This study examines direct and indirect impacts of antismoking media messages on adolescents' smoking attitudes and intentions to smoke. Elaborating on the influence of presumed influence model, this study incorporates the moderating role of peer proximity (i.e., proximal versus distal peers). Analyzing direct effects in a survey of 1,687 middle school students, we find that antismoking media messages have unexpected effects among both ever-smokers (experimenters and established smokers) and never-smokers. But analysis of indirect paths reveal significant effects in the intended direction. In addition, these effects are moderated by peer proximity. Respondents' perception that proximal peers, but not distal peers, are more influenced by such messages lead to a significant decrease in their favorable thoughts toward smoking and intention to smoke. The data suggest that antismoking messages may only achieve their desired effect via the indirect influence path.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
2.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3.
Aloise-Young, P.A., Graham, J.W., & Hansen, W.B. (1994). Peer influence on smoking initiation during early adolescence: A comparison of group members and group outsiders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(2), 281-287.
4.
American Lung Association. (2003). Adolescent smoking statistics. Retrieved October 9, 2004, from http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=39868
5.
Andrews, J.A., Tildesley, E., Hops, H., & Li, F.Z. (2002). The influence of peers on young adult substance use. Health Psychology, 21, 349-357.
6.
Baer, J.S., Stacy, A., & Larimer, M. (1991). Biases in the perception of drinking norms among college students. Journal ofStudies on Alcohol, 52, 580-586.
7.
Bearman, P.S. (2002). Social network context and adolescent STD risk . New York: Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy, Columbia University .
8.
Bearman, P.S., & Bruckner, H. (1999). Peer effects on adolescent girls' sexual debut and pregnancy. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
9.
Bearman, P.S., Bruckner, H., Brown, B.B., Theobald, W., & Philliber, S. (1999). Peer potential: Making the most of how teens influence each other. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
10.
Brown, B.B. (1990). Peer groups and peer cultures. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliot (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 171-196). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
Buhrmester, D., & Furman, W. (1987). The development of companionship and intimacy . Child Development, 58, 1101-1113.
12.
Bush, P.J., & Iannotti, R.J. (1985). The development of children's health orientations and behaviors: Lessons for substance abuse prevention . In C. L. Jones & R. J. Battjes (Eds.), Etiology of drug abuse . Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
13.
Chia, S.C. (2006). How peers mediate media influence on adolescents' sexual attitudes and sexual behavior. Journal of Communication , 56, 585-606.
14.
Cialdini, R.B. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York: Quill William Morrow.
15.
Cohen, J., Mutz, D., Price, V., & Gunther, A.C. (1988). Perceived impact of defamation: An experiment on third-person effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161-173.
16.
Clasen, D.R., & Brown, B.B. (1985). The multidimensionality of peer pressure in adolescence . Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 14(6), 451-468.
17.
Crockett, L., Losoff, M., & Petersen, A. (1984). Perceptions of the peer group and friendship in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 4, 155-181.
18.
David, P., Liu, K., & Myser, M. (2004). Methodological artifact or persistent bias? Testing the robustness of the third-person and reverse third-person effects for alcohol messages. Communication Research, 31(2), 206-233.
19.
Duck, J.M., Terry, D.J., & Hogg, M.G. (1995). The perceived influence of aids advertising: 3rd-person effects in the context of positive media content. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17(3), 305-325.
20.
Ellickson, P.L., Tucker, J.S., & Klein, D.J. (2001). High-risk behaviors associated with early smoking: results from a 5-year follow-up. Journal of AdolescentHealth , 28, 465-473.
21.
Farrelly, M.C., Davis, K.C., Haviland, M.L., Healton, C.G., & Messeri, P. (2005). Evidence of a dose-response relationship between “truth” antismoking ads and youth smoking prevalence. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 425-431.
22.
Farrelly, M.C., Healton, C.G., Davis, K.C., Messeri, P., Hersey, J.C., & Haviland, M.L. (2002). Getting to the truth: Evaluating national tobacco countermarketing campaigns. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 901-907.
23.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes, Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
24.
Fishbein, M., Jamieson, K.H., Zimmer, E., von Haeften, I., & Nabi, R. (2002). Avoiding the boomerang: Testing the relative effectiveness of antidrug public service announcements before a national campaign. American Journal of Public Health, 92(2), 238-245.
Grandpre, J., Alvaro, E.M., Burgoon, M., Miller, C.H., & Hall, J.R. (2003). Adolescent reactance and anti-smoking campaigns: A theoretical approach. Health Communication, 15, 349-366.
27.
Gunther, A.C. (1998). The persuasive press inference: Effects of mass media on perceived public opinion. Communication Research , 25, 486-504.
28.
Gunther, A.C., Bolt, D., Borzekowski, D.L.G., Liebhart, J.L., & Dillard, J.P. (2006). Presumed influence on peer norms: How mass media indirectly affect adolescent smoking. Journal of Communication , 56, 52-68.
29.
Gunther, A.C., & Christen, C.T. (1999). Effects of news slant and base rate information on perceived public opinion. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76, 277-292.
30.
Gunther, A.C., Christen, C.T., Liebhart, J.L., & Chia, S.C. (2001). Congenial public, contrary, press, and biased estimates of the climate of opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly , 65, 295-320.
31.
Gunther, A.C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70(1), 58-67.
32.
Gunther, A.C., & Storey, J.D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication, 53, 199-215.
33.
Gunther, A.C., & Thorson, E. (1992). Perceived persuasive effects of product commercials and public-service announcements: Third-person effects in new domains. Communication Research, 19(5), 574-596.
34.
Hansen, W., & Graham, J.W. (1991). Preventing alcohol, marijuana, and cigarette use among adolescents: One year results of the Adolescent Alcohol Prevention Trial . Preventive Medicine, 20, 414-430.
35.
Harris, J.R. (1995). Where is the child's environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychological Review, 102(3), 458-489.
36.
Henriksen, L., & Flora, J.A. (1999). Third-person perception and children—Perceived impact of pro- and anti-smoking ads. Communication Research , 26(6), 643-665.
37.
Henry, K.L., Slater, M.D., & Oetting, E.R. (2005). Alcohol use in early adolescence: The effect of changes in risk taking, perceived harm and friends' alcohol use. Journal ofStudies on Alcohol, 66, 275-283.
38.
Hyman, H., & Sheatsley, P. (1947). Some reasons why information campaigns fail. Public Opinion Quarterly, 11, 412-423.
39.
Hyman, H., & Singer, E. (Eds.). (1968). Readings in reference group theory and research. New York: Free Press.
40.
Iannotti, R.J., & Bush, P.J. (1992). Perceived vs. actual friends' use of alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and cocaine: Which has the most influence?Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 375-389.
41.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
42.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User's reference guideChicago: Scientific Software.
43.
Kirke, D.M. (2004). Chain reactions in adolescents' cigarette, alcohol and drug use: similarity through peer influence or the patterning of ties in peer networks?Social Networks, 26(1), 3-28.
44.
Maxwell, K.A. (2002). Friends: The role of peer influence across adolescent risk behaviors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31, 267-277.
45.
McLeod, D.M., Eveland, W.P., & Nathanson, A.I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent and misogynic rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect . Communication Research, 24(2), 153-174.
46.
Meltzer, W. (2003). Up front. Journal of Health Communication , 8, 101-105.
47.
Menashe, C.L., & Siegel, M. (1998). The power of a frame: An analysis of newspaper coverage of tobacco issues—United States, 1985-1996. Journal of Health Communication, 3, 307-325.
48.
Milkie, M.A. (1999). Social comparisons, reflected appraisals, and mass media: The impact of pervasive beauty images on black and white girls' self-concepts. Social Psychological Quarterly, 62, 190-210.
49.
Millstein, S.G. (1993). A view of health from the adolescent's perspective . In S. G. Millstein, A. C. Peterson, & E. O. Nightingale (Eds.), Promoting the health of adolescents: New directions for the twenty-first century (pp. 97-118). New York: Oxford University Press.
50.
Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology: Special fields and applications (pp. 347-412). New York: Random House.
51.
Murray, D.M., Perry, C.L., & Griffin, G. (1992). Results from a state-wide approach to adolescent tobacco use prevention. Preventive Medicine, 82, 449-472.
52.
Murray, D.M., Prokhorov, A.V., & Harty, K.C. (1994). Effects of a state-wide antismoking campaign on mass media messages and smoking beliefs. Preventive Medicine , 23, 54-60.
53.
Neuwirth, K., Frederick, E., & Mayo, C. (2002). Person-effects and heuristic-systematic processing . Communication Research, 29(3), 320-359.
54.
Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
55.
Paek, H.-J. (2006, August). Adolescent pre- and post-orientations that determine antismoking campaign effectiveness: Applying O-S-O-R model . Paper presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual Conference, San Francisco.
56.
Paek, H.-J. & Gunther, A. (2006, April). Roles of peer perceptions in the effects of antismoking campaigns: An exploration of mediating mechanisms with two-wave panel analysis. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Advertising Association in Reno, Nevada .
57.
Paek, H.-J., Pan, Z., Sun, Y., Abisaid, J., & Houden, D. (2005). The third-person perception as social judgment: An exploration of social distance and uncertainty reduction in perceived effects of political attack ads. Communication Research, 32, 143-170.
58.
Peterson, A.V., Kealey, K.A., Mann, S.L., Marek, P.M., & Sarason, I.G. (2000). Hutchinson smoking prevention project: Long-term randomized trial in school-based tobacco use prevention-results on smoking . Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92, 1979-1991.
59.
Prentice, D.A., & Miller, D.T. (1993). Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use on campus: Some consequences of misperceiving the social norm. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 64, 243-256.
60.
Randolph, W., & Viswanath, K. (2004). Lessons learned from public health mass media campaigns: Marketing health in a crowded media world. Annual Review of Public Health, 25, 419-437.
61.
Ross, M., & Fletcher, J.G.O. (1985). Attribution and social perception. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 73-122). New York: Random House.
62.
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C.W. (1964). Reference groups: exploration into conformity and deviation of adolescents. New York: Harper & Row.
63.
Slater, M.D. (2004). Operationalizing and analyzing exposure: The foundation of media effects research. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 168-183.
64.
Stephenson, M.T., & Palmgreen, P. (2001). Sensation seeking, perceived message sensation value, personal involvement, and processing of anti-marijuana PSAs. Communication Monographs, 68(1), 49-71.
65.
Sussman, S., Dent, C.W., Mestel-Rauch, J., Johnson, C.A., Hansen, W.B., & Flay, B.R. (1988). Adolescent nonsmokers, triers, and regular smokers' estimates of cigarette smoking prevalence: When do overestimations occur and by whom? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 537-551.
66.
Turner, J.C. (1991). Social influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Cole.
67.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 105-110.
68.
Urberg, K.A. (1992). Locus of peer influence: Social crowd and best friend. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21(4), 439-450.
69.
Wakefield, M., Flay, B., Nichter, M., & Giovino, G. (2003). Effects of anti-smoking advertising on youth smoking: A review. Journal of Health Communication, 8, 229-247.
70.
Wakefield, M., Terry-McElrath, Y., Emery, S., Saffer, H., Chaloupka, F.J., Szczypka, G., et al. (2006). Effect of televised, tobacco company-funded smoking prevention advertising on youth smoking-related beliefs, intentions, and behavior. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 2154-2160.
71.
Wartella, E.A., & Stout, P.A. (2002). The evolution of mass media and health persuasion models. In W. D. Crano & M. Burgoon (Eds.), Mass media and drug prevention: Classic and contemporary theories and research (pp. 19-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
72.
Weiss, C.S., Nesselhof-Kendall, S.E.A., Fleck-Kandath, C., & Baum, A. (1990). Psychosocial aspects of AIDS prevention among heterosexuals. In J. Edwards, R. S. Tindale, L. Heath, & E. J. Posavac (Eds.), Social influence processes and prevention (pp. 15-38). New York: Plenum Press.
73.
Wolburg, J.M. (2004). Misplaced marketing: The need for new anti-smoking advertising strategies that do not provoke smoker defiance. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21(3), 173-174.
74.
Yanovitzky, I., Stewart, L.P., & Lederman, L.C. (2006). Social distance, perceived drinking by peers, and alcohol use by college students. Health Communication, 19, 1-10.
