Reducing Tobacco Use Among Adolescents Using Social Cognitive Theory and Social Network Theory

Running head: REDUCING TOBACCO USE USING SCT & SNT 1
Reducing Tobacco Use Among Adolescents Using
Social Cognitive Theory and Social Network Theory
Shauna Ayres
HBEH 730 - Theoretical Foundations of Behavioral and Social Science
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
October 12, 2015
On my honor, I certify that no unauthorized assistance has been received or given in the completion of this
work and all outside sources have been cited appropriately.

REDUCING TOBACCO USE USING SCT & SNT 2
INTRODUCTION: Public health efforts to reduce tobacco use among adolescents started in the late
1980s (Wakefield, 2000) and continues to be a major public health goal. Research has demonstrated that
tobacco use at a young age leads to addiction and physical dependency for nicotine more quickly in
developing adolescent brains, as compared to adult brains, and permanently alters the composition of the
brain (Jacobsen, 2007). This is supported by the finding that approximately 9 out of 10 adult smokers report
smoking as adolescents (Towns, 2015; CDC, 2014). Additionally, it is estimated that 3,200-4,000 children
(<18 years old) smoke their first cigarette every day (CDC, 2010; 2014), of which about 1,000 children
become daily smokers (CDC, 2010). If current trends continue, estimates conclude that 5.6 million of
today’s youth will die prematurely from smoking-related illnesses (CDC, 2014).
Tobacco use is associated with a variety of negative health outcomes for young smokers. The short-
term effects include addiction to nicotine, reduced lung function, reduced lung growth, early cardiovascular
damage, shortness of breath, and reduced physical stamina (CDC, 2014). Long-term effects include, but
are not limited to, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,
emphysema, and diabetes (National Cancer Institute, 2014; CDC, 2014).
Aggregate data provided by Healthy People 2020 shows that smoking rates among children and
adolescents are declining with the exception of “smokeless tobacco use by adolescents in the past month”
(Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 2015). However, the trends are leveling off and many
Healthy People 2020 target goals associated with youth tobacco use and exposure will not be met in the
next five years. The increased advertising exposure, availability, and popularity of “safe” e-cigarettes and
other smokeless tobacco products among adolescents are concerning (Wang, 2014; Knorst, 2014). A major
fear is that more adolescents will initiate tobacco habits using these attractive alternative tobacco products
than would have otherwise initiated tobacco using traditional tobacco products. Consequently, more
adolescents may become nicotine dependent and increase their risk of tobacco-related health issues (Wang,
2014).
The purpose of this paper is to examine adolescent tobacco use through the theoretical lenses of the
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Social Network Theory (SNT). First, an explanation of the SCT

will be provided and accompanied by examples of how this theory has been applied to measuring adolescent
tobacco use and implementing successful health promotion programs. Next, an explanation of the SNT will
be outlined along with application and implementation examples. Possible effective strategies will then be
discussed for combining the theories along with key strengths and weaknesses. Finally, ideas for future
research directions will be considered.
SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: Social Cognitive Theory determines motivating factors behind
health behaviors, provides understanding of those motivations, and then designs health interventions to
promote positive behavior change (Kelder, 2015). The concept model is comprised of a dynamic triad of
three factors: personal cognitive factors, socioenvironmental factors, and behavioral factors. Personal
cognitive factors can be broken down into four constructs that address personal abilities: self-efficacy,
collective efficacy, outcome expectations, and knowledge. Socioenvironmental factors can be broken down
into four constructs that address physical and social factors in the environment: observational learning,
normative beliefs, social support, and barriers and opportunities. Behavioral factors can be broken down
into three constructs that address health actions: behavioral skills, intentions, and reinforcement and
punishment (Kelder, 2015).
All 11 constructs in the SCT impact each other at different times and strengths and no construct is
considered more important or influential in determining a health behavior; however, certain constructs may
be more foundational and effective when designing a specific intervention for a certain behavior (tobacco
use) among an identified population (adolescents). By classifying intervention strategies into constructs,
program planners can provide a multifactor approach that will yield the greatest impact.
Because adolescents are in a period of self-identity, the emphasis on self-efficacy for this group is
critical when addressing any health behavior. A study conducted by Van Zundert in the Netherlands
attempted to determine if the cognitive factors of self-efficacy and outcome expectations and the behavioral
factor, intentions, could be used to predict adolescent smoking lapses and relapses. Self-efficacy was
defined as “the ability to resist smoking in tempting situations.” Outcome expectations were operationalized
as the “pros and cons of smoking” and the “pros of quitting.” Intentions were defined as “the motivation or

readiness to quit.” In the study, 135 daily smoking adolescents who were serious about quitting were
monitored three times per day for four weeks, and a two month follow-up was also administered. The
primary findings confirmed that adolescents who endorsed the pros of smoking (OR 1.24), had low self-
efficacy (OR 1.34), and smoked heavily at baseline (OR 1.05) predicted relapse within three weeks after
quitting (Van Zundert, 2009). This study highlights the importance of the cognitive factors of self-efficacy
and outcome expectations and stresses that more efforts should focus on increasing adolescent self-efficacy
and improving positive outcome expectations prior to their attempt to quit (Van Zundert, 2009).
However, a 1991 study by Hansen examined the effect of school-based programs stressing refusal
skills (behavioral skills) compared to programs correcting erroneous perspectives of prevalence and
acceptability (normative beliefs) for alcohol and marijuana use between grade seven and eight. The findings
suggest that programs focusing on normative beliefs were more effective at preventing adolescent substance
use (22.5% reduction rate for initial alcohol use and 64.5% reduction rate for marijuana incidence) (Hansen,
1991). This is not to say that behavioral skills, or in this case refusal skills, are not an important part to
adolescent tobacco abstinence, and in fact they may be instrumental for teens who have initiated tobacco
use and are trying to quit; however, an intervention based solely on teaching behavioral skills is not a
sufficient strategy. Further, a critique of 10 school-based health education programs that assessed 12
mediating factors of substance use among adolescents highlighted the need for a multi-strategy approach
and suggested that “at a minimum” correcting erroneous normative beliefs, having students commit to
abstinence (intention), educating students about consequences (knowledge), and having students identify
their ideal lifestyles and stressing how substances are incongruent with that lifestyle (outcome expectations)
should be incorporated in prevention programs to reduce substance use among adolescents (Wyrick, 2001).
An applied method for effecting normative beliefs and intentions was the enactment of the United
Kingdom’s Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act (TAPA), which prohibited most tobacco marketing
from February 2003 to July 2005. Brown and Moodie used a cross-sectional study of over 1,100 adolescents
(11 to 16 years old) to measure changes in normative beliefs at various intervals: pre-ban, mid-ban, and
post-ban. The ban was successful in reducing teens’ intentions to smoke as well as shifting the normative

beliefs around smoking to be more socially unacceptable both during and after the marketing restrictions
(Brown, 2009). This strategy can also target outcome expectations if public health campaigns replace
tobacco ads with promotions that emphasize the health benefits of not using tobacco (physical outcome
expectation), portray smokers as uncool (social outcome expectation), and draw attention to personal
feelings about using tobacco (self-evaluative outcome expectation) (Kelder, 2015). Likewise, increasing
accurate knowledge about tobacco use can occur across a variety of mediums; however, widespread media
campaigns are instrumental when trying to reach large populations (Kelder, 2015).
A study conducted in the United Kingdom examined data from the 2007 and 2009 UK Office for
National Statistics Opinions and Lifestyle Survey to understand the characteristics shared among smokers
who have never tried to quit. They found that desire (intention) was the most predictive factor, followed by
health status, and also if smokers had received support or attention from someone to quit in the last year.
Those who had not received support were 1.57 times more likely to never have tried to quit as compared to
those who had received support. Also, smokers whose healthcare provider did not provide cessation advice
in the last five years were 2.69 times more likely to report never having tried to quit (Sharma, 2014).
Multiple web- or mobile-based cessation studies have found that interactive, tailored, and support-focused
interventions are linked to lowering cigarette consumption (Civljak, 2010; Haug, 2013; Shi, 2013). Social
support for asking questions, getting information, and quitting can be provided via quit lines, apps or
mHealth cessation programs, family and friends, school teachers and counselors, or social media platforms.
Related to social support, a key finding in a study of 3,473 youths with nonsmoking parents was that
the protective effects of increased perceived punishment and increased parental monitoring had on initiation
of smoking. Adolescents with higher parental monitoring were 33% less likely to start smoking while
decreased parental monitoring and decreased perceived punishment increase smoking initiation by 55%
and 17% respectively (Mahabee-Gittens, 2012). Interestingly however, another study found that a high-
school incentive-based cessation program was successful for short-term abstinence, but did not change
long-term abstinence rates (Krishnan-Sarin, 2013). Thus, reinforcements and punishments are highly

individualized and may be different for each person. Intervention designers should understand their target
population’s motivations in order to appropriately utilize this construct.
Reducing barriers and increasing opportunities for adolescents who have already started using tobacco
can be a challenge if other constructs are not being addressed. For example, lack of social support for
quitting or the perceived social benefit of smoking can both be barriers for abstinence. Several studies have
concluded that a primary action needed to reduce barriers for all smokers, including adolescents, is to create
or change policies (Rosenthal, 2013; Guiney, 2015; Levy 2012). This could transpire as mandating more
smoke-free zones, increasing tobacco taxes, increasing access to cessation treatment, or raising the
minimum age for tobacco sales (Levy, 2012; 2015; Bonnie, 2015). Due to the increasing prevalence of
smart phones, health professionals are becoming more interested in reducing barriers to access interventions
by developing health behavior apps and websites, which are relatively low-cost and accessible for both the
professional and the targeted individual. In addition, technology allows for unique tailoring of messages to
vast populations (Hall, 2015).
As demonstrated, aspects of the SCT are widely applied to adolescent tobacco use and often helpful
in reducing initiation rates or increasing cessation success; however, the theory in its entirety is too complex
for one study to address. This emphasizes the importance of the interactions between the various constructs
and acknowledges that there is not one formula for improving this health behavior. Some strategies are
foundational to success or have a greater individual impact on adolescent health outcomes such as self-
efficacy and social support, but nevertheless, incorporation of a variety of concepts into any intervention is
ideal so strengths of one construct overlap weaknesses of another.
SOCIAL NETWORK THEORY: Social Network Theory emphasizes understanding the connections
and relationships between and among individuals and groups to improve health (Valente, 2015). These
connections are often analyzed through mathematical algorithms and visually displayed as nodes/points
(people) and lines (connections). Unlike the SCT, the SNT does not have clearly defined constructs, but
rather three main components: network environment, position in a network, and structural or network
properties. The “network environment” component aims to understand the homophily, or the tendency for

like individuals to associate with one another. In the SNT, homophily is broken into two processes:
influence, or the degree to which individuals change their behaviors to match behaviors or beliefs; and
selection, or the degree to which they change their networks to match behaviors or beliefs. The “position
in a network” component identifies centrality of a social network, or the prominent people (opinion leaders)
with the greatest influence on the most people in the network. The “structural or network properties”
component seeks to explain the reciprocity in a social network, or the level of trust in a relationship;
transitivity, or the number of “friends who are friends with friends”; density, or number of interconnected
relationships; and the small-world property, or the distance between connections (Valente, 2015).
Essentially the SNT views the entire social network as one entity, not merely the sum of individuals, and
ultimately examines the encompassing network behavior. That network behavior is then the target for health
behavior change and improving network health.
The SNT is useful when trying to understand health beliefs and behaviors more today than ever before.
People are communicating ideas and beliefs much faster due to increased urbanization, improvements in
transportation, innovations in technology, accessibility to the internet, and the growth of social media.
Understanding these interactions is important when examining adolescent tobacco use because, as stated
before, adolescents are in a period of self-identity, and thus network-identity, and understanding the trends
in relationships between adolescents, their behaviors, and their networks becomes instrumental in
determining how to most effectively impact adolescents’ health beliefs and behaviors. The SNT theory is
particularly helpful because it provides tools to measure and understand adolescent social networks. By
identifying central positions in adolescent networks, intervention resources can be targeted to attain the
greatest impact within that particular network (Valente, 2015).
For example, during a three-year longitudinal study of 1,063 adolescents found that adolescents in
predominantly smoking peer groups were more likely to become smokers (40%) than those in
predominantly nonsmoking peer groups (27%) (Engels, 1997), demonstrating the SNT concept of influence
on homophily. This illustrates that tobacco use is a behavior that can be predicted by the friendship
connections adolescents have in their network. However, the researchers in this study also stress that other

determinants and social network connections are likely influencing adolescent behaviors simultaneously
and that peer connections should not be the only focus in any intervention (Engels, 1997). The same study
also found that smokers were more likely to become friends with other smokers (70%) as compared to
nonsmokers becoming friends with smokers (25%). This demonstrates the SNT concept of selection on
homophily such that adolescents tend to form network connections with peers that are similar to themselves
when it comes to smoking behavior. However, the research did not find that friendships were terminated
due to differing smoking behavior or habits (Engels, 1997).
Interventions for tobacco prevention among adolescents should be primarily focused on areas of
selection of new peer groups (Engles, 1997; Mercken, 2012). This could be achieved through media
campaigns or school-based programs that shift normative beliefs. If peers consider tobacco use to be
socially unacceptable and feel it will inhibit making friends, an adolescent may be less likely to initiate
tobacco use and will then be a positive influence on other individuals in the network. In time, nonsmoking
connections will become predominate, which will further perpetuate the shift in normative beliefs to
devalue tobacco use. This strategy can be particularly impactful when adolescents are transitioning from
junior high to high school—a time when many new connections develop.
Another network analysis conducted among 486 freshman students in Mexico found that students who
named more friends as being in their network had a protective factor for smoking (OR 0.89) while being
named a friend by peers increased probability of smoking (OR 1.10). It was theorized that these more
popular students (opinion leaders) had more pressure to smoke due to connections with other smokers
(influence). Due to their centrality in the student network, they would then be more influential in spreading
the norm that smoking is socially desirable (Ramirez-Ortiz, 2012). The study suggests future interventions
create a cultural climate where smoking is not valued by convincing popular students to support
antismoking norms and integrating these opinion leaders into prevention programs.
Identifying opinion leaders among adolescents in peer-led, school-based, antismoking health
promotion programs proved to be successful by reducing the odds of becoming a regular smoker by 22%
in a study conducted in England and Wales from 2001-2004. An in-depth network analysis was performed

on 10,730 students (12-13 years old) who were assigned to a control or intervention group. The control
group received normal smoking education—not peer-influenced—and the intervention group received
health programing supported by influential peers. Students were surveyed about their social networks and
the most frequently nominated students/friends in the intervention groups were trained as “peer supporters”
for a 10-week intervention period which focused on peer education and diffusing health promotion
messages (Starkey, 2009). This detailed examination of peer networks illustrates the SNT concept of
centrality in that among adolescents, popular peers (opinion leaders) are more influential than adult teachers
due to their central position in the network and can be utilized in health campaigns to influence the most
adolescents and alter the network behavior.
Although peer groups are important when considering tobacco use among adolescents, the family
structure is another critical network to understand when identifying risks for tobacco beliefs and behaviors.
A five-year longitudinal study of 406 adolescents (12-17 years old) found that adolescents with smoking
parents are 4.5 times more likely to experiment with tobacco and nearly 10 times more likely to become
regular users. Additionally, the risk of tobacco use increases with longer exposure to parental smoking.
However, former smokers or nonsmoking parents did not have a significant effect on adolescent tobacco
use (Mays, 2014). The study concluded that parents’ behaviors can unintentionally be passed to offspring;
and because duration of exposure to smoking is an additional variable predicting adolescent tobacco use,
parents who quit smoking as soon as possible can reduce their child’s risks of tobacco initiation and
dependency in the future. The SNT construct of structural or network properties is highlighted by the strong
reciprocity within a family unit and the profound effects it has on health behaviors such as tobacco use.
Likewise, a meta-analysis of 58 studies revealed that children with two parents who smoked had 2.73
times the risk of smoking. Increased risk of smoking was also linked if a sibling smoked (OR 2.30), the
mother smoked (OR 2.19), one parent smoked (OR 1.72), any household member smoked (OR 1.92), and
the father smoked (OR 1.66) (Leonardi-Bee, 2011). This highlights the small-world property of the SNT
by showing the strong ties among people living in the same household and the amount of influence these
people have on one another. Therefore, interventions combating adolescent tobacco beliefs and usage could

benefit from incorporating strategies to restructure the entire household network in respect to tobacco
exposure.
It is apparent that utilizing the SNT concepts can help understand the network complexities of
adolescents and how they relate to tobacco use. It is essential for health behavior interventions to identify
key opinion leaders and points of centrality among adolescent peer networks to effectively increase reach.
However, household networks and community networks are also important when influencing adolescent
behaviors and beliefs.
CONCLUSION: Both the Social Cognitive Theory and the Social Network Theory have proven to be
useful guides in understanding adolescent tobacco behavior. The SCT is more comprehensive and
comprised of a dynamic understanding of personal cognitive, socioenvironmental, and behavioral factors.
It is helpful in distinguishing strategies for interventions and correlations between constructs, variables, and
behavioral outcomes, but it lacks the insight into why those strategies are successful. Conversely, the SNT
does not provide concrete strategies like the SCT, but can examine evaluation gaps by describing networks
and why relationships exist and change. The SNT is also limited somewhat by measurement in that
qualitative data about relationships may not be accurately represented in a social network analysis or
quantitative data about relationships may not be that meaningful to the behavioral outcome. However, both
bring value and insight into finding best practices for improving current and creating new interventions to
prevent, reduce, and end adolescent tobacco use.
Personally, I think creating an anti-smoking program for adolescents will be most effective when it
classifies intervention strategies into all SCT constructs. For example, program planners would want to
ensure that they are providing a comprehensive, multifactorial approach by simultaneously addressing
personal cognitive, socioenvironmental, and behavioral factors. This is not to say that a program needs 11
different strategies; some activities, such as peer modeling, can be classified in any or all of the constructs
if well planned. For example, observing a respected peer refuse a cigarette during a role-playing exercise
can increase self-efficacy and collective efficacy by providing opportunities for mastery experiences,

develop behavior skills by suggesting refusal phrases, and shift social norms to support more anti-tobacco
attitudes.
The SNT can then be used to explain the success or failure of various strategies outlined in the SCT.
To continue with the peer-modeling example, SNT can provide insight into why this activity was successful
or not by answering questions related to the network environment, peer position in the network, and network
properties. SNT would examine the relationships the peer model had with others in the network and would
help to identify peers who will have the greatest impact on health behavior. Pinpointing the most influential
individuals is critical when designing an intervention to increase effectiveness and reduce wasted resources.
Most SCT studies utilize school-based interventions to reach adolescents; however, SNT studies
suggest adolescent anti-tobacco messaging that reaches outside the peer network and into wider familial
and community networks will have the greatest impact. The SNT not only focuses on message
dissemination, but also on how policies can influence a network. Large health campaigns, such as the Truth
and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, provide examples of health strategies that not only promote
individual change to refuse or stop using tobacco, but also focus on anti-tobacco laws such as creating
smoke-free public spaces, raising the minimum age to purchase tobacco, and mandating regulations on
tobacco advertising (Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, 2014; Truth Initiative Foundation, 2015).
Future research is needed to determine the optimal combination of constructs within the SCT and the
most appropriate strategies to target today’s adolescents. These findings can then be analyzed with the SNT
to understand more effective methods for implementing these constructs to reduce tobacco use at the
individual and network level. I think this will be primarily done via technological platforms such as mobile
phones, video games, and mass media. Tobacco use among adolescents is a complex public health concern
that is continually evolving and there is no one simple solution. Nevertheless, understanding the SCT and
SNT and their applications to this health behavior can help public health professions better address the issue
now, and with reassessment, develop new strategies in the future.

REFERENCES:
Bonnie, R.J., Stratton, K., & Kwan, L.Y. (2015). Public health implications of raising the minimum age for
purchasing tobacco products. National Academies Press.
Brown, A., & Moodie, C. (2009). The influence of tobacco marketing on adolescent smoking intentions via
normative beliefs. Health Education Research, 24(4), 721-733.
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. (2014). Who we are. Retrieved
from http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/who_we_are/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010). A report of the surgeon general: How tobacco smoke
causes disease: What it means to you. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). The health consequences of smoking—50 years of
progress: A report of the surgeon general. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.
Civljak, M., Sheikh, A., Stead, L. F., & Car, J. (2010). Internet-based interventions for smoking
cessation. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Engels, R. C., Knibbe, R. A., Drop, M. J., & de Haan, Y. T. (1997). Homogeneity of cigarette smoking
within peer groups: Influence or selection? Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication
of the Society for Public Health Education, 24(6), 801-811.
Guiney, H., Li, J., & Walton, D. (2015). Barriers to successful cessation among young late-onset
smokers. The New Zealand Medical Journal, 128(1416), 51-61.
Hall, A. K., Cole-Lewis, H., & Bernhardt, J. M. (2015). Mobile text messaging for health: A systematic
review of reviews. Annual Review of Public Health, 36, 393-415.

Hansen, W. B., & Graham, J. W. (1991). Preventing alcohol, marijuana, and cigarette use among
adolescents: Peer pressure resistance training versus establishing conservative norms. Preventive
Medicine, 20(3), 414-430.
Haug, S., Schaub, M. P., Venzin, V., Meyer, C., & John, U. (2013). Efficacy of a text message-based
smoking cessation intervention for young people: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Journal of
Medical Internet Research, 15(8), e171.
Jacobsen, L. K., Picciotto, M. R., Heath, C. J., Frost, S. J., Tsou, K. A., Dwan, R. A., . . . Mencl, W. E.
(2007). Prenatal and adolescent exposure to tobacco smoke modulates the development of white
matter microstructure. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for
Neuroscience, 27(49), 13491-13498.
Kelder, S.H., Hoelscher, D., Perry, C.L. (2015). How individuals, environments, and health behaviors
interact: Social cognitive theory. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B.K., Viswanath, K. (Ed.), Health behavior:
Theory, research, and practice (5th ed., pp. 159-181), Jossey-Bass.
Knorst, M. M., Benedetto, I. G., Hoffmeister, M. C., & Gazzana, M. B. (2014). The electronic cigarette:
The new cigarette of the 21st century? Jornal Brasileiro De Pneumologia: Publicacao Oficial Da
Sociedade Brasileira De Pneumologia e Tisilogia, 40(5), 564-572.
Krishnan-Sarin, S., Cavallo, D. A., Cooney, J. L., Schepis, T. S., Kong, G., Liss, T. B., ... Carroll, K. M.
(2013). An exploratory randomized controlled trial of a novel high-school-based smoking cessation
intervention for adolescent smokers using abstinence-contingent incentives and cognitive
behavioral therapy. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 132(1-2), 346-351.
Leonardi-Bee, J., Jere, M. L., & Britton, J. (2011). Exposure to parental and sibling smoking and the risk
of smoking uptake in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorax,
66(10), 847-855.
Levy, D., Fergus, C., Rudov, L., McCormick-Ricket, I., & Carton, T. (2015). Tobacco policies in Louisiana:
Recommendations for future tobacco control investment from SimSmoke, a policy simulation
model. Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research.

Levy, D. T., Boyle, R. G., & Abrams, D. B. (2012). The role of public policies in reducing smoking: The
Minnesota SimSmoke tobacco policy model. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(5
Suppl 3), S179-186.
Mahabee-Gittens, E. M., Xiao, Y., Gordon, J. S., & Khoury, J. C. (2012). Continued importance of family
factors in youth smoking behavior. Nicotine & Tobacco Research: Official Journal of the Society
for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 14(12), 1458-1466.
Mays, D., Gilman, S. E., Rende, R., Luta, G., Tercyak, K. P., & Niaura, R. S. (2014). Parental smoking
exposure and adolescent smoking trajectories. Pediatrics, 133(6), 983-991.
Mercken, L., Steglich, C., Sinclair, P., Holliday, J., & Moore, L. (2012). A longitudinal social network
analysis of peer influence, peer selection, and smoking behavior among adolescents in British
schools. Health Psychology: Official Journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American
Psychological Association, 31(4), 450-459.
National Cancer Institute. (2014). Harms of cigarette smoking and benefits of quitting. Retrieved from
http://www.cancer.gov.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco/
cessation-fact-sheet#q2
Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (2015). Healthy people 2020: Search the data.
Retrieved from http://www.healthypeople.gov.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/2020/data-search/Search-the-
Data
Ramirez-Ortiz, G., Caballero-Hoyos, R., Ramirez-Lopez, G., & Valente, T. W. (2012). The effects of social
networks on tobacco use among high-school adolescents in Mexico. Salud Publica De Mexico,
54(4), 433-441.
Rosenthal, L., Carroll-Scott, A., Earnshaw, V. A., Sackey, N., O'Malley, S. S., Santilli, A., & Ickovics, J.
R. (2013). Targeting cessation: Understanding barriers and motivations to quitting among urban
adult daily tobacco smokers. Addictive Behaviors, 38(3), 1639-1642.
Sharma, A., & Szatkowski, L. (2014). Characteristics of smokers who have never tried to quit: Evidence
from the British opinions and lifestyle survey. BMC Public Health, 14, 346.

Shi, H. J., Jiang, X. X., Yu, C. Y., & Zhang, Y. (2013). Use of mobile phone text messaging to deliver an
individualized smoking behavior intervention in Chinese adolescents. Journal of Telemedicine and
Telecare, 19(5), 282-287.
Starkey, F., Audrey, S., Holliday, J., Moore, L., & Campbell, R. (2009). Identifying influential young
people to undertake effective peer-led health promotion: The example of a stop smoking in schools
trial (ASSIST). Health Education Research, 24(6), 977-988.
Towns, S., DiFranza, J. R., Jayasuriya, G., Marshall, T., & Shah, S. (2015). Smoking cessation in
adolescents: Targeted approaches that work. Paediatric Respiratory Reviews.
Truth Initiative Foundation. (2015). ABOUT truth: How we finish it. Retrieved
from http://www.thetruth.com/about
Valente, T. W. (2015). Social networks and health behavior. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B.K., Viswanath, K.
(Ed.), Health behavior: Theory, research, and practice (5th ed., pp. 205-222), Jossey-Bass.
Van Zundert, R. M., Nijhof, L. M., & Engels, R. C. (2009). Testing social cognitive theory as a theoretical
framework to predict smoking relapse among daily smoking adolescents. Addictive
Behaviors, 34(3), 281-286.
Wakefield, M. & Chaloupka, F. (2000). Effectiveness of comprehensive tobacco control programs in
reducing teenage smoking in the USA. Tobacco Control, 9(2), 177–186.
Wang, B., King, B. A., Corey, C. G., Arrazola, R. A., & Johnson, S. E. (2014). Awareness and use of non-
conventional tobacco products among U.S. students, 2012. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 47(2 Suppl 1), S36-52.
Wyrick, D., Wyrick, C. H., Bibeau, D. L., & Fearnow-Kenney, M. (2001). Coverage of adolescent
substance use prevention in state frameworks for health education. The Journal of School Health,
71(9), 437-442.

Reducing Tobacco Use Among Adolescents Using Social Cognitive Theory and Social Network Theory

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Reducing Tobacco Use Among Adolescents Using Social Cognitive Theory and Social Network Theory

Similar to Reducing Tobacco Use Among Adolescents Using Social Cognitive Theory and Social Network Theory (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Reducing Tobacco Use Among Adolescents Using Social Cognitive Theory and Social Network Theory