Table 1.

Measures assessed on the personal digital assistant

Measure/construct	Items
School characteristics
Detentions	Participants were asked “During this school year, how many detentions and suspensions have you had?” Responses were coded as “none” or “one or more.”
SSS (44)	Using a 10-rung ladder, participants are asked “At the top of the ladder are kids who are best off—get good grades, have lots of friends, or do well at sports. At the bottom are kids who are worst off—get poor grades, have few friends, or do poorly in sports. Choose the one rung where you think you are on the ladder.” Responses of 10 or 9 were coded as “high” and 8 and below as “low.”
Peer & family influence
Household members smoking behavior	Created an index of all household members who the participant reported she lived with who smoked. Responses were dichotomized into “lives with at least one household member who smokes” or “does not.” We examined the extent to which adolescent reports on mother’s smoking status and mother’s self-reports on smoking are concordant with one another. Overall, we found good concordance (94–96% exact agreement) between mother self-reports and adolescent reports on her smoking (45).
Friends smoking behavior	Participants who responded “1 or more” to either “How many of your friends smoke?” or “How many of your closest friends smoke?” were coded as “at least one;” all other participants were coded as “none.”
Attitudes toward smoking and normative beliefs
Temptations to smoke (46)	Assessed 14 different situational temptations to try smoking, e.g., “With friends at a party,” analyzed as one scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.90). Responses were made on a five-point scale ranging from “not at all tempted” to “extremely tempted.” Participants who responded “not at all” to all items were coded as “none;” all others were coded as “some.”
Positive outcome expectations (47)	Seven items assessed positive expectations, e.g., “I think smoking would make me look more mature.” (Cronbach’s α = 0.88). Responses were made on a four-point scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” Participants who responded “strongly disagree” to all items were coded as “none;” all others were coded as “some.”
Peer and family normative influence (48)	Assessed normative beliefs of family and peers, i.e., “How would your parents feel about your smoking cigarettes?” and “How would your close friends feel about your smoking cigarettes?” Responses were made on a four-point scale ranging from “strongly approve” to “strongly disapprove.” Responses of “strongly disapprove” were compared with all other responses.
Acculturation
Country of birth	Either United States or Mexico
Years in United States	Assessed among participants born in Mexico only.
Acculturation scale (49)	Assessed using four items that ascertain language used when reading, speaking at home, speaking with friends, and thinking. The scale has excellent internal reliability among Mexican Americans (α = 0.92). Responses were made on a five-point scale ranging from “only Spanish” to “only English.” Scores of 3 or more were coded as “high acculturation,” and those of 2.75 or below were coded as “low.”
Parental SES
Parental education	Educational attainment was divided into two categories: “less than high school” and “high school/General Educational Development equivalency or more than high school.”

NOTE: All Cronbach’s alphas are derived from the baseline study data.