Health messages have limited effects on young smokers. The health effects typically have long latent periods, and the appreciation of risk depends on the meaning given to longevity. This study aims to understand how college student smokers interpreted the risks of losing 10 years of life because of smoking. In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 23 male smokers from a relatively low-achieving college in southern Taiwan. The participants had vague ideas about the future; were not expecting a successful life, thought life was stressful and boring; and expressed that there was no need to live too long. Many believed that removing the stress and having a composed lifestyle was the way to becoming healthy, which could be achieved only by people with economic success. They would quit had they been rich. Empowerment to help young smokers gain control over their life events may be the key to tobacco control.
DollRPetoRBorehamJSutherlandI. Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years’ observations on male British doctors. BMJ. 2004;328:1519.
2.
JhaPPetoRZatonskiWBorehamJJarvisMJLopezAD. Social inequalities in male mortality, and in male mortality from smoking: indirect estimation from national death rates in England and Wales, Poland, and North America. Lancet. 2006;368:367-370.
3.
KuoPHYangHJSoongWTChenWJ. Substance use among adolescents in Taiwan: associated personality traits, incompetence, and behavioral/emotional problems. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2002;67: 27-39.
4.
WenCPTsaiSPChengTYHsuCCChenTLinHS. Role of parents and peers in influencing the smoking status of high school students in Taiwan. Tob Control. 2005;14(suppl 1):i10-i15.
5.
Taiwan International Medical Alliance. National Survey of Smoking Behavior Among College Students and Staff (Final Report). Taipei, Taiwan: Bureau of Health Promotion, Department of Health; 2010.
6.
BergCJLustKASanemJR. Smoker self-identification versus recent smoking among college students. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36:333-336.
7.
MoranSWechslerHRigottiNA. Social smoking among US college students. Pediatrics. 2004;114: 1028-1034.
8.
AjzenI. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2002;32:665-683.
9.
BeckerMH. The Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior. Thorofare, NJ: CB Slack; 1974.
10.
Peretti-WatelPMoattiJP. Understanding risk behaviours: how the sociology of deviance may contribute? The case of drug-taking. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63:675-679.
11.
SmithMUmenaiT. Knowledge, attitude and practice of smoking among university students of allied health sciences in Japan. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2000;12:17-21.
12.
GoughBFryGGroganSConnerM. Why do young adult smokers continue to smoke despite the health risks? A focus group study. Psychol Health. 2009;24:203-220.
13.
OakesWChapmanSBorlandRBalmfordJTrotterL. “Bulletproof skeptics in life’s jungle”: which self-exempting beliefs about smoking most predict lack of progression towards quitting?Prev Med. 2004;39:776-782.
14.
HeikkinenHPatjaKJallinojaP. Smokers’ accounts on the health risks of smoking: why is smoking not dangerous for me?Soc Sci Med. 2010;71:877-883.
15.
GilmanSEAbramsDBBukaSL. Socioeconomic status over the life course and stages of cigarette use: initiation, regular use, and cessation. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57:802-808.
16.
WenCPLevyDTChengTYHsuCCTsaiSP. Smoking behaviour in Taiwan, 2001. Tob Control. 2005;14(suppl 1):i51-i55.
17.
PachaneeCALimLBainCWibulpolprasertSSeubsmanSASleighAC. Smoking behavior among 84 315 open-university students in Thailand. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2011;23(4):544-554.
18.
HalfonNHochsteinM. Life course health development: an integrated framework for developing health, policy, and research. Milbank Q. 2002;80:433-479.
19.
SeemanMLewisS. Powerlessness, health and mortality: a longitudinal study of older men and mature women. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:517-525.
20.
De VogliRSantinelloM. Unemployment and smoking: does psychosocial stress matter?Tob Control. 2005;14:389-395.
21.
ThegeBKBachnerYGMartosTKushnirT. Meaning in life: does it play a role in smoking?Subst Use Misuse. 2009;44:1566-1577.
22.
PikoBFWillsTAWalkerC. Motives for smoking and drinking: country and gender differences in samples of Hungarian and US high school students. Addict Behav. 2007;32:2087-2098.
23.
HsiaFNSpruijt-MetzD. The meanings of smoking among Chinese American and Taiwanese American college students. Nicotine Tob Res. 2003;5:837-849.
24.
PalfaiTPRalstonTE. Life goals and alcohol use among first-year college students: the role of motives to limit drinking. Addict Behav. 2011;36(11):1083-1086.
25.
HarwoodGASalsberryPFerketichAKWewersME. Cigarette smoking, socioeconomic status, and psychosocial factors: examining a conceptual framework. Public Health Nurs. 2007;24:361-371.
26.
SchulzAJIsraelBAZimmermanMACheckowayBN. Empowerment as a multi-level construct: perceived control at the individual, organizational and community levels. Health Educ Res. 1995;10:309-327.
27.
YoungI. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1990.
28.
RisselC. Empowerment: the holy grail of health promotion?Health Promot Int. 1994;9:39-47.
29.
Directorate General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics. Report on the survey of family income and expenditure. National Statistics, Republic of China (Taiwan). Taipei, Taiwan: Statistical Bureau. http://eng.stat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=3417&CtNode=1596&mp=5. Published 2010. Accessed February 1, 2011.
30.
YaminAE. Suffering and powerlessness: the significance of promoting participation in rights-based approaches to health. Health Human Rights. 2009;11:5-22.
31.
KhattabNFentonS. What makes young adults happy? Employment and non-work as determinants of life satisfaction. Sociology. 2009;43:11-26.
32.
BergMComanESchensulJ. Youth Action Research for Prevention: a multi-level intervention designed to increase efficacy and empowerment among urban youth. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;43:345-359.
33.
KohfeldtDChhunLGraceSLanghoutR. Youth empowerment in context: exploring tensions in school-based yPAR. Am J Community Psychol. 2011;47:28-45.
