TABLE 2—

Comparison of Homeless and Domiciled Smoker Samples: Dallas, TX; August 2011–November 2012

Variable	Homeless Smokers (n = 57), Mean (SD) or %	Domiciled Smokers (n = 110), Mean (SD) or %	P
Affect and perceived stress
PANAS—Negative Affect17	18.0 (6.6)	19.5 (8.0)	.233
PANAS—Positive Affect17	31.2 (10.5)	29.2 (9.4)	.22
Perceived Stress Scale18	6.1 (3.4)	6.3 (3.3)	.618
Mental health
PHQ Alcohol Dependence20	17.5	17.3	.965
Depression diagnosis history	80.7	50.9	<.001
BRFSS no. of days with mental health problems21	11.5 (10.5)	8.0 (9.8)	.035
CES–D,9	15.7 (10.3)	16.0 (11.1)	.879
Negative experiences and exposure to threat or harm
Detroit Discrimination Scale25	31.5 (13.4)	19.5 (10.0)	<.001
Urban Life Stress Scale24	48.4 (11.1)	43.2 (11.8)	.006
Social Cohesion and Trust Scale23	14.2 (2.3)	15.6 (2.7)	.001
Fear Scale22	1.7 (0.8)	1.5 (0.6)	.027
Mistrust Scale22	1.9 (0.7)	1.6 (0.6)	.002
Reserve capacity
Loneliness28	5.3 (2.0)	5.2 (1.9)	.713
General Self-Efficacy Scale26	34.1 (6.1)	33.8 (5.8)	.738
Revised Life Orientation Test30	13.8 (4.4)	14.5 (4.1)	.362
ISEL27
Appraisal scale	12.4 (3.1)	12.5 (2.9)	.87
Belonging scale	12.5 (2.9)	12.2 (3.1)	.523
Tangible support scale	12.3 (3.0)	12.3 (3.0)	.077
Lubben Social Network Scale29	12.1 (7.3)	13.7 (6.3)	.122
Self-efficacy/motivation for quitting
Self-efficacy and motivation for quitting: TSAMS Motivation for Quittinga	20.9 (4.4)	22.2 (3.9)	.047
Self-efficacy for quitting31
Positive affect and social situations	2.2 (0.9)	2.7 (0.8)	<.001
Negative affect situations	2.1 (0.9)	2.3 (0.9)	.069
Habit and craving situations	2.3 (0.9)	2.8 (0.8)	.001

Note. BRFSS = Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System; CES-D = Center for Epidemiological Studies—Depression scale; ISEL = Interpersonal Support Evaluation List; PANAS = Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; PHQ = Patient Health Questionnaire; TSAMS = Texas Smoking Abstinence Motivation Scale.

^aCastro et al., unpublished data, 2012.