To examine the factorial validity and measurement invariance of scales that measure smoking-related self-efficacy, beliefs, and intention between daily and intermittent adolescent smokers.
Design.
Cross-sectional survey design.
Setting.
Selected high schools in eastern Texas.
Subjects.
Subjects were 2888 high school current smokers; mean age 16.2 years; 53.5% male; 67.4% White, 17.8% Hispanic, 6.2% Black, 8.6% “other.” Daily smokers comprised 37.9% of the sample (i.e., smoked at least one cigarette every day 30 days prior to the survey).
Measures.
Smoking-related self-efficacy and intention were measured by three items; beliefs were measured by four items.
Analysis.
Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to test the invariance of the measures between daily and intermittent smokers. Fit indices included comparative fit index (CFI), nonnormed fix index (NNFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA).
Results.
The three-factor measurement model had good fit for daily (CFI = .97, NNFI = .95, RMSEA = .09) and intermittent (CFI = .96, NNFI = .95, RMSEA = .09) smokers. Evidence of strong factorial invariance was found for the factors between the smoking subgroups (CFI = .96, NNFI = .96, RMSEA = .08).
Conclusion.
These measures may be used to capture and compare scores on self-efficacy to resist smoking, beliefs about benefits of smoking, and intention to smoke between daily and intermittent adolescent smokers.
US Department of Health and Human Services. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Ga: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 1994.
2.
AnLCBergCJKlattCM. Symptoms of cough and shortness of breath among occasional young adult smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11:126–133.
3.
RubinsteinMLBenowitzNLAuerbackGMMoscickiA-B. Withdrawal in adolescent light smokers following 24-hour abstinence. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11:185–189.
4.
AusemsMMestersIvan BreukelenGDe VriesH. Do Dutch 11–12 years olds who never smoke, smoke experimentally or smoke regularly have different demographic backgrounds and perceptions of smoking?Eur J Public Health. 2003;13:160–167.
5.
MyersMGMcCarthyDMMacPhersonLBrownSA. Constructing a short form of the Smoking Consequences Questionnaire with adolescents and young adults. Psychol Assess. 2003;15:163–172.
6.
Lewis-EsquerreJMRodrigueJRKahlerCW. Development and validation of an adolescent smoking consequences questionnaire. Nicotine Tob Res. 2005;7:81–90.
7.
WahlSKTurnerLRMermelsteinRJFlayBR. Adolescents' smoking expectancies: psychometric properties and prediction of behavior change. Nicotine Tob Res. 2005;7:613–623.
8.
FlayBRHuFBRichardsonJ. Psychosocial predictors of different stages of cigarette smoking among high school students. Prev Med. 1998;27(5 Pt 3):A9–18.
9.
TyasSLPedersonLL. Psychosocial factors related to adolescent smoking: a critical review of the literature. Tob Control. 1998;7:409–420.
10.
HornKDinoGGoldcampJKalsekarIModyR. The impact of Not On Tobacco on teen smoking cessation: end-of-program evaluation results, 1998–2003. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2005;20:640–661.
SussmanSSunPDentCW. A meta-analysis of teen cigarette smoking cessation. Health Psychol. 2006;25:549–557.
13.
SterlingLandrum KDiamondPMMullenDolan PPallonenUFordKHMcAlisterAL. Smoking-related self-efficacy, beliefs, and intention: assessing factorial validity and structural relationships in 9th-12th grade current smokers. Addict Behav. 2007;32:1863–1876.
14.
DavisKCFarrellyMCMesseriPDukeJ. The impact of national smoking prevention campaigns on tobacco-related beliefs, intentions to smoke and smoking initiation: results from a longitudinal survey of youth in the United States. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2009;6:722–740.
15.
CowellAJFarrellyMCChouRValloneDM. Assessing the impact of the national “truth” antismoking campaign on beliefs, attitudes, and intent to smoke by race/ethnicity. Ethn Health. 2009;14:75–91.
16.
CarpenterMJGarrett-MayerEVitocCCartmellKBiggersSAlbergAJ. Adolescent nondaily smokers: Favorable views of tobacco yet receptive to cessation. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11:348–355.
17.
VandenbergRLanceC. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods. 2000;3:4–70.
18.
AnatchkovaMDReddingCARossiJS. Development and validation of Decisional Balance and Temptations measures for Bulgarian adolescent smokers. Addict Behav. 2006;31:155–161.
19.
AnatchkovaMDReddingCARossiJS. Development and validation of transtheoretical model measures for Bulgarian adolescent non-smokers. Subst Use Misuse. 2007;42:23–41.
20.
GuoBAveyardPFieldingASuttonS. The factor structure and factorial invariance for the decisional balance scale for adolescent smoking. Int J Behav Med. 2009;16:158–163.
21.
SahaTDComptonWMPulayAJ. Dimensionality of DSM-IV nicotine dependence in a national sample: an item response theory application. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2010;108:21–28.
22.
CastroYKendzorDEBusinelleMS. Structural and predictive equivalency of the Wisconsin Smoking Withdrawal Scale across three racial/ethnic groups. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011;13:548–555.
23.
VajerPUrbánRTomborIStauderAKalabayL. Psychometric properties and construct validity of the brief wisconsin inventory of smoking dependence motives in an Internet-based sample of treatment-seeking Hungarian smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011;13:273–281.
24.
MacPhersonLMyersMG. Invariance study of an adolescent survey-based smoking-related cognitions scale: examination across Hispanic and Caucasian groups. Prev Med. 2004;39:1026–1035.
25.
BryantF. Assessing the measurement validity. In: Reading and Understanding More Multivariate Statistics. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2002:99–146.
26.
GregorichSE. Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Med Care. 2006;44(11Suppl 3):S78–S94.
27.
MeshackAFHuSPallonenUEMcAlisterALGottliebNHuangP. Texas Tobacco Prevention Pilot Initiative: processes and effects. Health Educ Res. 2004;19:657–668.
28.
HoyleRStephensonMPalmgreenPLorchEDonohewR. Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences. 2002;32:401–414.
29.
HornJLMcArdleJJ. A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Exp Aging Res. 1992;18:117–144.
30.
SteenkampJBaumgartnerH. Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research. 1998;25:78–90.
31.
AjzenIFishbeinM. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc; 1980.
32.
FishbeinM. The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care. 2000;12:273–278.
33.
BanduraA. Social Foundations of Though & Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.
34.
TuckerJSEllicksonPLKleinDJ. Smoking cessation during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood. Nicotine Tob Res. 2002;4:321–332.
35.
EllicksonPLMcGuiganKAKleinDJ. Predictors of late-onset smoking and cessation over 10 years. J Adolesc Health. 2001;29:101–108.
36.
BabbinSFHarringtonMBurdittC. Prevention of alcohol use in middle school students: psychometric assessment of the decisional balance inventory. Addict Behav. 2011;36:543–546.
37.
HarringtonMBabbinSReddingC. Psychometric assessment of the Temptations to Try Alcohol Scale. Addict Behav. 2011;36:431–433.
38.
HuLBentlerP. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999;6:1–55.
39.
BrowneMCudeckR. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: BollenKALongJS, eds. Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park, Calif; 1993:132–162.
McGeeHABabbinSFReddingC. Prevention of smoking in Middle School Students: psychometric assessment of the Temptations to Try Smoking Scale. Addict Behav. 2012;37:521–523.
42.
VelicerWFDiclementeCCRossiJSProchaskaJO. Relapse situations and self-efficacy: an integrative model. Addict Behav. 1990;15:271–283.
