Table 4. Comparison of littering behavior scenarios.
Schultz et al. 2013 (65%) | 85% | 35% | 10% | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SER quintile | Butts per m2 | IRR | Butts per m2 | IRR | Butts per m2 | IRR | Butts per m2 | IRR |
0.0–0.2 | 0.0153 | 0.0200 | 0.0083 | 0.0024 | ||||
0.2–0.4 | 0.0112 | 0.73 | 0.0146 | 0.73 | 0.0060 | 0.73 | 0.0017 | 0.73 |
0.4–0.6 | 0.0135 | 0.88 | 0.0177 | 0.88 | 0.0073 | 0.88 | 0.0021 | 0.88 |
0.6–0.8 | 0.0274 | 1.79 | 0.0359 | 1.79 | 0.0148 | 1.79 | 0.0042 | 1.79 |
0.8–1.0 | 0.0858 | 5.60 | 0.1122 | 5.60 | 0.0462 | 5.60 | 0.0132 | 5.60 |
Total cigarette butts | 145,772,501,112 | 190,625,578,336 | 78,492,885,197 | 22,426,538,628 |
Data represent the area-weighted littered cigarette butt density (butts/m2) among quintiles of Social-Environmental Risk (SER) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) for the Schutlz et al 2013 scenario (65%) compared to littering of 85%, 35%, and 10% of all cigarettes. Incidence rate ratios and intervals are back-transformed from the log scale. The total modeled number of cigarette butts littered in a year is presented for each scenario.