The Mississii Social Climate of Tobacco Control, 2000-2003 Robert Cameron McMillen Nell Valentine Wolfgang Frese Arthur G. Cosby SSRC Social Science Research Center www.ssrc.msstate.edu
ACKNOWLEDGMENT The Mississii Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control was made ossible through suort rovided by The Partnershi for a Healthy Mississii. The oinio exressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Partnershi for a Healthy Mississii. Additional funds were rovided by the Health, Safety and Security Ititute of the Social Science Research Center at Mississii State University through a grant from the Office of Health Policy, U.S. Deartment of Health and Human Services (1DIARH0000501), as well as the Mississii Agricultural and Forestry Exeriment Station. The design of the survey itrument was based on an exteive review of extant itruments such as the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System, the Current Poulation Survey - Tobacco Sulement, and the California Adult Tobacco Survey, and sulemented by additional items needed to oerationalize the social climate concet. The reliance on existing measurements was greatly enhanced by the review and excellent advice from the Office of Smoking and Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The origi of this study can be traced to research associated with the tobacco settlement in Mississii. We develoed the social climate aroach to hel the Mississii Tobacco Control Foundation The Partnershi for a Healthy Mississii and the Mississii State Deartment of Health - monitor the degree to which their efforts were imacting the social fabric of Mississii. Ellen Jones and Sheila Keller, formerly of the Mississii State Deartment of Health, and Vivien Carver and Bonnie Reinert, at the Partnershi for a Healthy Mississii, worked closely with us in the develoment of a social climate survey. 2
The Mississii Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control, 2000 2003 In 1964, the U.S. Surgeon General formally announced the health risks of tobacco, thereby roviding the imetus for one of the most inteive ublic health interventio in the history of the United States. Sanning several decades, the tobacco control movement has develoed an increasingly effective series of social rograms and olicies designed to encourage nomoking and rotect nomokers from environmental tobacco smoke. In the years following the initiation of the tobacco control movement, the ercentage of current cigarette smokers in the American adult oulation has decreased dramatically from 42.4 ercent in 1965 to 23.0 ercent in 2002 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004). This decrease tralates into about 40 million fewer adult smokers in the United States today than had the rate remained at 42.4 ercent. Tobacco control has recently witnessed two other major accomlishments. First, the tobacco comanies have been hit with massive comeatory and unitive fines resulting from lawsuits by former smokers, as well as massive settlement exees with individual states to cover health exees related to tobacco use. Second, national and state agencies have imlemented romising multicomonent rograms to revent and reduce youth tobacco use. These rograms have become increasingly comreheive through a shift from focusing rimarily on individual tobacco use to more oulation-based interventio with broad objectives such as social, environmental, and olitical change (United States Deartment of Health and Human Services, 2000). In somewhat simlified terms these national and statewide rograms target changes in the social climate. This aroach is an attemt to denormalize tobacco use through changes in beliefs and knowledge that are incororated into an individual's view of aroriate and accetable behavior, to the rules and regulatio that structure our organizatio, and ultimately in the manner in which we see tobacco use as a art of the social environment (Stillman et al., 1999). Recent research validates this strategy to target intermediate social and olitical olicies to imact the social climate, and ultimately reduce tobacco use. To illustrate, rograms that have successfully reduced ercetio that tobacco use is a normative behavior and/or increased the revalence of smoke-free olicies in ublic and rivate settings have been linked to increased cessation attemts by smokers, lower coumtion by smokers, and decreased initiation by adolescents (Borland, Chaman, Owen, & Hill, 1990; Farkas, Gilin, Distefan, & Pierce, 1999; Farrelly, Eva, & Sfekas, 1999). Although comreheive tobacco control rograms have moved toward logic models that incororate olitical and social intermediate objectives, lanning and evaluation in this area has been hamered by the lack of timely, comreheive data about tobacco control attitudes and ractices of US adults. We develoed the Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control (SCS-TC) as a methodology to objectively measure and ultimately monitor the fundamental osition of tobacco control in society, and thereby rovide a data collection system to monitor rogram imacts. The survey includes items to measure rogress towards intermediate objectives such as olicy changes, changes in social norms, reductio in exosure of individuals to environmental tobacco smoke, and rejection of ro-tobacco influences. The results resented in this reort are based on annual crosssectional assessments of the social climate of tobacco control within Mississii and within the United States from 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. 3
Survey Develoment The Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control (SCS-TC) is an attemt to contribute to the understanding of tobacco control through the introduction of an ititutional-based ersective that stresses not simly individual variatio in behaviors and attitudes, but rather attemts to use cross-sectional survey data for the measurement of societal norms, ractices, and beliefs surrounding tobacco. Put broadly, we want to measure the social norms, ractices, and beliefs surrounding a ublic health issue - in this case tobacco use. This technique is rimarily one of a shift in focus and interretation rather than basic survey methodology. By asking this series of questio to a random samle of American adults, we can measure the extent to which tobacco control and tobacco use are ingrained in the social ititutio that influence decisio about tobacco. The concet of social ititutio, taken from the sociological literature, rovides the framework for our methodology. As a fundamental comonent of a society, social ititutio emerge as clusterings of beliefs, norms, and ractices in order to meet the needs of society. To illustrate, the ititution of family and friendshi grous rovides the nurturing necessary to roduce and raise new members of a society; the education ititution then shaes the individual into a otentially roductive member of society. Seven social ititutio are included in our aroach -- each of which meets secific needs of society. These ititutio are: 1) Family and Friendshi Grous, 2) Education, 3) Government and Political Order, 4) Work, 5) Health and Medical Care, 6) Recreation, Leisure, and Sorts, and 7) Mass Communication and Culture. Moreover, in each of these ititutional areas, beliefs, norms, and ractices about tobacco use and tobacco control have evolved. It is these ititutional beliefs, norms, and ractices that form the essence of the ingrained status of tobacco use in the social fabric of American society. The Social Climate Survey coists of a set of questio designed to measure the norms, ractices, and knowledge concerning tobacco within each of these ititutio. Until recently revalence rates and er caita coumtion measures have frequently been the yardsticks with which tobacco control rograms were evaluated. While several state now have comreheive data collection systems for lanning and evaluation and there have been a substantial number of studies of attitudes toward the control of smoking in ublic settings (Ashley, Bull, & Pederson, 1995; Ashley & Cohen, 1998; Brooks & Mucci, 2001; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2002c), no such descritive studies ublished to date have been comreheive or national in scoe. To our knowledge, the resent roject is the most comreheive survey of the extent to which tobacco control imacts the daily lives of America. The SCS- TC adds to existing national data sources by roviding annual cross-sectional data on a comreheive set of social and environmental indicators selected to monitor the fundamental osition of tobacco control across a broad range of social settings. This emhasis on collecting data on the measurable characteristics of the social climate, as well the brief time lag - 5 months between data collection and data availability, increases the utility of the SCS-TC as a data collection system for lanning secific interventio and evaluation of rogram imacts on the social climate. Researchers at the Social Science Research Center have artnered with State agencies in Mississii and the AAP's Center for Child Health Research to aly findings from the survey to lanning and evaluation. 4
Methods The Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control (SCS-TC) was administered to reresentative samles of Mississii adults who were interviewed by telehone between July and Setember of either 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. s from all years reresent the civilian, non-ititutionalized adult oulation over age 18. Households were selected using random digit dialing rocedures to include households with unlisted numbers. Once a household was contacted, the adult to be interviewed was selected by asking to seak with the erson in the household who is 18 years of age or older and who will have the next birthday. Five attemts were made to contact those selected adults who were not home. The samle was weighted by race and gender, based on the most current U.S. Ceus estimates. Measures The SCS-TC is an annual cross-sectional survey that contai items ertaining to normative beliefs, ractices/olicies, and knowledge regarding tobacco control across seven social ititutio. These ititutio include 1) Family and Friendshi Grous, 2) Education, 3) Government and Political Order, 4) Work, 5) Health and Medical Care, 6) Recreation, Leisure, and Sorts, and 7) Mass Communication and Culture. Although the SCS-TC includes items to measure smoking status and cessation, the survey emhasizes social and environmental indicators. These intermediate indicators were selected to rovide a comreheive assessment of the social climate in which eole are exosed to and make decisio about tobacco control interventio. Survey items were develoed and selected based on an exteive review of extant tobacco control surveys and then reviewed by an external anel of tobacco control researchers. The anel develoed many of the items included in the survey, while others were selected from existing measurement itruments with established validity. Secifically, the SCS-TC included items from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2002a) and the Tobacco Use Sulement- Current Poulation Survey (TUS-CPS) (Hartman, Willis, Lawrence, Marcus, & Gibson, 2002), as well as modified items from the California Adult Tobacco Surveys. 5
Results To facilitate the interretation and alication of the survey results, we have develoed the following heuristic classification scheme for assessing the social enetration of tobacco control in American society. Some issues are fully ingrained into society, such as norms agait smoking in day care centers, and are thus coidered to be universally acceted. Other issues are strongly suorted, but continue to be rejected by a small, but nontrivial segment of society. These issues are coidered as redominant cultural norms, beliefs, and ractices. Contested issues, on the other hand, are areas of tobacco control in which there remain substantial differences of oinion across society. The suort and oosition for these controls are roughly matched across society. Finally, some tobacco control issues, such as norms agait smoking in bars, are suorted by only a small segment of society and are coidered to be culturally marginal norms, ractices, or beliefs. By identifying universal, redominant, contested, and marginal asects of the social climate, it becomes ossible to develo more informed tobacco control efforts. To illustrate, it may not be necessary to target culturally universal norms, ractices, and beliefs because these asects of tobacco control are already deely ingrained. Norms, ractices, and beliefs that are redominantly ingrained in the social climate may serve as anchors for camaign efforts to target contested asects of the social climate. Finally, this aroach can identify those asects of the social climate which are only marginally ingrained and likely to be very resistant to interventio. The following classification scheme is used to categorize the degree to which these asects of tobacco control imact the daily lives of America. Heuristic Classification Scheme for Assessing the Social Penetration of Normative Beliefs, Health Beliefs, and Practices Universal Predominant Contested Marginal Universal normative beliefs, health beliefs, and ractices Held by the overwhelming majority of society members: 85-100% Predominant normative beliefs, health beliefs, and ractices Held by a redominance of society members: 65-84% Contested normative beliefs, health beliefs, and ractices Held by half of society members: 35-64% Marginal normative beliefs, health beliefs, and ractices Held by 0-34% of society members 6
2000 MS s Of the eligible resondents contacted, 803 resondents comleted the survey (85.0%) and 142 (15.0%) refused to articiate. The samling error (binomial questio with 50/50 slit) for the total data set is no larger than ± 3.5 (95% confidence interval). Of the 803 resondents, 292 (36.4 ercent) were male and 511 (63.6 ercent) were female. The racial comosition of the samle is as follows: white = 577 (71.9 ercent), = 196 (24.4 ercent), Asian or Pacific Islander = 3 (.4 ercent), American Indian or Alaskan Native = 1 (.1 ercent), other races = 8 (1.0 ercent), and unknown (i.e., did not awer the question on race) = 18 (2.2 ercent). The samle was weighted by race and gender, based uon 1998 U.S. Ceus estimates to eure that it is reresentative of the Mississii oulation. 2001 MS s Of the eligible resondents contacted, 1,504 resondents comleted the survey (87.6%) and 212 (12.4%) refused to articiate. The samling error (binomial questio with 50/50 slit) for the total data set is no larger than ± 2.5 (95% confidence interval). Of the 1,504 resondents, 569 (37.8 ercent) were male and 934 (62.1 ercent) were female. The racial comosition of the samle is as follows: white = 1,050 (69.8 ercent), = 415 (27.6 ercent), Asian or Pacific Islander = 6 (0.4 ercent), American Indian or Alaskan Native = 2 (0.1 ercent), other races = 12 (0.8 ercent), and unknown (i.e., did not awer the question on race) = 19 (1.3 ercent). The samle was weighted by race and gender, based uon 1999 U.S. Ceus estimates to eure that it is reresentative of the Mississii oulation. In the few cases where race and/or gender was missing the resondents were given a weight of 1.0. 2002 MS s Of the eligible resondents contacted, 1,013 resondents comleted the survey (98.0%) and 21 (2.0%) refused to articiate. The samling error (binomial questio with 50/50 slit) for the total data set is no larger than ± 3.1 (95% confidence interval). Of the 1,013 resondents, 321 (31.7 %) were male and 687 (67.8%) were female. The racial comosition of the samle is as follows: white = 713 (70.4%), = 270 (26.7%), Asian or Pacific Islander = 5 (0.5%), American Indian or Alaskan Native = 1 (0.1%), other races = 14 (1.4%), and unknown (i.e., did not awer the question on race) = 10 (1.0%). The samle was weighted by race and gender, based uon 2000 U.S. Ceus estimates to eure that it is reresentative of the Mississii oulation. 2003 MS s Of the eligible resondents contacted, 815 resondents comleted the survey (96.1%) and 33 (3.9%) did not comlete the survey or refused to articiate. The samling error (binomial questio with 50/50 slit) for the total data set is no larger than ± 3.4 (95% confidence interval). Of the 815 resondents, 255 (31.3%) were male and 560 (68.7%) were female. The racial comosition of the samle is as follows: white = 558 (68.5%), = 237 (29.1%), American Indian or Alaskan Native = 1 (.1%), other races = 7 (.9%), and unknown (i.e., did not awer the question on race) = 12 (1.5%). The samle was weighted by race and gender based uon 2002 U.S. Ceus estimates to eure that it is reresentative of the Mississii oulation. s of the original samles are comared with the weighted samles in Table 1.1. The results resented in this reort are based on the weighted samle; the maximum samling error for each suboulation is resented in Table 1.2 7
Table 1.1 Comarison of s of the Original and Weighted s 2000 2001 2002 2003 s / Smoking Status Gender Race Age Education Nomoker African-American Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian/Alaska Other Race 18-24 years 25-44 years 45-64 years 65 + years Not HS Grad HS Grad Some College College Grad Orig. 46.1 53.9 80.2 19.8 36.4 63.6 71.9 24.4 0.4 0.1 3.2 14.1 36.0 32.3 17.7 15.7 33.5 24.8 26.0 Wtd. 45.8 54.2 78.9 21.1 48.3 53.3 66.6 31.2 0.1 0.1 2.1 13.9 36.9 32.4 16.8 16.8 34.1 24.0 25.2 Orig. 42.8 57.2 78.6 21.4 37.8 62.1 69.8 27.6 0.4 0.1 2.1 12.7 38.6 34.4 11.1 12.3 33.6 26.7 27.5 Wtd. 41.6 58.4 78.2 21.8 46.5 53.5 64.2 32.8 0.6 0.3 2.1 12.8 39.1 34.3 13.8 12.2 33.8 26.7 27.2 Orig. 45.1 54.9 80.1 19.9 31.7 67.8 70.4 26.7 0.5 0.1 1.4 12.1 35.5 34.3 18.1 12.8 31.0 31.4 24.9 Wtd. 45.1 54.9 79.8 20.2 46.2 53.3 65.0 33.1 0.3 0.6 13.1 35.4 34.2 17.3 13.0 30.9 31.3 24.8 Orig. 43.2 56.8 82.6 17.4 31.3 68.7 68.5 29.1 0.1 0.9 9.6 35.0 37.8 17.7 12.1 33.4 27.1 27.5 Wtd. 44.0 56.0 82.0 18.0 46.6 53.4 64.6 32.9 0.1 0.9 9.7 35.2 38.6 16.6 12.2 33.8 26.7 27.3 Table 1.2 Weighted Size and Maximum Samling Error 2000 2001 2002 2003 / Smoking Status Non- Gender Race Age 65 years of age + Education Not high school grad. High school grad. Weighted Size 368 435 634 169 375 428 535 250 111 296 260 135 131 265 187 197 Maximum Samling Error 5.1 4.7 3.9 7.5 5.1 4.7 4.2 6.2 9.3 5.7 6.1 8.4 8.6 6.0 7.2 7.0 Weighted Size 626 878 1176 328 699 8.4 966 493 192 589 516 207 181 502 396 404 Maximum Samling Error 3.9 3.3 2.9 5.4 3.7 3.5 3.2 4.4 7.1 4.0 4.3 6.8 7.3 4.4 4.9 4.9 Weighted Size 440 573 808 204 468 540 658 335 132 358 356 176 132 312 316 251 Maximum Samling Error 4.7 4.1 3.4 6.9 4.5 4.2 3.8 5.4 8.5 5.2 5.3 7.4 8.5 5.5 5.5 6.2 Weighted Size 352 463 670 141 255 560 558 237 78 285 308 144 98 271 220 223 Maximum Samling Error 5.2 4.6 3.8 8.3 6.1 4.1 4.1 6.4 11.1 5.8 5.6 8.2 9.9 6.0 6.6 6.6 8
9
Family and Friendshi Grous, 2000 to 2003 100% Smoking is never allowed in the resence of children, 85.5% Parents should not allow children under the age of 18 to smoke cigarettes, 92.9% Smoke from a arent's cigarette harms their children, 96.3% Percent of MS Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 80% 60% 40% 20% Strict household rules agait smoking, 74.9% Tobacco use is unaccetable within the household, 71.9% Smoking is unaccetable in front of children, 79.9% s do not smoke in social settings with nomokers, 24.3% Children are more likely to smoke if their arents smoke, 86.2% Tobacco use is unaccetable among close friends, 51.7% 0% Bubble Size Indicates Magnitude of Change (2000-2003), Green bubbles reresent significant increases, yellow bubbles reresent non-significant changes, and red bubbles reresent significant decreases from 2000 to 2003 10
Family and Friendshi Grous, MS vs US Percent of MS Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% Smoking is never allowed in the resence of children, 3.7% Smoking is never allowed in the vehicle when children are resent, 1.0% Strict household rules agait smoking, 2.0% No ETS exosure in a car or truck, 1.7% Smoking is never allowed in the vehicle, 8.0% No ETS exosure in the home, 2.6% Children under 18 are never allowed to smoke, 1.5% Recognize that smoking in a car affects the health of children, 3.8% Smoking is unaccetable in front of children, 1.9% Tobacco use is unaccetable within the household, 5.3% Smoke from a arent's cigarette harms their children, 1.3% Parents should not allow children under the age of 18 to smoke, 0.4% s do not smoke in social settings with nomokers, 2.1% Children are more likely to smoke if their arents smoke, 1.9% Tobacco use is unaccetable among close friends, 3.9% 0% Green bubbles reresent significantly more suort in Mississii, yellow bubbles reresent no significant differences in suort, and red bubbles reresent significantly less suort in Mississii than in the United States. 11
12
FAMILY AND FRIENDSHIP GROUPS Universal Norms, Beliefs and Practices 1-1.0 million Mississii households 2 (98.4 ercent) never allow children under the age of 18 years of ages to smoke cigarettes - 2.0 million Mississii adults (96.3 ercent) believe that smoke from arents cigarettes harms their children - 1.9 million Mississii adults (92.9 ercent) believe that arents should not allow children under the age of 18 to smoke cigarettes - 1.8 million Mississii adults (86.6 ercent) never allow smoking in the vehicle when children are resent - 1.8 million Mississii adults (86.2 ercent) believe that children are more likely to smoke if their arents smoke -.9 million Mississii households (85.5 ercent) never allow smoking in the resence of children Significant Imrovements from 2000 to 2003 3 Family and Friendshi Grous 2000 2001 2002 2003 Strict household rules agait MS 68.7 72.3 71.6 74.9 smoking US 69.1 74.1 73.7 76.4 Smoking is never allowed in the MS 77.5 85.9 88.6 85.5 resence of children US 78.6 87.9 87.8 88.7 No ETS Exosure in the home MS n/a n/a 53.6 57.8 US n/a n/a n/a 56.3 No ETS Exosure in a car or truck MS n/a n/a 74.4 75.4 US n/a n/a n/a 76.7 Smoking is never allowed in the vehicle MS n/a n/a n/a 69.0 US n/a n/a n/a 74.5 Smoking is never allowed in the vehicle MS 92.8 79.4 72.3 86.6 when children are resent US n/a 79.6 78.5 87.5 Recognize that smoking in a car affects MS n/a 77.8 79.6 81.8 the health of children US n/a 76.9 80.9 78.6 Children under 18 are never allowed to MS n/a 98.0 97.4 98.4 smoke US n/a 96.8 96.6 97.1 Tobacco use is unaccetable within the MS 66.1 74.2 73.4 71.9 household US 67.2 72.7 73.6 75.7 Smoking is unaccetable in front of MS 83.5 83.6 81.8 79.9 children US 77.7 79.3 76.7 78.3 Parents should not allow children MS 88.1 91.0 93.4 92.9 under the age of 18 to smoke US 91.2 90.5 90.2 92.4 Smoke from a arent's cigarette harms MS 92.8 95.7 97.4 96.3 their children US 93.7 95.2 94.9 95.1 Children are more likely to smoke if MS 82.9 82.0 81.7 86.2 their arents smoke US 78.1 83.3 82.3 84.6 s do not smoke in social MS 29.9 24.0 26.4 24.3 settings with nomokers 4 US 27.8 25.7 23.3 23.8 Tobacco use is unaccetable among MS 49.3 47.7 48.3 51.7 close friends US 50.8 49.4 50.4 53.7, 2000 to 2003.006 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a.012.001.002.021.008, 2002 to 2003, MS v. US, 2003.015.014 n/a n/a n/a n/a.002 n/a.036.049.030.003.014.018.012 1 Indicators endorsed by at least 85% of U.S. adults 2 Note that these numbers are based uon U.S. Ceus 2002 oulatio estimates for residents 18 years of age and older 3 All imrovements are statistically significant, α<.05 13
Families and Friendshi Grous: Percent of resondents who suort normative beliefs, recognize health risks, or reort tobacco control ractices Children under 18 are never allowed to smoke Smoke from a arent's cigarette harms their children Parents should not allow children under 18 to smoke Smoking is never allowed in resondent's vehicle with children resent Children are more likely to smoke if their arents smoke Smoking is never allowed in the resence of children Recognize that smoking in a car affects the health of children either a lot or a great extent Smoking is unaccetable in front of children 98.4 96.3 92.9 86.6 86.2 85.5 81.8 79.9 No ETS exosure within an automobile in the ast 7 days Strict household rules agait smoking 75.4 74.9 Tobacco use is unaccetable in the household Smoking is never allowed in resondent's vehicle 71.9 69.0 No ETS exosure within a home in the ast 7 days 57.8 Tobacco use is unaccetable among friends 51.7 s do not smoke in social settings with nomokers 24.3 Universal Predominant Contested Marginal 4 This estimate does not include resondents who reort that none of their friends smoke. 14
Table 2.1 Household Rules About Smoking Which of the following best describes your household s rules about smoking? Smoking is allowed in all arts of the home Smoking is allowed in some arts of the home Smoking is not allowed in any art of the home Total 16.7 8.5 74. 9 19.5 14.3 6.4 10.1 74.1 75.6.037 Nomoker 7.7 58.2 7.5 13.0 84.8 28.8 <. 001 18.2 15.2 7.7 9.2 74.1 75.6 17.9 14.6 6.5 13.1 75.6 72.4. 006 65 years of age and older 14.1 20.2 16.9 10.3 5.1 8.4 10.2 6.6 80.8 71.4 72.9 83.1 College Graduate 38.4 18.5 12.5 8.6 6.1 8.7 9.3 8.1 55.6 72.7 78.2 83.3 <. 001 Note: ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. Table 2.2 Smoking in the Presence of Children In your home, is smoking in the resence of children always allowed, sometimes allowed, or never allowed? Always allowed Sometimes allowed Never allowed Total 5.3 9.2 85.5 7.0 3.7 9.8 8.8 83.2 87.4 Nomoker 2.3 18.8 5.2 27.8 92.6 53.5 <. 001 5.5 5.1 10.8 7.9 83.7 87.0 5.5 4.9 8.8 10.5 85.7 84.6 65 years of age and older 5.2 7.3 4.2 2.9 6.5 12.9 8.7 4.4 88.3 79.8 87.1 92.6.022 College Graduate 12.2 5.5 3.3 3.6 14.3 12.1 5.1 7.2 73.5 82.4 91.6 89.1 <. 001 Note: 0.5 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 15
Table 2.3 Frequency of ETS Exosure in the Home During the ast 7 days, on how many days were you in the same room with someone who was smoking cigarettes? 0 Days 1 or 2 Days 3 or 4 Days 5 or 6 Days 7 Days (everyday) Total 57.8 15.9 4.9 2.7 18.7 Nomoker 65 years of age and older College Graduate Note: 1.3 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 56.3 58.9 66.7 16.1 54.8 60.3 56.1 61.5 55.1 49.8 55.8 80.3 49.5 57.3 55.9 64.1 16.3 15.6 17.5 7.7 15.9 16.0 15.8 15.5 19.2 17.8 15.6 10.6 12.9 14.2 16.9 18.6 5.1 4.9 5.2 4.2 5.4 4.4 5.0 4.9 6.4 6.3 4.9 1.5 2.0 6.0 5.6 4.1 2.5 2.9 2.4 4.2 2.7 2.8 3.1 1.9 1.3 3.1 3.2 1.5 4.0 2.6 2.3 2.3 19.7 17.8 8.2 67.8 21.2 16.5 2 16.2 17.9 23.0 20.5 6.1 31.7 19.9 19.2 10.9.013 Table 2.4 Frequency of ETS Exosure in a Car or Truck During the ast 7 days, on how many days were you in a car or truck with someone who was smoking cigarettes? 0 Days 1 or 2 Days 3 or 4 Days 5 or 6 Days 7 Days (everyday) Total 75.4 7.2 3.9 2.2 11.3 76.1 75.1 5.8 8.2 4.1 3.7 1.2 3.0 12.8 1 Nomoker 86.9 25.4 7.0 8.0 2.1 10.9 1.4 5.8 2.6 5 <. 001 73.6 77.2 7.4 6.9 5.2 2.7 1.9 2.5 12.0 10.6 75.1 76.4 6.0 9.5 3.9 3.3 2.7 1.7 12.3 9.1 65 years of age and older 64.3 7 76.2 93.3 12.9 9.3 5.6 3.4 7.1 4.3 4.0 0.8 2.9 2.5 2.3 0.8 12.9 13.9 11.9 1.7.001 College Graduate 57.7 72.8 77.6 83.3 12.8 6.0 6.7 6.9 3.8 5.7 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.6 1.9 1.9 23.1 12.8 11.0 5.1.002 Note: 5.1 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 16
Table 2.5 Smoking in Vehicles Please tell me which best describes how cigarette smoking is handled in your car. No one is allowed to smoke in my car Secial guests are allowed to smoke in my car Smoking is allowed in my car only if the windows are oen Smoking is allowed in my car at any time Total 69.0 1.9 16.7 12.4 Nomoker 65 years of age and older College Graduate 68.7 69.2 81.9 10.9 66.8 71.1 67.6 72.0 68.6 65.7 65.6 85.6 59.0 67.0 67.0 77.2 Note: 5.4 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Kno w or refused or did not own a car. 2.6 1.4 1.9 2.2 1.1 2.7 2.1 1.3 2.5 1.3 3.4 1.3 1.9 1.4 2.3 16.1 17.1 11.7 39.4 16.8 16.5 16.4 16.7 15.7 22.5 16.2 4.2 17.9 17.4 19.1 13.0 12.6 12.4 4.5 47.4 <. 001 15.2 9.7.048 13.9 1 15.7 9.3 16.9 6.8 <. 001 21.8 13.6 12.4 7.4 Table 2.6 Smoking in Vehicles with Children Present Please tell me which best describes how cigarette smoking is handled in your car when children are resent. No one is allowed to smoke in my car Secial guests are allowed to smoke in my car Smoking is allowed in my car only if the windows are oen Smoking is allowed in my car at any time Total 86.6 0.4 9.6 3.4 Nomoker 65 years of age and older College Graduate 83.8 88.8 94.1 51.8 87.2 86.3 85.0 9 89.9 86.0 83.1 95.7 72.7 85.1 88.6 91.2 Note: 5.7 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused or did not own a car. 0.6 0.2 0.2 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.8 0.7 0.3 1.3 0.8 0.5 12.4 7.5 4.0 35.3 8.7 10.3 11.0 6.2 5.8 11.5 11.6 1.7 16.9 10.7 9.0 6.0 3.2 3.5 1.8 11.5 <. 001 4.1 2.8 3.7 2.9 4.3 1.8 5.0 2.6.026 9.1 3.4 2.4 2.3.012 17
Table 2.7 How Much Does Smoking in a Car Affect the Health of Children In your oinion, how much does smoking in a car affect the health of children? Not at all A little bit Somewhat A lot A great extent Total 4.3 4.7 9.2 36.3 45.5 5.0 3.9 5.6 4.1 9.6 8.9 36.0 36.4 43.9 46.8 Nomoker 3.6 8.1 3.3 11.0 6.9 20.6 37.7 27.9 48.6 32.4 <. 001 4.8 4.0 5.6 4.0 14.3 4.9 37.5 35.1 37.8 52.0 <. 001 3.4 6.1 5.2 3.1 11.2 5.7 33.1 42.7 47.1 42.4.004 65 years of age and older 7.8 2.9 3.7 6.1 3.9 5.0 5.4 3.1 6.5 11.9 9.8 4.6 39.0 33.1 35.7 42.7 42.9 47.1 45.5 43.5 College Graduate 11.5 4.3 3.8 1. 9 7.3 2.7 6.2 3.7 11.5 7.4 7.6 11.6 36.5 42.2 35.7 29.6 33.3 43.4 46.7 53.2.001 Note: 4.0 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. Table 2.8 Household Rules About Youth Smoking In your home, are children under the age of 18 always allowed, sometimes allowed, or never allowed to smoke cigarettes? Always allowed Sometimes allowed Never allowed Total 1.1 0.5 98. 4 Nomoker 65 years of age and older College Graduate Note: 1.2 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or re fused. 2.2 0.2 0.6 3.5 1.3 0.9 1.4 0.7 1.3 1.4 1.3 0.8 4.1 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.2 2.1 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.4 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.9 97.5 99.1.019 99.2 94.4 <. 001 98.4 98.6 98.1 98.9 98.7 97.6 98.4 99.2 95.9 98.5 99.1 98.6 18
Table 2.9 Accetability of Tobacco Use in the Household Within your household, how accetable is tobacco use? Very accetable Somewhat accetable Somewhat unaccetable Very unaccetable Total 11.4 16.7 10.2 61.7 14.9 8.6 14.3 18.6 8.4 11.5 62.4 61.3.012 Nomoker 3.3 47.9 13.4 32.6 10.3 8.3 73.0 11.1 <. 001 12.2 10.6 19.1 14.5 11.4 9.2 57.3 65.6 13.0 8.3 17.0 16.5 9.8 11.3 60.2 63.9 65 years of age and older 7.7 11.9 14.5 4.5 23.1 19.3 16.1 9.0 6.4 11.2 11.0 8.2 62.8 57.5 58.4 78.4.002 College Graduate 23.7 11.0 13.0 5.0 18.6 16.9 14.9 17.1 10.3 9.9 11.2 9.9 47.4 62.1 60.9 68.0.001 Note: 0.8 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. Table 2.10 Accetability of Parents Smoking in Front of Children It is accetable for arents to smoke in front of children. agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 1.0 19.1 51.6 28.3 1.5 0.5 20.4 18.1 51.9 51.6 26.2 29.9 Nomoker 0.2 5.1 12.8 49.3 54.9 36.0 32.1 9.6 <. 001 0.3 1.4 24.0 15.2 5 53.0 25.7 30.4.006 1.2 0.8 22.4 11.4 48.8 58.2 27.6 29.7.002 65 years of age and older 1.3 0.7 1.3 0.7 24.7 21.6 20.5 7.5 57.1 46.0 51.3 60.4 16.9 31.7 26.8 31.3.008 College Graduate 1.1 1.9 0.5 22.1 17.5 20.8 17.9 56.8 55.1 48.6 47.6 2 25.5 30.7 34.0 Note: 3.5 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 19
Table 2.11 Should Parents Allow Children to Smoke Cigarettes? Parents should not allow children under the age of eighteen to smoke cigarettes. agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 36.4 56.5 5.5 1.6 36.3 36.3 56.1 56.8 5.9 5.3 1.7 1.5 Nomoker 38.6 26.9 54.8 64.1 5.0 6.9 1.5 2.1 31.7 40.4 60.3 53.3 6.1 4.8 1.9 1.4 38.0 34.3 55.7 56.3 5.0 7.1 1.3 2.2 65 years of age and older 25.3 40.1 39.4 27.3 68.4 51.6 54.5 65.2 5.1 5.6 5.2 6.8 1.3 2.8 1.0 0.8.047 College Graduate 23.0 31.2 42.1 43.4 67.0 58.7 53.2 51.6 8.0 7.4 4.2 3.6 2.0 2.6 0.5 1.4.004 Note: 0.8 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. Table 2.12 Beliefs about Health Effects of Parent s Cigarette Smoke on Children Inhaling smoke from a arent s cigarette harms the health of babies and children. agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 38.6 57.7 2.9 0.8 41.1 36.8 55.4 59.4 3.1 2.7 0.3 1.1 Nomoker 41.0 27.8 55.8 65.4 2.3 6.0 0.9 0.8.007 36.7 40.5 58.9 56.5 4.1 1.9 0.3 1.2 41.0 35.0 55.7 60.4 2.9 3.1 0.4 1.5 65 years of age and older 31.6 39.8 4 36.6 65.8 57.7 55.7 56.7 2.5 2.1 3.7 3.7 0.4 0.7 3.0 College Graduate 28.1 31.7 40.4 50.5 65.6 63.0 56.8 48.2 5.2 3.4 2.3 1.4 1.0 1.9 0.5.001 Note: 2.4 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 20
Table 2.13 Beliefs about Risk of Children Smoking if Parents are s Children are more likely to smoke if arents are smokers. agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 26.1 60.1 12.6 1.2 25.3 26.8 59.8 60.2 13.5 11.9 1.4 1.1 Nomoker 27.8 19.1 61.9 51.8 9.2 27.0 1.1 2.1 <. 001 24.1 27.9 64.1 56.4 11.2 13.8 0.5 1.9 29.3 21.0 58.3 62.2 11.6 15.0 0.8 1.9.039 65 years of age and older 19.2 28.2 27.9 21.7 65.4 59.6 55.7 68.2 11.5 11.1 15.8 9.3 3.8 1.1 0.7 0.8 College Graduate 18.6 21.4 24.9 36.4 63.9 59.9 62.7 55.6 16.5 16.0 11.5 7.9 1.0 2.7 1.0.001 Note: 3.6 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. Table 2.14 Do Friends who are s Smoke in Social Settings with Nomokers In social settings where there are smokers and nomokers, do your friends who are smokers tend to: Always Refrain from smoking Sometimes Refrain from smoking Never Refrain from smoking Total 24.3 55.2 20.5 26.2 22.6 52.5 57.7 21.3 19.7 Nomoker 24.8 22.3 55.6 53.2 19.6 24.5 21.8 26.9 59.1 51.4 19.1 21.7 22.4 28.5 58.5 47.3 19.1 24.2.028 65 years of age and older 15.7 23.1 24.6 33.7 52.9 53.4 56.8 56.5 31.4 23.5 18.6 9.8.010 College Graduate 25.0 23.5 27.3 22.2 47.5 51.8 54.1 64.3 27.5 24.8 18.6 13.5.030 Note: 17.0 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 21
Table 2.15 Accetability of Tobacco Use among Friends Among your friends, would you say that tobacco use is: Very accetable Somewhat accetable Somewhat unaccetable Very unaccetable Total 13.7 34.6 22.3 29.4 13.7 13.8 34.6 34.5 22.1 22.4 29.7 29.3 Nomoker 9.4 31.7 31.4 49.0 24.8 11.7 34.4 7.6 <. 001 17.3 10.8 39.0 30.8 22.8 21.8 20.9 36.6 <. 001 12.4 16.3 38.6 27.6 22.8 20.2 26.2 35.8.003 65 years of age and older 17.1 20.6 10.2 4.1 35.5 35.5 35.5 30.1 19.7 22.0 23.4 22.0 27.6 22.0 30.9 43.9 <. 001 College Graduate 16.7 15.1 14.4 1 38.5 34.3 34.1 33.6 17.7 19.6 22.6 26.5 27.1 30.9 28.8 29.9 Note: 3.7 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 22
Education, 2000 to 2003 100% Students should be unished for violating school rules agait smoking, 95.2% Percent of MS Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 80% 60% 40% 20% Increase state taxes to fund rograms to revent young eole from smoking, 78.3% 0% Bubble Size Indicates Magnitude of Change (2000-2003), Green bubbles reresent significant increases, yellow bubbles reresent non-significant changes, and red bubbles reresent significant decreases from 2000 to 2003 23
24
EDUCATION Universal Norms, Beliefs and Practices - 2.0 million Mississii adults (95.2 ercent) believe that students should be unished for violating school rules agait smoking Significant Imrovements 2000 to 2003 Education 2000 2001 2002 2003 Increase state taxes to fund rograms MS 76.5 79.7 79.5 78.3 to revent young eole from smoking US 68.9 73.9 72.8 n/a Students should be unished for MS 94.9 96.3 96.1 95.2 violating school rules agait smoking US 91.8 93.8 93.0 n/a, 2000 to 2003 n/a n/a, 2002 to 2003 n/a n/a, MS v. US, 2003 n/a n/a 25
Education: Percent of resondents who suort normative beliefs, recognize health risks, or reort tobacco control ractices Students should be unished for violating school rules agait smoking 95.2 State taxes should be increased to fund rograms to revent young eole smoking 78.3 Universal Predominant Contested Marginal 26
Table 3.1 Increase Tobacco Taxes to Fund Anti-Smoking Education State tobacco taxes should be increased to fund education rograms to revent young eole from starting to smoke. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? (Percent resonding by rural/urban, smoking status, gender, race, age, and education.) agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 26.9 51.4 16.9 4.8 Nomoker Note: 4.1 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 27.3 26.5 29.2 16.3 22.7 30.6 29.1 24.0 24.4 24.8 31.4 22.8 20.6 28.8 21.0 34.1 48.8 53.4 54.7 36.9 51.1 51.5 47.3 58.8 61.5 55.4 43.8 53.5 56.7 50.2 59.0 42.1 17.2 16.7 13.5 31.9 21.3 13.1 18.2 14.1 12.8 14.7 18.4 20.5 17.5 15.6 16.2 19.2 6.7 3.4 2.5 14.9 5.0 4.8.006 5.4 3.1.021 1.3 5.0 6.4 3.1 5.2 5.2 3.8 4.7.050 Table 3.2 Students Should be Punished for Violating Rules agait Smoking Students should be unished for violating school rules agait smoking. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? (Percent resonding by rural/urban, smoking status, gender, race, age, and education.) agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 30.1 65.1 4.4 0.5 Nomoker Note: 1.1 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 29.7 30.5 31.6 24.3 27.0 32.8 32.4 25.7 26.6 31.9 34.2 18.2 24.7 24.6 27.8 41.7 65.0 65.0 63.7 70.1 68.4 62.1 62.9 68.7 64.6 62.5 63.9 73.5 67.0 69.5 67.1 56.0 4.5 4.2 4.1 5.6 4.0 4.6 4.2 4.9 8.9 4.6 1.9 7.6 7.2 4.8 5.1 1.8 0.8 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.7 1.1 0.8.003 1.0 1.1 0.5.002 27
28
Government and Political Order, 2000 to 2003 100% Stores should need a licee to sell tobacco roducts, 84.3% Stores should be enalized for the sale of tobacco to minors, 95.3% Percent of MS Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 80% 60% 40% 20% Tobacco taxes should be increased to fund enforcement of tobacco laws, 77.8% Tobacco should be regulated as a drug, 73.3% Youth should be enalized for the ossession of tobacco, 81.9% Taxes on tobacco are fair, 69.6% Government should NOT limit fines from lawsuits agait the tobacco comanies, 44.9% 0% Bubble Size Indicates Magnitude of Change (2000-2003), Green bubbles reresent significant increases, yellow bubbles reresent non-significant changes, and red bubbles reresent significant decreases from 2000 to 2003 29
Government and Political Order, MS vs US 100% Percent of Mississii Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 80% 60% 40% 20% Stores should need a licee to sell tobacco roducts, 8.9% Tobacco should be regulated as a drug, 10.1% Stores should be enalized for the sale of tobacco to minors, 2.3% Youth should be en alized for the ossession of tobacco, 8. 9% Taxes on tobacco are fair, 0.1% Government should NOT limit fines from lawsuits agait the tobacco comanies, 0.7% 0% Green bubbles reresent significantly more suort in Mississii, yellow bubbles reresent no significant differenc es in suort, and red bubbles reresent significantly less suort in Mississii than in the United States. 30
GOVERNMENT AND POLITICAL ORDER Universal Norms, Beliefs and Practices - 2.0 million Mississii adults (95.3 ercent) believe that stores should be enalized for the sale of tobacco to minors Significant Imrovements 2000 to 2003 Government and Political Order 2000 2001 2002 2003 Tobacco should be regulated as a drug MS 67.9 75.9 73.2 73.3 US 63.7 66.0 66.0 65.9 Stores should need a licee to sell MS 80.8 84.7 84.3 84.3 tobacco roducts US 71.5 74.6 78.2 76.8 Tobacco taxes should be increased to fund MS 75.3 79.9 78.0 77.8 enforcement of tobacco laws US 64.7 71.3 72.2 n/a Stores should be enalized for the sale of MS 95.8 96.4 96.4 95.3 tobacco to minors US 93.4 94.0 94.0 93.1 Youth should be enalized for the MS 82.0 83.0 82.1 81.9 ossession of tobacco US 75.6 76.0 76.3 74.6 Taxes on tobacco are fair MS 66.9 72.4 66.6 69.6 US 68.8 72.4 68.1 69.7 Government should NOT limit fines from MS 47.6 47.2 40.1 44.9 lawsuits agait the tobacco comanies US 47.6 5 48.6 45.2, 2000 to 2003.002 n/a, 2002 to 2003, MS v. US, 2003 n/a n/a.021.049.010 31
Government and Political Order: Percent of resondents who suort normative beliefs, recognize health risks, or reort tobacco control ractices Stores should be enalized for the sale of tobacco to minors 95.3 Stores should need a licee to sell tobacco roducts 84.3 Youth should be enalized for the ossession of tobacco 81.9 Tobacco taxes should be increased to fund enforcement of tobacco laws 77.8 Tobacco should be regulated as a drug 73.3 Taxes on tobacco are fair 69.6 Government should NOT limit fines from lawsuits agait the tobacco comanies 44.9 Universal Predominant Contested Marginal 32
Table 4.1 Tobacco Should Be Regulated as a Drug Tobacco roducts should be regulated as a drug by a government agency such as the Food and Drug Administration. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 20.7 52.6 22.6 4.0 Nomoker 65 years of age and older Note: 5.8 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 23.5 18.5 23.1 10.9 16.1 24.8 21.0 21.2 18.7 19.6 24.0 16.8 13.3 21.6 21.6 22.7 48.2 56.0 56.3 37.0 49.9 55.1 46.8 62.2 6 55.6 45.5 58.4 65.6 54.5 50.5 46.4 25.9 20.1 18.1 41.3 29.3 16.7 26.9 15.1 21.3 21.1 25.0 21.6 17.8 19.7 24.5 26.6 2.4 5.3.010 2.6 10.9 <. 001 4.8 3.4 <. 001 5.3 1.5 <. 001 3.6 5.5 3.2 3.3 4.2 3.4 4.3 Table 4.2 Tobacco Liceing Store owners should need a licee to sell tobacco, just like they do to sell alcohol. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 23.3 61.0 13.9 1.7 Nomoker Note: 1.9 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 24.8 22.0 25.4 15.2 20.8 25.5 24.3 22.3 18.2 22.3 26.9 2 20.6 22.1 19.3 3 58.6 62.9 61.7 57.2 58.1 63.4 56.9 67.5 71.4 64.2 51.5 70.8 66.0 65.7 62.7 51.2 15.5 12.8 11.7 23.4 19.2 9.4 16.5 9.4 10.4 11.7 19.4 7.7 12.4 11.4 16.0 15.7 1.1 2.2 1.2 4.1 <. 001 1.9 1.7.001 2.3 0.8.007 1.8 2.3 1.5.002 1.0 0.7 1.9 3.2.035 33
Table 4.3 Increased Taxes to Fund Enforcement of Tobacco Laws State tobacco taxes should be increased to fund rograms to enforce laws that revent sales of tobacco to minors. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 21.9 55.9 19.3 2.9 Nomoker Note: 2.5 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 22.8 21.2 24.6 10.5 20.2 23.3 22.7 20.3 17.9 21.8 24.8 16.9 13.3 23.4 18.4 27.9 52.1 58.9 59.9 37.1 51.5 59.7 52.2 63.5 66.7 58.2 48.7 61.5 58.2 58.1 60.4 47.4 22.2 16.9 13.2 46.9 25.9 13.7 22.0 13.9 14.1 16.8 23.2 19.2 26.5 15.8 18.9 20.9 2.8 2.9 2.3 5.6 <. 001 2.4 3.3 <. 001 3.1 2.3.012 1.3 3.2 3.3 2.3 2.0 2.6 2.4 3.7.038 Table 4.4 Stores Should Be Penalized for the Sale of Tobacco Products to Minors Stores should be enalized for the sale of tobacco roducts to erso under the age of 18. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? (Percent resonding by rural/urban, region, smoking sta tus, gender, race, age, and education.) agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 33.5 61.8 4.5 0.2 Nomoker Some College Note: 0.6 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 33.1 33.8 35.1 26.9 31.5 35.2 34.4 33.7 23.1 36.7 37.5 23.0 21.2 29.2 33.8 43.6 62.4 61.3 60.7 66.9 63.8 60.2 61.1 61.8 69.2 60.1 57.4 71.1 72.7 64.6 62.0 53.2 4.5 4.4 3.9 6.2 4.8 4.2 4.4 4.1 6.4 3.1 5.1 5.2 5.1 5.8 4.2 3.2 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.4 1.3 0.7.011 1.0 0.4.006 34
Table 4.5 Possession of Tobacco by Minors Perso under the age of 18 should be enalized for the ossession of tobacco roducts. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 21.7 60.2 16.7 1.4 Nomoker Note: 4.7 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or re fused. 22.5 21.2 22.9 16.2 19.9 23.4 21.4 22.7 19.5 24.6 22.2 15.4 14.7 21.4 19.7 27.2 59.8 60.5 60.3 61.0 59.4 60.9 58.5 64.2 55.8 64.8 56.7 61.0 71.6 59.9 64.5 50.7 16.6 16.7 15.3 21.3 19.1 14.5 18.1 12.7 24.7 1 18.8 22.0 12.6 17.6 14.3 20.2 1.2 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.2 2.0 0.4 0.7 2.4 1.6.007 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.9 Table 4.6 Are Taxes on Tobacco Fair Taxes on tobacco are unfair. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 5.4 25.0 56.2 13.4 Nomoker Note: 5.7 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 6.5 4.6 3.1 16.2 5.0 5.7 5.3 5.7 6.6 5.5 5.4 4.8 6.3 6.3 5.9 3.8 26.2 24.2 21.1 40.8 30.3 20.4 21.5 31.1 26.3 24.3 26.8 21.4 33.7 24.2 27.0 20.7 56.3 56.0 59.8 41.5 51.8 60.1 58.5 51.6 59.2 58.8 50.8 61.1 49.5 58.6 54.4 57.3 11.0 15.2 16.1 1.4 <. 001 12.9 13.8.018 14.6 11.5.032 7.9 11.4 16.9 12.7 10.5 10.9 12.7 18.3 35
Table 4.7 Lawsuit Limit agait Tobacco Comanies The government should limit fines from lawsuits agait the tobacco comanies. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? agree Agree Disagree disagree Total 8.4 46.7 37.2 7.7 Nomoker Note: 7.2 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 6.4 10.1 7.7 11.5 7.0 9.8 9.8 6.4 6.7 8.9 8.5 8.6 5.6 8.0 7.7 11.2 54.9 40.3 44.4 56.1 50.1 43.5 48.6 42.6 41.3 45.4 46.4 53.4 59.6 43.0 46.2 46.1 32.6 40.7 38.8 30.9 34.9 39.3 34.6 41.4 46.7 37.3 37.2 31.0 30.3 41.8 37.5 34.0 6.1 8.9.001 9.1 1.4.001 7.9 7.5 7.0 9.6 5.3 8.5 7.8 6.9 4.5 7.2 8.7 8.7 36
37
Work, 2000 to 2003 100% Cigarettes are not available for sale at work lace, 93.1% Percent of MS Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 80% 60% 40% 20% Tobacco use is unaccetable among coworkers, 60.1% Smoking in work areas should not be allowed, 72.2% Smoking is not allowed in any area at work, 64.8% Strictly enforced tobacco olicy at work, 82.9% Place of work does not accommodate smokers, 48.2% Emloyer offered a cessation rogram in ast 12 months, 17.8% 0% Bubble Size Indicates Magnitude of Change (2000-2003), Green bubbles reresent significant increases, yellow bubbles reresent non-significant changes, and red bubbles reresent significant decreases from 2000 to 2003 38
Work, MS vs US 100% Cigarettes are not available for sale at work lace, 0.4% Percent of Mississii Adults in 2003 Who Suort Each Indicator 80% 60% 40% 20% Strictly enforced tobacco olicy at work, 4.2% Smoking in work areas should not be allowed, 4.8% Tobacco use is unaccetable among coworkers, 1.2% Smoking is not allowed in any area at work, 7.3% No ETS exosure at work in the ast 7 days, 8.1% Emloyer offered a cessation rogram in ast 12 months, 5.8% 0% Green bubbles reresent significantly more suort in Mississii, yellow bubbles reresent no significant differences in suort, and red bubbles reresent significantly less suort in Mississii than in the United States. 39
40
WORK Universal Norms, Beliefs and Practices - 93.1 ercent of Mississii adult workers reort that cigarettes are not available for sale at their work lace Significant Imrovements 2000 to 2003 Work 2000 2001 2002 2003 Smoking in work areas should not be MS 61.8 63.4 64.1 72.2 allowed US 57.8 61.8 66.4 68.9 Tobacco use is unaccetable among MS 52.4 48.7 52.6 60.1 coworkers US 53.8 53.6 54.8 60.8 Smoking is not allowed in any area at work MS 53.2 62.1 64.7 64.8 US 65.7 68.5 65.0 69.9 Strictly enforced tobacco olicy at work MS 72.3 82.8 85.4 82.9 US 78.0 79.5 80.7 86.5 No ETS exosure at work in the ast 7 MS n/a n/a n/a 79.1 days US n/a n/a n/a 86.1 Place of work does not accommodate MS 54.1 53.6 45.6 48.2 smokers US 53.4 50.3 56.1 n/a Cigarettes are not available for sale at work MS 91.8 91.6 91.0 93.1 lace US 91.9 91.9 93.4 93.5 Emloyer offered a cessation rogram in MS 14.5 19.8 18.8 17.8 ast 12 months US 23.2 23.6 21.3 18.9, 2000 to 2003.017.022 n/a n/a n/a.012, 2002 to 2003, MS v. US, 2003.038.014.001.031 n/a n/a n/a n/a 41
Work: Percent of resondents who suort normative beliefs, recognize health risks, or reort tobacco control ractices Cigarettes are not available for sale at work lace 93.1 Strictly enforced tobacco olicy at work 82.9 No ETS exosure at work in the ast 7 days 79.1 Smoking in work areas should not be allowed 72.2 Smoking is not allowed in any area at work 64.8 Tobacco use is unaccetable at work 60.1 Place of work does not accommodate smokers 48.2 Emloyer offered a cessation rogram in ast 12 months 17.8 Universal Predominant Contested Marginal 42
Table 5.1 Should Smoking Be Allowed in Work Areas In indoor work areas, do you think smoking should be allowed in all areas, some areas, or not at all? In all areas In some areas Not allowed at all Total 1.4 26.4 72.2 Nomoker Note: 0.8 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused. 1.7 1.1 0.5 5.6 2.1 0.7 1.0 2.2 2.1 1.3 0.7 5.2 1.1 0.9 0.9 28.0 25.2 19.1 60.4 34.0 19.7 27.8 24.6 25.3 27.0 30.1 17.9 32.0 26.1 25.0 25.9 70.3 73.7 80.4 34.0 <. 001 63.9 79.6 <. 001 71.2 73.1 74.7 70.9 68.6 81.3 62.9 72.8 74.1 73.2.050 Table 5.2 Accetability of Tobacco at Worklace At your work lace, would you say that tobacco use is very accetable, somewhat accetable, somewhat unaccetable, or very unaccetable? Very accetable Somewhat accetable Somewhat unaccetable Very unaccetable Total 15.8 24.1 15.4 44.7 Nomoker 17.6 14.8 11.7 31.5 22.4 9.0 18.6 10.1 26.7 14.3 15.0 18.8 27.8 16.1 19.4 10.1 Note: 41.3 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused or did not work. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. 23.4 24.4 22.4 31.5 24.8 23.2 23.1 25.8 24.4 24.7 23.3 18.8 27.8 27.5 26.1 18.2 14.9 15.8 15.9 13.0 17.1 13.7 13.4 18.9 11.1 16.6 16.1 6.3 19.4 16.1 14.2 14.5 44.1 45.0 5 23.9 <. 001 35.8 54.1 <. 001 45.0 45.3 37.8 44.4 45.6 56.3 25.0 40.3 40.3 57.2.010 43
Table 5.3 Emloyer Smoking Policy Which of the following best describes your lace of work s official smoking olicy for indoor work areas? Smoking is not allowed in any area It is allowed in some areas It is allowed in all areas There is no official olicy Total 64.8 22.7 4.5 8.0 Nomoker 62.4 66.4 69.5 44.8 59.8 69.8 62.3 68.4 67.4 66.8 61.7 66.7 47.2 55.0 63.7 79.7 Note: 41.0 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Kn ow or refused or did not work. 24.2 21.7 19.8 34.4 24.4 20.9 21.6 24.7 21.7 21.5 24.5 2 33.3 28.2 23.7 14.6 5.9 3.4 3.6 8.3 5.7 3.4 6.5 1.3 4.5 5.6 2.8 7.4 5.2 0.6 7.5 8.5 7.0 12.5 <. 001 10.2 6.0 9.7 5.7.029 10.9 7.2 8.2 13.3 16.7 9.4 7.4 5.1 >. 001 Table 5.4 Enforcement of Smoking Policy Would you say that this smoking olicy is not enforced at all, oorly enforced, somewhat enforced, or strictly enforced? Not enforced at all Poorly enforced Somewhat enforced Strictly enforced Total 3.1 3.1 10.8 82.9 Nomoker 3.8 2.7 2.3 6.7 3.9 2.3 3.9 2.0 7.3 1.0 4.2 15.4 Note: 48.8 ercent of resondents reorted Don t Know or refused or did not work. 6.9 1.6 5.1 2.0 5.0 1.9 2.9 4.0 5.4 0.9 2.3 4.1 2.4 2.0 4.8 20.7 2.4 1.7 1.4 11.9 10.1 9.6 17.3 14.6 7.5 14.1 6.1 12.2 11.7 9.1 7.7 10.3 14.5 11.1 8.2 79.2 85.3 85.1 72.0.037 76.1 89.2.002 79.7 87.8.045 78.0 85.3 81.8 76.9 62.1 81.5 82.1 88.4 <. 001 44