Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 96, Issue 5, pp 348–352 | Cite as

Predictors of Different Cigarette Access Behaviours Among Occasional and Regular Smoking Youth

  • Scott T. LeatherdaleEmail author
Article

Abstract

Background

Understanding the different ways underage youth access tobacco is required in order to develop more effective tobacco access restrictions. The purpose of this study was to examine characteristics that predict whether underage smoking youth buy their own cigarettes, buy their cigarettes from friends, or get someone else to buy their cigarettes.

Methods

Logistic regression analyses were used to examine the predictors of three different tobacco access behaviours among 737 occasional smoking and 2,050 regular smoking youth.

Results

Most smoking youth were asked their age less than half of the time when trying to buy cigarettes. Occasional smokers usually buy their cigarettes from a friend (59.5%) and the majority of regular smokers usually buy their own cigarettes (59.8%). Occasional smokers were less likely to buy their own cigarettes (OR 0.85) and more likely to ask someone else to buy their cigarettes (OR 1.24) the more frequently they were asked their age on purchase attempts. Regular smokers were also less likely to buy their own cigarettes (OR 0.70) and more likely to buy their cigarettes from someone else (OR 1.51) or a friend (OR 1.18) the more frequently they were asked their age on purchase attempts.

Interpretation

Point-of-sale restrictions are insufficient to prevent youth from acquiring cigarettes because youth commonly access cigarettes from social sources. A more comprehensive approach for restricting access is required that targets both underage youth and individuals who purchase tobacco for underage youth.

MeSH terms

Smoking adolescent 

Résumé

Contexte

Pour établir des mesures de restriction efficaces, il est essentiel de déterminer comment les mineurs se procurent des cigarettes. La présente étude visait à examiner les caractéristiques prédictives des modes d’accès aux cigarettes des mineurs, soit par l’achat direct, auprès d’amis ou par la sollicitation des services d’une autre personne.

Méthodes

On a réalisé des analyses de régression logistiques pour examiner les variables prédictives des trois différents modes d’accès au tabac à l’égard de 737 mineurs, qui fument à l’occasion, et 2 050 mineurs qui fument chaque jour.

Résultats

On constate que moins d’une fois sur deux, les points de vente de cigarettes demandent l’âge des mineurs qui tentent de se procurer du tabac. Les fumeurs occasionnels achètent leurs cigarettes auprès d’amis (59,5 %) et la plupart des fumeurs réguliers achètent eux-mêmes leurs cigarettes (59,8 %). Les fumeurs occasionnels étaient moins susceptibles d’acheter eux-mêmes leurs cigarettes (RC 0,85) et ils étaient davantage susceptibles de demander à une autre personne de leur en acheter (RC 1,24) si on leur demandait souvent leur âge lors de tentatives d’achat de cigarettes. Les fumeurs réguliers étaient également moins susceptibles d’acheter eux-mêmes leurs cigarettes (RC 0,70) et davantage susceptibles de demander à une autre personne (RC 1,51) ou à un ami (RC 1,18) de les acheter à leur place si on leur demandait souvent leur âge lors de tentatives d’achat de cigarettes.

Interprétation

Les mesures restrictives aux points d’accès ne suffisent pas à empêcher les mineurs d’acheter des cigarettes parce qu’ils peuvent s’en procurer auprès de leur réseau social. Il faut donc adopter une approche globale pour limiter l’accès, une approche qui ciblera tant les mineurs que les personnes qui achètent des cigarettes pour les mineurs.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Altman DG, Wheelis AY, McFarlane M, Lee H, Fortmann, SP. The relationship between tobacco access and use among adolescents: A four community study. Soc Sci Med 1999;48(6):759–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jason LA, Ji PY, Anes MD, Birkhead, SH. Active enforcement of cigarette control laws in the prevention of cigarette sales to minors. JAMA 1991;266(22):3159–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Landrine H, Klonoff, EA. Validity of assessments of youth access to tobacco: The familiarity effect. Am J Public Health 2003;93(11):1883–86.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jason LA, Berk M, Schnopp-Wyatt DL, Talbot B. Effects of enforcement of youth access laws on smoking prevalence. Am J Community Psychol 1999;27(2):143–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rigotti NA, DiFranza JR, Chang Y, Tisdale T, Kemp B, Singer, DE. The effect of enforcing tobacco-sales laws on adolescents’ access to tobacco and smoking behavior. N Engl J Med 1997;337(15):1044–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Naum GP, Yarian DO, McKenna, JP. Cigarette availability to minors. J Am Osteopath Assoc 1995;95(11):663–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Landrine H, Klonoff EA, Lang D, Alcaraz R. Use of identification cards by underage youth to purchase tobacco. JAMA 2001;285(18):2329.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Croghan E, Aveyard P, Griffin C, Cheng KK. The importance of social sources of cigarettes to school students. Tob Control 2003;12(1):67–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Forster J, Chen V, Blaine T, Perry C, Toomey T. Social exchange of cigarettes by youth. Tob Control 2003;12(2):148–54.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Castrucci BC, Gerlach KK, Kaufman NJ, Orleans, CT. Adolescents’ acquisition of cigarettes through noncommercial sources. J Adolesc Health 2002;31(4):322–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rimpela AH, Rainio, SU. The effectiveness of tobacco sales ban to minors: The case of Finland. Tob Control 2004;13(2):167–74.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones SE, Sharp DJ, Husten CG, Crossett LS. Cigarette acquisition and proof of age among US high school students who smoke. Tob Control 2002;11(1):20–25.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klonoff EA, Landrine H, Lang D, Alcaraz R, Figueroa-Moseley C. Adults buy cigarettes for underaged youths. Am J Public Health 2001;91(7):1138–39.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shive S, Ma GX, Shive E. A study of young adults who provide tobacco products to minors. J Sch Health 2001;71(6):218–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leatherdale ST, Brown KS, Cameron R, McDonald P. Social modelling in the school environment, Student characteristics, and smoking susceptibility: A multi-level analysis. J Adolesc Health In press.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    SAS Institute Inc. The SAS System for Windows. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 2001.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Legislative Assembly of Ontario. The Ontario Tobacco Control Act (OTCA)–an act to prevent the provision of tobacco to young persons and to regulate its sale and use by others. Toronto, Ontario, 1993.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lantz PM, Jacobsen PD, Warner KE, Wasserman J, Pollack HA, Berson J, Ahlstrom A. Investing in youth tobacco control: A review of smoking prevention and control strategies. Tob Control 2000;9(1):47–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cummings K. Is the prevalence of youth smoking affected by efforts to increase retailer compliance with a minors access law? Nic Tob Research 2003;5:465–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Robinson LA, Klesges RC, Zbikowski SM. Gender and ethnic differences in young adolescents’ sources of cigarettes. Tob Control 1998;7(4):353–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Everett Jones S, Sharp DJ, Husten CG, Crossett LS. Cigarette acquisition and proof of age among U.S. high school students who smoke. Tob Control 2002;11(1):20–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wolfson M, Forster JL, Clazton AJ, Murray DM. Adolescent smokers’ provision of tobacco to other adolescents. Am J Public Health 1997;87(4):649–51.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Landrine H. Validity of assessments of youth access to tobacco. The familiarity effect. Am J Pubic Health 2003;93(11):1883–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Preventive OncologyCancer Care OntarioTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations