Table 3.
Relationship Between Psychosocial Factors and Latent Classes of Tobacco Use, Higher-SES Students (n = 4,489)a
| Latent classes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Never user, low risk | Never user, high risk | Ever user, high risk | Overall p value | |
| M (SE) | ||||
| Intrapersonal factors | ||||
| Knowledge (health effects) | 0.12 (0.02)a | 0.13 (0.04)a | 0.06 (0.08)a | .6643 |
| Beliefs (social consequences) | 0.41 (0.02) | 0.29 (0.03) | 0.09 (0.05) | <.0001 |
| Meanings (reasons to use) | 0.09 (0.01) | −0.16 (0.03) | −0.33 (0.08) | <.0001 |
| Meanings (reasons not to use) | 0.72 (0.02)a | 0.71 (0.03)a | 0.67 (0.07)a | .8259 |
| Self-efficacy (refusal skills) | 0.66 (0.05)a | 0.38 (0.06)b | 0.52 (0.11)ab | <.0001 |
| Social-environmental factors | ||||
| Normative beliefs | 0.10 (0.02) | −0.25 (0.03)a | −0.32 (0.07)a | <.0001 |
| Normative expectations | 0.25 (0.01) | 0.14 (0.02) | −0.06 (0.05) | .0001 |
| Perceived access | −0.29 (0.04)a | −0.23 (0.05)a | −0.20 (0.10)a | .4036 |
| Perceived prevalence (chewing) | 0.19 (0.02) | −0.08 (0.03)a | −0.07 (0.07)a | <.0001 |
| Perceived prevalence (smoking) | 0.15 (0.03)a | 0.38 (0.04) | 0.16 (0.08)a | <.0001 |
| Knowledge (public policy) | −0.10 (0.02)a | −0.07 (0.05)a | 0.07 (0.10)a | .2204 |
| Support (public policy) | 0.08 (0.02) | −0.01 (0.04) | −0.22 (0.07) | <.0001 |
| Self-efficacy (advocacy skills) | 0.30 (0.03) | 0.22 (0.04)a | 0.09 (0.07)a | .0007 |
| Other factors | ||||
| Receptivity to advertising | 0.03 (0.02)a | −0.03 (0.05)a | 0.02 (0.10)a | .5306 |
| Exposure to advertising | −0.01 (0.03)a | 0.04 (0.05)a | 0.04 (0.09)a | .4187 |
Note. A higher score on all multi-item scales for all factors indicate less risk.
Means in the same row that share subscripts do not differ at p < .05 according to the pairwise comparisons.
aEstimates are generated from mixed-effects models that are adjusted for other factors, using standardized scale scores.