was bad, 19.8% when it was dark, 20.2% when there is a party/celebration in the home, and 7.5% when a guest is visiting. Conclusion: Assessments of personal smoke-free policies indicate various exceptions based on type of product used and other nuances to location and situations, thus requiring attention in order to prevent secondhand exposure to toxins from tobacco products and marijuana. Berg, C. J. & Kegler, M.C. (2015, March). Smoke-free policies in homes and cars among U.S. adults: What exceptions exist regarding products and situations? Presentation at the 2015 World Conference on Tobacco or Health, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

  • Smoke-free policies in homes and cars among U.S. adults: What exceptions exist regarding types of tobacco product and marijuana emissions, locations within the home, and situational factors?

    Poster: Berg, C. J. & Kegler, M.C. (2014, November). Smoke-free policies in homes and cars among U.S. adults: What exceptions exist regarding types of tobacco product and marijuana emissions, locations within the home, and situational factors? Presentation at the 2014 American Public Health Association Annual Meeting. New Orleans, Louisiana.

  • Smoke-free Policies in Multiunit Housing: Correlations with Smoking Behavior and Reactions to Messaging Strategies in Support and Opposition

    This study examined correlates of having smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) among U.S. adults and reactions to messaging regarding their implementation. In 2013, 2,500 U.S. adults were recruited through an online survey panel to complete a cross-sectional survey assessing tobacco use, personal smoke-free policies in homes and cars, and smoke-free MUH policies. We also assessed reactions to messaging in relation to smoke-free MUH policies using messaging frames of: health, economy, youth prevention, individual rights/responsibility, religion/morality, and hospitality. Overall, 752 (30.1%) lived in MUH; 423 (56.3%) had no smoke-free MUH policies; 207 (27.5%) had partial MUH policies (i.e., some smoke-free areas); 122 (16.2%) had complete smoke-free MUH policies (i.e., smoke-free in all indoor areas). Multivariate regression indicated that correlates of less restrictive MUH policies included younger age, lower education and income (p’s<.01). After controlling for sociodemographics and smoking-related factors, more restrictive smoke-free MUH policies were associated with fewer smoking days in the past month, recent quit attempts, and readiness to quit among current smokers (p’s<.05). More restrictive MUH policies were associated with greater private restrictions in homes and cars (p’s<.001). In terms of messaging strategies, “People have the right to smoke in their own homes” (rights/responsibility; M=6.8 on a scale of 1 to 9, 9 being most persuasive) and “Property owners, not the government, should decide whether to permit smoking in their properties” (rights/responsibility; M=5.8) were the most persuasive messages opposing smoke-free MUH policies. The most persuasive messages in support were “You have the right to breathe clean air in your home” (rights/responsibility; M=7.7) and “Your loved ones have the right to breath clean air in your home” (youth; M=7.0). Smoke-free MUH policies may increase health disparities; they are less common in lower SES groups but are associated with actions toward cessation among smokers. Messaging in favor of vs. against MUH policies was more persuasive, indicating the potential for using these approaches. Berg, C. J., Haardӧrfer, R., Solomon, M., & Kegler, M. C. (2015, February). Smoke-free Policies in Multiunit Housing: Correlations with Smoking Behavior and Reactions to Messaging Strategies in Support and Opposition. Presentation at the 2015 Annual Meeting of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

  • Smoke-free Policies in Multiunit Housing: Smoking Behavior and Reactions to Messaging Strategies in Support and Opposition.

    INTRODUCTION: Given the high proportion of US adults living in multiunit housing (MUH) and the related risks of secondhand smoke, we examined correlates of having smoke-free MUH policies, level of support for such policies, and reactions to related messaging among a quota-based nonprobability sample of US adults. METHODS: In 2013, 752 adult MUH residents were recruited through an online survey panel to complete a cross-sectional survey assessing tobacco use, personal smoke-free policies in homes and cars, smoke-free MUH policies, and reactions to messaging on smoke-free MUH policies. We sought sufficient representation of smokers, racial/ethnic minorities, and residents of the Southeast. RESULTS: Overall, 56.3% had no smoke-free MUH policies and 16.2% had complete policies; 62.8% favored living in smoke-free MUH, and 28.9% said they would move if their building became smoke-free. Multivariate regression indicated that correlates of living in MUH with partial or no policies included younger age, less education, lower income, and current smoking (P's ≤ .01); more restrictive smoke-free MUH policies were associated with lower cigarette consumption and recent quit attempts among current smokers (P's < .05); and correlates of support for MUH policies included greater education, nonsmoker status, and having complete MUH policies (P's < .05). Of 9 messages opposing smoke-free MUH policies, the most persuasive was "People have the right to smoke in their own homes"; the most persuasive message of 11 in support was "You have the right to breathe clean air in your home." CONCLUSION: Smoke-free MUH policies may reduce smoking. Messaging in favor of smoke-free MUH policies was more persuasive than messaging opposing such policies, indicating the potential for using these approaches.

  • Smokers' perceptions of the health risks of e-cigarettes and other tobacco products: Implications for tobacco control.

    Lead author: Jessica Pepper. Poster and "rapid fire" oral presentation at the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) 21st Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA.

  • Smoking selfies: Using Instagram to examine smoking behavior

    SRNT, Chicago, IL, 2016. Szczypka G, Cortese D, Wang S, Ilakkuvan V, Hair E, Vallone D, Emery S. Smoking selfies: Using Instagram to examine smoking behavior. Poster Session #3, Poster #66, Friday, March 4.

  • Social Branding to Decrease Smoking Among Young Adults in Bars

    Objectives. We evaluated a Social Branding antitobacco intervention for “hipster” young adults that was implemented between 2008 and 2011 in San Diego, California. Methods. We conducted repeated cross-sectional surveys of random samples of young adults going to bars at baseline and over a 3-year follow-up. We used multinomial logistic regression to evaluate changes in daily smoking, nondaily smoking, and binge drinking, controlling for demographic characteristics, alcohol use, advertising receptivity, trend sensitivity, and tobacco-related attitudes. Results. During the intervention, current (past 30 day) smoking decreased from 57% (baseline) to 48% (at follow-up 3; P?=?.002), and daily smoking decreased from 22% to 15% (P?<?.001). There were significant interactions between hipster affiliation and alcohol use on smoking. Among hipster binge drinkers, the odds of daily smoking (odds ratio [OR]?=?0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]?=?0.30, 0.63) and nondaily smoking (OR?=?0.57; 95% CI?=?0.42, 0.77) decreased significantly at follow-up 3. Binge drinking also decreased significantly at follow-up 3 (OR?=?0.64; 95% CI?=?0.53, 0.78). Conclusions. Social Branding campaigns are a promising strategy to decrease smoking in young adult bar patrons.

  • Social Branding® to Young Adult Tobacco Use: Evidence of a Promising New Approach

  • Social media data analysis: Introducing some innovative, rigorous, and interdisciplinary methods

    Emery S (2017, April). Social media data analysis: Introducing some innovative, rigorous, and interdisciplinary methods. CDC Roundtable, CDC Evaluation Group, Atlanta, GA.

  • Standardized Tobacco Assessment for Retail Settings (STARS) Surveillance Survey

    The Standardized Tobacco Assessment for Retail Settings (STARS) survey was designed for practitioners to inform state and local tobacco control policies for the point of sale. The STARS form and training materials resulted from a collaboration of SCTC researchers with stakeholders from five state health departments, the CDC, and the Tobacco Control Legal Consortium. The assessment items (e.g., price, product promotions) were selected exclusively for their policy relevance; no items function as compliance checks for federal regulations. This user-friendly survey can be filled out by professionally trained data collectors, as well as self-trained youth and adults.