No More Nico-teen

You have seen television commercials about smoking and its health risks by The Truth. You may even remember a slogan that read, “Tobacco is whacko if you’re a teen.” These marketing campaigns are one of many attempts to reduce youth smoking. A promising campaign to deter youth smoking involves police interventions (writing tickets to minors possessing or using tobacco) with young smokers. Increased tobacco law enforcement will reduce youth smoking rates. If youth smokers worry about tickets, they will have one more thing to ponder before lighting a cigarette.

Researchers recently tested the efficacy of law enforcement interventions to deter youth smoking. Psychologists Jason A. Leonard, Steven B. Pokorny, Julia R. Sanem, and Monica L. Adams from DePaul University created a youth smoking research study in community settings. The experiment’s summary appeared in the September 2006 issue of Behavior Modification in an article titled, “Monitoring and Decreasing Public Smoking Among Youth.” They observed popular youth hangouts in towns around the Chicago area during August 2004, right after school resumed. The researchers wanted to discover how effective law enforcement interventions are at stopping youth smoking.

Before summarizing on their findings, the researchers elaborated on youth smoking trends. They report that around 5,500 youth try cigarettes for the first time every day (681). In addition, around 3,000 become daily smokers. They estimate around 21.9% of high school students in the year 2003 smoked (682). The United States Department of Health and Human Services aims to have youth smoking rates below 17% by 2010. To accomplish this, high school anti-smoking campaigns will need help from additional sources. Leonard et al report that law enforcement interventions combined with efforts to keep merchants from selling to minors promise to reduce youth smoking rates below the current level.

In order to prove their claims, Leonard et al observed several popular locations where youth smoking occurred after school. These locations were shopping mall and fast food restaurant parking lots (684). The researchers designated two sites for police intervention, and designated two as controls. They observed the sites and recorded the number of youth smokers per day. After establishing a baseline number of average youth smokers, the police intervened at the designated sites. The offenders received a ticket, their tobacco was confiscated, parents were notified, and they were required to make a court appearance (686). Following the interventions, researchers continued to observe cases of youth smoking at the locations. Unsurprisingly, cases of youth smoking decreased significantly. However, the control sites showed little change in youth smoking rates (686-687).

Following the study, the researchers discussed their findings. They revealed that following intervention, the days with highest smoking rates were days with little or no police presence (687). However, youth smoking rates at an observed fast food restaurant remained low, regardless of police presence. The researchers attribute this to the fast food parking lot’s layout. If a police car were to drive by, anyone smoking in the parking lot could be easily seen (687).

The researchers also acknowledge the fact that youth smokers may have found a more secluded area to replace the former public hangouts (687). However, the researchers consider this as progress. Applying the social learning theory, they conclude that making smoking less observable in society conveys that it is not socially acceptable and potentially harmful (688). This will lead to a decrease in youth smoking in the future. The researchers also conclude that increased law enforcement interventions against youth smoking will “modify norms regarding the acceptability of smoking,” (688). In addition, they argue that fewer law enforcement interventions will create social norms promoting smoking, making it appear socially acceptable and harmless. Leonard et al write that adults are expected to protect youth from harmful behavior. Adults failing to intervene with youth smoking will send a message of “acceptance and indifference,” (688).

Leonard et al conclude their research summarizing the potential variables that could have affected their results. Since the researchers performed the study outside of the laboratory, controlled tests cannot be performed. However, given the nature of the study, Leonard et al believe “there might need to be a certain appreciation of the hurdles that investigators implementing this type of work encounter, (690). Yes, there will be some potential answer to any result of the experiment, but one should not attribute their findings to pure coincidence. The police interventions showed significant progress in deterring youth smoking. Therefore, police efforts should be increased to deter youth smoking.

Leonard A. Jason, Steven B. Pokorny, Julia R. Sanem, and Monica L. Adams
"Monitoring and Decreasing Public Smoking Among Youth." Behavior Modification 30 (2006): 681-692.