Quick question: What do researchers, the surgeon general,
and anti-tobacco lobbyists want, and what do RJ Reynolds and Philip Morris fear? If you answered the reasons for smoking,
you’re right. You’ve seen the ads, heard of the risks, and seen government officials and widows alike denounce
it publicly and demagogically as a cancer on society. The government and researchers have spent countless amounts of time,
energy, and money trying to figure out why people smoke. But the answer to this question has not come easily. Despite their
best efforts, nobody has figured out why people smoke.
Researchers have always considered “negative affects”
such as bad mood, stress, or even withdrawal symptoms to be the most significant reason (Shiffman et al 2002). In fact, researchers
have linked these affects to smoking virtually ever since they have attempted finding out why people smoke. Additionally,
researchers considered alcohol and smoking cues (ranging from other people smoking to the very presence of cigarettes) significant
cues for smokers to light up. Even so, however, nobody ever tested these hypotheses; these connections had always been taken
for granted (Bower 2002). That all changed, however, in November of 2002, when a research team led by Saul Shiffman conducted
the first blanket study investigated why people smoke.
To come to their conclusion, Shiffman’s research
team needed a group of volunteers, all long-term smokers who had smoked for a minimum of 13 years and for an average of 23
years (2002). The research team equipped all participants with handheld computers. Each time study participants were about
to smoke they answered questions about negative affects and their desire to smoke. Additionally, the handheld computers prompted
participants four to five times daily with the same questions (Shiffman et al 2002).
The researchers found that smokers were most likely to
smoke in restaurants, but that tobacco prompts were mostly dependent on other variables. Smokers were also less likely to
smoke when working or during business interactions (Shiffman et al 2002). The researchers also found that smokers were twice
as likely to smoke after having consumed alcohol and 55% more likely to smoke after having consumed coffee or tea in support
of previous theories. Additionally, the consumption of any kind of food increased smokers’ likelihood of lighting up
(Shiffman et al 2002). Not surprisingly, the presence of other people smoking increased a smokers’ likelihood of smoking
by 78%, with little difference whether or not the other person smoking was an acquaintance or a stranger (Shiffman et al 2002).
Also unsurprising is the fact that likelihood of smoking increased dramatically with a smoker’s desire to smoke.
The above results, however, were expected, an affirmation
of previous theories as to why people smoke. They exclude, however, the most important supposed connection, that between mood
and smoking. Shockingly, Shiffman et al. found that the supposed connection between smoking and negative affects doesn’t
exist (2002). The research team found virtually no relationship between smoking and negative affects. Even after excluding
situations in which smoking was discouraged or restricted the correlation between negative affect and smoking was virtually
nonexistent (2002). These findings represent a major misconception about why smokers smoke. Up to this point in time, virtually
every study, every theoretical model on why people smoke has included the central theory that negative affects were directly
related to smoking (Shiffman et al 2002). Nobody, however, ever bothered to test this hypothesis, which Shiffman’s research
team disproved through this study.
Armed with this knowledge, we would
hopefully be able to create more effective anti-smoking programs. Additionally, several rehabilitation methods for smoking
involve a significant amount of time trying to get smokers to do other things when they are experiencing negative affects.
Shiffman’s research team, however, recently proved that the connection between negative affects and smoking is nonexistent,
meaning that smoker rehabilitation programs must also be refocused. Hopefully, the effects of this research will be more efficient
programs to get people to stop smoking. In addition to helping to save thousands of smokers, the research could thus save
taxpayers millions of dollars as their money is more efficiently spent within the realm of anti-smoking and smoker rehabilitation
programs. The groundbreaking research of Shiffman et al. blasts the longstanding notion that mood is directly and significantly
related to smoking. It may be only preliminary research, yet their findings could go a very long way in our fight against
smoking.
References
Bower, Bruce. Lost that smoking
feeling (2002). Science News, 162:340-341.
Shiffman, Saul;
Gwaltney, Chad J; Balabanis, Mark H.; Liu, Kenneth S.; Paty, Jean A.; Kassel, John D.; Hickcox, Mary; Gnys, Maryann. (2002)
Immediate Antecedents of Cigarette Smoking: An Analysis From Ecological Momentary Assessment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
111:531-545
