Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 May 13.
Published in final edited form as: J Relig Health. 2013 Mar;52(1):169–183. doi: 10.1007/s10943-011-9462-z

Discrimination, Religious Coping, and Tobacco Use Among White, African American, and Mexican American Vocational School Students

Karissa D Horton 1, Alexandra Loukas 1
PMCID: PMC8117250  NIHMSID: NIHMS1696628  PMID: 21249522

Abstract

This study examined whether religious coping moderates the impact of racial/ ethnic discrimination on current (past 30 day) cigarette and cigar/cigarillo use among a racially/ethnically diverse sample of 984 technical/vocational school students (47.1% women; mean age = 25 years). Results indicate that discrimination increased the likelihood of current cigarette use among African American students and current cigar/cigarillo use among white and African American students. Positive religious coping decreased the likelihood of cigarette and cigar/cigarillo smoking for white students only. Negative religious coping increased the likelihood of cigarette use for white students and cigar/ cigarillo use for white and African American students. Two 2-way interactions indicate that positive and negative religious coping moderate the discrimination–cigarette smoking relationship for African American and Mexican American students, respectively.

Keywords: Racial discrimination, Cigarette smoking, Vocational student, Religious coping, African American, Mexican American

Introduction

A growing body of research indicates that racial/ethnic discrimination is one of the best predictors of cigarette smoking among African American adults (Landrine and Klonoff 2000; Guthrie et al. 2002) and also predicts smoking among Latino and white adults (Landrine et al. 2006). Defined as ‘unfair treatment specifically attributed to race/ethnicity’ (Chae et al. 2008, p. 485), racial/ethnic discrimination is pervasive in the United States (US). Although racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to report this form of discrimination, white adults in the US also report experiences of discrimination (Borrell et al. 2007). Among a sample of white, African American, Latino, and Asian American adults, Landrine et al. (2006) found that the frequency of experiences with racial/ethnic discrimination was related to the prevalence of smoking such that the more racial/ethnic discrimination one experienced, the more the individual smoked. However, not all adults who experience racial/ethnic discrimination use tobacco. Thus, it is reasonable to ask what factors moderate the impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on tobacco use. The purpose of this study was to determine whether religious coping moderated the influence of perceived racial/ethnic discrimination on the likelihood of current tobacco use in a racially/ethnically diverse sample of students enrolled in post-secondary vocational/technical programs. We asked whether the impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on the likelihood of current tobacco use varied by amount and type of religious coping (positive or negative) utilized.

Students enrolled in post-secondary, two-year, public vocational/technical schools are an ideal population for this study because they report higher levels of smoking than do adults in the general population (Loukas et al. 2008), occupy lower socioeconomic status (SES) categories, and are training to work in blue-collar occupations, such as air-conditioning, welding, and vocational nursing. According to the 2000 National Health Interview Survey, adults with low levels of education and/or low income and those working in service or blue-collar occupations are most likely to be current smokers (Barbeau et al. 2004). Moreover, racial and ethnic minorities are over-represented among individuals low in SES (DeNavas-Walt et al. 2009) and may be more likely to attend two-year colleges than four-year colleges (Horn and Nevill 2006). Finally, two-year colleges are over-represented by 18- to 24-year-old young adults, the age group most likely to smoke (Rock et al. 2007). Despite elevated risk for and prevalence of cigarette smoking, relatively little research examines the risk and protective factors associated with smoking in students attending two-year vocational/technical schools, and no studies have examined the roles of racial/ethnic discrimination and religious coping in the tobacco use of this population.

Researchers examining the consequences of racial/ethnic discrimination situate their research within a stress and coping paradigm (Landrine et al. 2006). Recognized as a social-environmental stressor with mental health consequences as potent as those associated with a divorce, job loss, or death of a loved one (Kessler et al. 1999), racial/ethnic discrimination requires a coping response from the individual. Historically and continuing to current times, religious involvement (e.g., attendance at services) has provided the African American community with the opportunity to connect with a like-minded social support system and teachings about how to effectively deal with the stresses of oppression and racial/ethnic discrimination (Lincoln and Mamiya 1990). Although religious involvement is traditionally also important to the white and Latino populations, very little research has examined how religiousness influences the negative consequences of discrimination in the Latino population. One exception is a recent study by Ellison et al. (2009) that examined whether religious involvement exacerbated the relationship between discrimination and depressive symptoms in a sample of Mexican-origin adults living in California. This study extends existing literature by examining the role of religious coping for Mexican American and white vocational/technical students, in addition to African American students.

Religious coping, the mobilization of religious resources in moments of stress, can buffer or exacerbate the effects of stress, particularly for individuals with less power in society (Pargament 2007). Positive religious coping, similar to problem-focused coping, is an expression of a secure relationship with God (whomever God may be) and a trustworthy view of the world (Pargament et al. 1998). Examples of positive religious coping methods include seeking spiritual support and collaborative religious coping (Pargament et al. 1998). Negative religious coping, similar to emotion-focused coping, tends to be an expression of an insecure relationship with God and a threatening view of the world (Pargament et al. 1998). Examples of negative religious coping methods include spiritual discontent and punishing God reappraisals (Pargament et al. 1998). Findings suggest that negative religious coping, also referred to as spiritual struggles, is used less frequently than positive religious coping (Pargament et al. 1998). While positive religious coping is associated with improved physical health (Pargament et al. 2004) and positive psychological adjustment when facing stressful situations (Ano and Vasconcelles 2005), negative religious coping is associated with decreased physical health, increased levels of psychopathology (McConnell et al. 2006; Pargament et al. 1998), and negative psychological adjustment when facing stressful situations (Ano and Vasconcelles 2005). These findings suggest that religious coping is not always associated with favorable and/or stressbuffering outcomes.

The literature provides support for race/ethnicity as a moderator of the relationship between racial/ethnic discrimination and religious coping on tobacco use. For example, Bierman (2006) found that attendance at religious services buffered the detrimental effects of racial/ethnic discrimination on mental health outcomes among African American adults, but not among white adults. Similarly, in a sample of HIV-positive adults, Tarakeshwar et al. (2005) reported that African American and Hispanic adults utilized spiritual coping to a greater extent than white adults. Given that religious involvement may be more relevant for African American (Taylor et al. 2004) and Mexican American (Diaz-Stevens and Stevens-Arroyo 1998) adults than for whites, religious coping may be a stronger predictor of tobacco use for racial/ethnic minorities. Tobacco use also varies by race/ethnicity. African American adults in the United States are more likely to smoke cigars than Latino or white adults, whereas African American and white adults are more likely to smoke cigarettes than Latino adults (SAMHSA 2008).

Gender must also be taken into account when examining the relationships between racial/ethnic discrimination, religious coping, and tobacco use. First, tobacco use varies by gender. Data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA 2008) indicate that US men report higher rates of tobacco use than women. Moreover, men tend to report more perceived racial/ethnic discrimination than women (Borrell et al. 2006). Lastly, since religion is more salient for women (Levin et al. 1994), there may be differences in the role of religious coping for men and women. For these reasons, it is important to include gender as a covariate in the analyses for this study.

In summary, this study examined whether positive and negative religious coping moderate the relationship between perceived racial/ethnic discrimination and the likelihood of current tobacco use in a racially/ethnically diverse sample of vocational/technical students. The following hypotheses were tested: (1) recent (past 30 days) experiences of racial/ethnic discrimination would be associated with quantity-frequency of students’ past 30-day tobacco use. Participants experiencing high levels of racial/ethnic discrimination were expected to report more cigarette and cigar/cigarillo use in the past month than those reporting lower levels of racial/ethnic discrimination and (2) positive religious coping would act as a protective factor that buffers, or lessens, the impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on past 30-day tobacco use, whereas negative religious coping would exacerbate or worsen the negative effects of racial/ethnic discrimination on past 30-day tobacco use.

Methods

Participants

Participants were 984 students drawn from a larger study comprised of a convenience sample of 1,111 students enrolled in a variety of required introductory- and advanced-level classes at two two-year colleges in Texas. Of the 984 students, 62.4% were aged 18–24, 16.2% were 25–29, 21.4% were older than 30, and 1.7% were missing data for this item. Forty-seven percent of the respondents were women, 41.8% were white, 27.8% were African American, and 30.4% were Mexican American. With respect to race or ethnicity, our sample matched the general student population of these institutions. Due to the small number of non-Mexican American Hispanic students, those who were Hispanic, but not Mexican American (e.g., Cuban) were removed from the data set (n = 45). Students who reported a race of ‘other’ (n = 57) and students who did not report their race (n = 25) were also removed from the data set. Therefore, of the 1,111 students in the sample, 984 students met the inclusion criteria for this study. Students in the sample reported forty-one different majors: 39.7% reported a technology major (e.g., computer drafting), 36.5% reported an allied health major (e.g., radiologic technology), 11.4% reported a supervision major (e.g., food management), 3.4% reported a workforce training major (e.g., criminal justice training), and 9.1% were undecided, did not answer, or reported having a major not listed.

Data Collection

Following receipt of approval from the Institutional Review Boards (IRB) at the University leading the study and the participating college that had an IRB, data were collected in the fall of 2007 and the spring of 2008. Researchers approached the instructors of various introductory-level classes and requested permission to administer a 117-item anonymous self-report questionnaire on tobacco use to their students. Students were given 25 minutes to complete the survey on their own during class.

Measures

Discrimination Stress

The General Ethnic Discrimination Scale (GEDS; Landrine et al. 2006) is a 17-item measure of perceived discrimination appropriate for African American, Latino, and white adults, which is based on Landrine and Klonoff’s (1996) Schedule of Racist Events. Items measure the frequency of discriminatory events at work, in public places, and in health care settings during the past month. The frequency of each item (e.g., ‘How often have you been treated unfairly by teachers and professors because of your race/ethnic group?’) is scored on a scale ranging from 1 (‘never’) to 6 (‘almost all of the time’). A high score indicates greater frequency of discriminatory experiences. Landrine et al. (2006) report high internal consistency reliability for recent discriminatory events for African American, Latino, and white individuals (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.80, 0.85, and 0.85, respectively). In the current sample, Cronbach’s alphas for this measure were 0.93, 0.89, and 0.92 for African American, Mexican American, and white students, respectively.

Religious Coping

The 6-item Brief RCOPE (Pargament 1999) was used to assess how often (0 = ‘a great deal’ to 3 = ‘not at all’) respondents engage in both positive and negative forms of religious coping when dealing with a major life problem. Prior to answering the religious coping items, students were asked to ‘think about how you try to understand and deal with major problems in your life. To what extent is each of these involved in the way you cope?’ Three items measured positive religious coping (e.g., ‘I look to God for strength, support, and guidance in crises’) and three items measured negative religious coping (e.g., ‘I feel that stressful situations are God’s way of punishing me for my sins or lack of spirituality’). Each item was reverse coded so that higher scores indicate greater use of positive and negative religious coping strategies. In the current sample, Cronbach’s alpha for the positive religious coping subscale was 0.78, 0.87, and 0.91 for African American, Mexican American, and white students, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha for the negative religious coping scale was 0.68, 0.62, and 0.64 for African American, Mexican American, and white students, respectively.

Quantity-Frequency of Current Tobacco Use

Current tobacco use was measured using four items from the CDC College Health Risk Behavior Survey (CDC 1997). Two items measured frequency of current tobacco use (one for cigarettes and one for cigars/cigarillos) (e.g., ‘During the past 30 days, on how many days did you smoke cigarettes?’). Students identified how often they smoke cigarettes or cigars/cigarillos on a scale ranging from 0 (‘0 days’) to 6 (‘all 30 days’). The percent of students reporting cigarette use on more than one day in the past 30 days (prevalence of current cigarette use) was 38.1, 22.3, and 24.3% for white, African American, and Mexican American students, respectively. Prevalence of current cigar/cigarillo smoking was 12.8, 16.5, and 8.2% for white, African American, and Mexican American students, respectively. Two items measured quantity of current tobacco use (one for cigarettes and one for cigars/cigarillos) (‘During the past 30 days, on the days you smoked, how many cigarettes did you smoke per day?’). Students identified the quantity of current cigarette or cigar/ cigarillo use on a scale ranging from 0 (‘I did not smoke cigarettes during the past 30 days’) to 6 (‘more than 20 cigarettes per day’). Similar to Schleicher et al. (2009), the current tobacco use items were multiplied together to create quantity-frequency variables for cigarettes and cigars/cigarillos, which provide counts of the quantity-frequency of cigarettes and cigars/cigarillos smoked during the 30 days prior to the survey and range from 0 to 36.

Covariate

Given that gender (0 = woman; 1 = man) is associated with tobacco use (SAMHSA 2008), it was included as a covariate in this study.

Data Analysis

Negative binomial regression, a type of Poisson regression model, was used to test the study hypotheses. This statistical technique was selected because, unlike ordinary least squares regression, negative binomial regression allows for use of a non-normally distributed outcome variable (see Hox 2010). The outcome variables of interest, counts of the quantity-frequency of cigarettes and cigars/cigarillos smoked in the month prior to study participation, are highly skewed and do not exhibit a normal distribution. For example, the data are clustered at zero since the majority of study participants indicated no cigarette (70.6%) or cigar/cigarillo (87.6%) use during the past month. In addition, negative binomial regression accounts for the ‘overdispersion’ of the outcome variables in this study, a common occurrence with count data, whereby the variance of the outcome measure is greater than the mean (Cohen et al. 2003). Finally, negative binomial regression models allow for examination of the full distribution of the tobacco use outcome variables, thus preventing a loss of information concerning the amount of smoking reported by participants, a situation that occurs when tobacco use is dichotomized into smokers versus nonsmokers.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Given that this is a racially/ethnically diverse sample of students and that national statistics indicate that cigarette smoking status varies across racial/ethnic groups (CDC 1997), Box’s M test was used to determine the homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices of the study variables across the three racial/ethnic groups in this study. Because the Box’s M test was significant (Box’s M = 158.40, df = 20, P = .000), indicating that the variance- covariance matrices varied across the groups, all subsequent models were run separately for white, African American, and Mexican American students.

For descriptive purposes, we also examined mean differences in study variables. As shown in Table 1, there was a statistically significant difference at the P < .05 level in scores for all variables across the three racial/ethnic groups. Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the African American students reported significantly more racial/ethnic discrimination than did Mexican American students, who reported more discrimination than white students. Next, results indicated that the mean scores for positive and negative religious coping for African American students were significantly higher than for white and Mexican American students. However, white students did not differ significantly from Mexican American students on either type of religious coping. Regarding tobacco use, white students reported a significantly higher quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use than African American and Mexican American students; however, African American students did not significantly differ from Mexican American students. Lastly, the Tukey’s HSD test indicated that the mean score for quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use for African American students was significantly higher than for white and Mexican American students, but white students did not significantly differ from Mexican American students on quantity-frequency of cigar/cigarillo use.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics and examination of mean differences in all study variables across race/ethnicity

Variable White (n = 411)
 African American (n = 274)
 Mexican American (n = 299)
 ANOVA
Range M (SD) Range M (SD) Range M (SD) df F
Gender (male = 1) 0–1 .55 (.50) 0–1 .43 (.50) 0–1 .60 (.49) n.a. n.a.
Discrimination 2–102 20.72a (7.87) 3–80 27.45b (13.54) 7–67 22.84c (8.15) 2,971 38.21***
Pos. religious coping 0–9 5.01a (2.98) 0–9 7.02b (2.36) 0–9 5.00a (2.84) 2,920 47.40***
Neg. religious coping 0–9 1.92a (2.07) 0–9 2.51b (2.53) 0–9 1.99a (2.08) 2,918 5.97**
Cigarette use 0–36 6.13b (10.31) 0–36 3.48a (7.92) 0–24 1.96a (4.76) 2,979 23.07***
Cigar/cigarillo use 0–36 .64a (3.09) 0–36 1.72b (5.35) 0–25 .35a (1.94) 2,923 10.78***
Open in a new tab

Means in a row with different superscripts (a, b, and c) are significantly different from each other at P < .05

*

P < .05;

**

P < .01;

***

P < .001

Prior to testing the study hypotheses, zero-order correlations between the independent and dependent variables for the African American, Mexican American, and white students were examined. As shown in Table 2, increased levels of perceived discrimination were associated with increased cigarette smoking in the past month among African American students and with increased cigar/cigarillo use among African American and white students. Positive religious coping was associated with decreased cigarette smoking among white students, whereas negative religious coping was associated with increased cigar/cigarillo smoking in the past month among African American and white students. Finally, compared to their female peers, men of all three races were more likely to smoke cigars/cigarillos and African American and Mexican American men were more likely to smoke cigarettes.

Table 2.

Intercorrelations among study variables by race/ethnicity

Variable White
 African American
 Mexican American
CIG CGR CIG CGR CIG CGR
Gender (male = 1) .03 .12* .19** .24*** .14* .12*
Discrimination .03 .13** .17** .29*** .03 −.02
Pos. religious coping −.11* −.06 .002 −.01 −.03 −.05
Neg. religious coping .08 .15** .04 .21*** .001 .02
Cigarette use – .17*** – .45*** – .34***
Cigar/cigarillo use .17*** – .45*** – .34*** –
Open in a new tab

CIG quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use; CGR quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use

*

P <.05;

**

P <.01;

***

P <.001

Hypothesis Testing

Separate negative binomial regression models were examined for quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use and cigar/cigarillo use. For each outcome, we evaluated the unique contributions of perceived racial/ethnic racial discrimination and positive and negative religious coping after accounting for the contribution of gender. Two separate two-way interactions between discrimination and religious coping were tested to determine whether the associations between discrimination and both types of tobacco use varied by use of positive and negative religious coping. For example, we examined the relationship between past 30-day discrimination and quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use among African American students at high (1 SD above the mean value) and low (1 SD below the mean value) levels of the positive religious coping variable. All significant interactions were probed using methods outlined by Aiken and West (1991) and nonsignificant interactions were trimmed from the final models.

As shown in Table 3, gender and each of the predictor variables (past 30-day racial/ethnic discrimination, positive religious coping, negative religious coping) were entered simultaneously in model one. Both of the two-way interaction terms (discrimination × positive RC, discrimination × negative RC) were tested independently in model two with all main effects included. To prevent problems with multicollinearity, the discrimination, positive religious coping, and negative religious coping predictor variables were each mean centered (Aiken and West 1991).

Table 3.

Negative binomial regression analysis for variables predicting quantity-frequency of students’ past 30-days cigarette and cigar/cigarillo use (N = 984)

Variable Cigarette use
 Cigar/cigarillo use
Model 1
 Model 2
 Model 1
W AA MA AA MA W AA MA
Gender (male = 1) .10 .77*** .82*** 2.39*** 1.19*** 2.11***
Discrimination .01 .02*** .01 .09*** .03*** −.02
Pos. rel. coping −.07*** −.02 −.01 −.12*** −.07 −.06
Neg. rel. coping .07* −.02 −.04 .14*** .19*** .001
Discrim × PRC .01*
Discrim × NRC −.01*
Open in a new tab

W White; AA African American; MA Mexican American; Discrim Discrimination; PRC positive religious coping; NRC negative religious coping. Because all non-significant interactions were omitted, model 2 for cigar/cigarillo use is not shown

*

P < .05;

**

P < .01;

***

P < .001

Cigarette Use

The negative binomial regression model predicting quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use from gender, perceived racial/ethnic discrimination, and positive and negative religious coping was statistically significant for white (x2 (4) = 20.56, P < .001), African American (x2 (4) = 51.29, P < .001), and Mexican American (x2 (4) = 29.16, P < .001) students. As shown in Table 3, gender was uniquely associated with past 30-day cigarette use for African American and Mexican American students (model one). Given that the negative binomial regression model is log linear, it is possible to convert the regression coefficients into the predicted multiplicative effect of a 1-unit change in the variable of interest (i.e., positive religious coping) on the count of cigarette use, holding all other variables constant (Coxe et al. 2009). For African American and Mexican American students, the regression coefficient for gender was 0.77 and 0.82, respectively. The exponentiation of the regression coefficient (e0.77 = 2.16, African American; e0.82 = 2.27, Mexican American) is the multiplicative difference in quantity-frequency of cigarettes smoked for men versus women, holding all other variables constant. Findings, therefore, indicate that African American and Mexican American men smoke, on average, 2.16 and 2.27 times more cigarettes than their female counterparts, respectively.

Discrimination was significantly associated with quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use for African American students only. Examination of the exponentiation of the regression coefficient for discrimination (e0.02 = 1.02) indicates that an African American student with a perceived racial/ethnic discrimination score of 4 is expected to smoke, on average, 1.02 times as many cigarettes as an African American student with a perceived racial/ethnic discrimination score of 3.

Positive and negative religious coping were also significantly associated with quantity- frequency of past 30-day cigarette use, but for white students only. The exponentiation of the regression coefficient for positive religious coping (e−0.07 = 0.93) indicates that, holding all other variables constant, a 1-unit increase in positive religious coping causes the expected count of cigarettes smoked by white students to decrease by a factor of 0.93. The exponentiation of the regression coefficient for negative religious coping (e0.07 = 1.07) indicates that a white student with a negative religious coping score of 7 is expected to smoke, on average, 1.07 times as many cigarettes as a white student with a negative religious coping score of 6.

As indicated in Table 3, there were two significant two-way interactions, one between discrimination and positive religious coping for African American students (x2 (5) = 55.52, P < .001), and one between discrimination and negative religious coping for Mexican American (x2 (5) = 33.06, P < .001) students. Probing the significant discrimination × positive religious coping interaction for African American students revealed that perceived racial/ethnic discrimination was significantly associated with quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigarette use at high (beta = .02, P < .001) but not low (beta = .002, P > .05) levels of positive religious coping (see Fig. 1). Unexpectedly, results indicate that positive religious coping exacerbates the impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on African American students’ likelihood of past 30-day cigarette use.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Examining the discrimination × high (1 SD above the mean) and low (1 SD below the mean) positive religious coping interaction for African American students

Probing the significant discrimination × negative religious coping interaction for Mexican American students revealed that perceived racial/ethnic discrimination was significantly associated with past 30-day cigarette use at low (beta = .03, P = < .05), but not high (β = −.004, P > .05) levels of negative religious coping (see Fig. 2). Also unexpectedly, findings indicate that negative religious coping buffers the impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on Mexican American students’ likelihood of current cigarette use.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Examining the discrimination × high (1 SD above the mean) and low (1 SD below the mean) negative religious coping interaction for Mexican American students

Cigar Use

The negative binomial regression model predicting quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use from gender, perceived racial/ethnic discrimination, and positive and negative religious coping was statistically significant for white (x2 (4) = 184.31, P < .001), African American (x2 (4) = 151.54, P < .001), and Mexican American (x2 (4) = 49.28, P < .001) students. As shown in Table 3, gender was uniquely associated with past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use for white, African American, and Mexican American students, controlling for all variables in the model (model one). Examination of the exponentiation of the regression coefficients (e2.39 = 10.91, white; e1.19 = 3.29, African American; e2.11 = 8.25, Mexican American) indicate that white, African American, and Mexican American men smoke, on average, 10.91, 3.29, and 8.25 times more cigarettes than their female counterparts, respectively.

Perceiving racial/ethnic discrimination in the past 30 days was also significantly associated with quantity-frequency of past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use for both white and African American students. The exponentiation of the regression coefficient for discrimination (e0.09 = 1.09, white; e0.03 = 1.03, African American) indicates that a white student with a perceived racial/ethnic discrimination score of 4 is expected to smoke, on average, 1.09 times as many cigars/cigarillos as a white student with a perceived racial/ ethnic discrimination score of 3. Moreover, the exponentiation of the regression coefficient indicates that an African American student with a perceived racial/ethnic discrimination score of 4 is expected to smoke, on average, 1.03 times as many cigars/cigarillos as an African American student with a perceived racial/ethnic discrimination score of 3.

For white students, positive religious coping was significantly associated with cigar use in the past month. The exponentiation of the regression coefficient for positive religious coping (e−0.12 = 0.89) indicates that, holding all other variables constant, a 1-unit increase in positive religious coping causes the expected count of cigars/cigarillos smoked by white students to decrease by a factor of 0.89. Negative religious coping was significantly associated with cigar/cigarillo use during the past 30 days for white and African American students. The exponentiation of the regression coefficient for negative religious coping (e0.14 = 1.15, white; e0.19 = 1.21, African American) indicates that a white student with a negative religious coping score of 7 is expected to smoke, on average, 1.15 times as many cigars/cigarillos as a white student with a negative religious coping score of 6. Moreover, an African American student with a negative religious coping score of 7 is expected to smoke, on average, 1.21 times as many cigars/cigarillos as an African American student with a negative religious coping score of 6. The two-way interactions between discrimination and positive religious coping and discrimination and negative religious coping were not significant for any of the three races for the cigar/cigarillo use outcome.

Discussion

This study extends existing literature by examining whether positive and negative religious coping moderate the influence of racial/ethnic discrimination on the likelihood of past 30-day cigarette and cigar/cigarillo use in a racially/ethnically diverse sample of students attending two-year post-secondary vocational/technical schools. Partially confirming hypothesis 1 and consistent with a stress and coping perspective, findings indicated that perceived racial/ethnic discrimination was associated with an increased likelihood of cigarette use among African American students and increased likelihood of cigar/cigarillo use among white and African American students. In support of theory and research on religious coping (see Pargament et al. 1990), positive religious coping was beneficial for white students in terms of decreasing their likelihood of cigarette and cigar/cigarillo use, whereas negative religious coping was detrimental to white students’ cigarette use and white and African American students’ cigar/cigarillo use. Limited evidence was found for the protective role of positive religious coping and the exacerbating role of negative religious coping in the associations between racial/ethnic discrimination and likelihood of tobacco use.

In support of hypothesis 1 and consistent with prior research (Guthrie et al. 2002; Landrine and Klonoff 1996; Landrine and Klonoff 2000), results showed that past 30-day racial/ethnic discrimination was predictive of increased likelihood of past 30-day cigarette use for African American students and past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use for white and African American students. According to a stress and coping framework, individuals with limited coping resources may turn to various substances to deal with their heightened levels of stress (Wills and Shiffman 1985). Similar to the findings of this study, Landrine et al. (2006) also found that perceived racial/ethnic discrimination predicted tobacco use among white and African American adults. Surprisingly, although Mexican American students in this study reported more discrimination than white students, this risk factor was not predictive of Mexican American students’ smoking. Perhaps other culturally relevant variables such as ethnic identity and acculturation level are more important predictors of tobacco use for the Mexican American students in our sample. One final possibility for the lack of association between discrimination and tobacco use for Mexican Americans is that the quantity-frequency variable is truncated for Mexican Americans, limiting our ability to detect significant associations between discrimination and tobacco use. That is, the range of scores on the quantity-frequency variables for both the white and African American students ranged from 0 to 36, whereas for Mexican American students it ranged only from 0–24 and 0–25 for quantity-frequency of cigarette use and cigar/cigarillo use, respectively.

In contrast to the deleterious impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on tobacco use, results showed that positive religious coping was associated with a decreased likelihood of cigarette and cigar/cigarillo use, but only among white students. These findings are consistent with numerous studies indicating that individuals who report higher levels of religiousness also report a lower likelihood of a variety of negative health outcomes, including less cigarette smoking (see review by Koenig et al. 2001). Many religious groups model health-promoting behaviors and proscribe health-risk behaviors (Koenig et al. 2001) such as tobacco use. Both of these factors may explain the inverse relationship between positive religious coping and cigarette smoking.

Results from this study also indicated that negative religious coping increased the likelihood of past 30-day cigarette use for white students and past 30-day cigar/cigarillo use for white and African American students. These findings corroborate the assertion by Pargament (2007) that both positive and negative religious coping will influence substance use in varying directions. In contrast to the beneficial effect of positive religious coping on tobacco use found among white students, however, our results indicate that negative religious coping is a risk factor for tobacco use. Thus, it appears that for some students, perceiving that the stress in their lives is a result of God’s punishment or feeling as though God has abandoned them increases their risk for tobacco use.

Unlike the direct beneficial role that positive religious coping played in white students’ cigarette use and contrary to hypothesis 2, results indicated that high levels of positive religious coping magnified the negative impact of racial/ethnic discrimination on the likelihood of African American students’ cigarette smoking. Religious coping is uniquely correlated with one’s level of religiousness (Krägeloh et al. 2010), which may bolster an individual’s sense of personal worth and identity, hopefulness, and optimism (Ellison 1994), particularly for the highly religious. Thus, for a highly religious African American with a strong sense of self-worth and an optimistic view of the world, the experience of discrimination may be especially upsetting, overwhelming their coping resources and increasing the likelihood of cigarette smoking. Although counterintuitive to our hypothesis, findings from this study are consistent with those reported by Ellison et al. (2009) that the effects of acculturative stress had a greater impact on the depressive symptoms of Mexican-origin adults who reported high levels of religiousness.

Although there was no main effect for negative religious coping on Mexican American students’ tobacco use, results indicated that high levels of negative religious coping did not increase the likelihood of cigarette use among Mexican American students who experienced high levels of racial/ethnic discrimination. Unexpectedly, findings indicate that as Mexican American students experience more discrimination, those who engage in low levels of negative religious coping have an increased likelihood of smoking cigarettes. One possible explanation for these findings is that high levels of negative religious coping may be indicative of higher levels of religious involvement, which is inversely related to cigarette smoking (Koenig et al. 1998). Low levels of negative religious coping may signify low levels of religious belief or religious involvement among Mexican American students, in which case we would expect higher levels of cigarette use (Koenig et al. 1998) when experiencing high levels of discrimination stress. Given the surprisingly few significant associations between the predictor variables and Mexican American students’ tobacco use in this study, additional research with this population is warranted. As noted earlier, future studies should consider the role of culturally relevant variables, such as acculturation level in the associations among discrimination, religious coping, and tobacco use.

The limitations of this study should be considered when interpreting the results of our study. First, this study utilizes cross-sectional data limited only to students attending two post-secondary vocational/technical schools in Texas. Therefore, the generalizability of these findings may be limited and the direction of the associations between racial/ethnic discrimination, religious coping, and tobacco use cannot be determined. Subsequent studies should collect multiple waves of data from students attending a larger variety of vocational/technical schools. Another limitation of this study is the lack of information concerning the religious affiliation and religious service attendance of study participants. Lastly, given the low prevalence rates of tobacco use among racial/ethnic minority students, future research should oversample for African American and Mexican American individuals.

Despite the study limitations, findings from this study cast light on the potentially beneficial as well as detrimental effects of certain forms of religious involvement when one is coping with the aftermath of racial/ethnic discrimination. In particular, results indicate that experiences of racial/ethnic discrimination may increase the likelihood of smoking among highly religious African Americans as well as less religious Mexican Americans. Most of the current literature on religious coping examines the positive aspects of religious coping, particularly when individuals are facing various life stressors. This study underscores the need to understand the potentially negative aspects of various forms of religious coping. Thus, future studies are needed to further develop our understanding of the relationships between racial/ethnic discrimination, religious coping and religious involvement, and tobacco use among low-SES populations. In particular, studies that examine the factors that explain or account for the effect of religious coping and tobacco use are warranted.

References

  1. Aiken LS, & West SG (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ano GG, & Vasconcelles EB (2005). Religious coping and psychological adjustment to stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 461–480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barbeau EM, Krieger N, & Soobader M (2004). Working class matters: Socioeconomic disadvantage, race/ethnicity, gender, and smoking in NHIS 2000. American Journal Public Health, 94(2), 269–278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bierman A (2006). Does religion buffer the effects of discrimination on mental health? Differing effects by race. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 45, 551–565. [Google Scholar]
  5. Borrell LN, Jacobs DR Jr, Williams DR, Pletcher MJ, Houston TK, & Kiefe CI (2007). Self-reported racial discrimination and substance use in the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Adults Study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 166, 1068–1079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Borrell LN, Kiefe CI, Williams DR, Diez-Roux AV, & Gordon-Larsen P (2006). Self-reported health, perceived racial discrimination, and skin color in African Americans in the CARDIA study. Social Science and Medicine, 63, 1415–1427. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1997). Youth risk behavior surveillance: National college health risk behavior survey—United States, 1995. MMWR, 46(SS-6), 1–54. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2007). Age adjusted percent distributions of current cigarette smoking status among persons 18 years of age and over, by selected characteristics: United States, 2006. Retrieved 24 Sept 2009, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_235.pdf#table25.
  9. Chae DH, Takeuchi DT, Barbeau EM, Bennett GG, Lindsey J, & Krieger N (2008). Unfair treatment, racial/ethnic discrimination, ethnic identification, and smoking among Asian Americans in the National Latino and Asian American Study. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 485–492. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, & Aiken LS (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  11. Coxe S, West SG, & Aiken LS (2009). The analysis of count data: A gentle introduction to Poisson regression and its alternatives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 121–136. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor BD, & Smith JC (2009). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2008 (US Census Bureau, Current population reports, P60–236). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. [Google Scholar]
  13. Diaz-Stevens AM, & Stevens-Arroyo A (1998). Recognizing the Latino resurgence in US religion: The Emmaus paradigm. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ellison CG (1994). Religion, the life stress paradigm, and the study of depression. In Levin JS (Ed.), Religion in aging and health: Theoretical foundations and methodological frontiers (pp. 78–121). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellison CG, Finch BK, Ryan DN, & Salinas JJ (2009). Religious involvement and depressive symptoms among Mexican-origin adults in California. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 171–193. [Google Scholar]
  16. Guthrie BJ, Young AM, Williams DR, Boyd CJ, & Kintner EK (2002). African American girls’ smoking habits and day-to-day experiences with racial discrimination. Nursing Research, 51, 183–190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Horn L, & Nevill S (2006). Profile of undergraduates in US postsecondary education institutions: 2003–2004: With a special analysis of community college students (NCES 2006-184). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, NCES. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hox JJ (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kessler RC, Mickelson KD, & Williams DR (1999). The prevalence, distribution, and mental health correlates of perceived discrimination in the United States. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 40, 208–230. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Koenig HG, George LK, Cohen HJ, Hays JC, Larson DB, & Blazer DG (1998). The relationship between religious activities and cigarette smoking in older adults. Journal of Gerontology (Medical Sciences), 53A, M426–M434. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Koenig HG, McCullough ME, & Larson DB (2001). Handbook of religion and health. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  22. Krägeloh CU, Chai PPM, Shepherd D, & Billington R (2010). How religious coping is used relative to other coping strategies depends on the individual’s level of religiosity and spirituality. Journal of Religion and Health. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s10943-010-9416-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Landrine H, & Klonoff EA (1996). The Schedule of Racist Events: A measure of racial discrimination and a study of its negative physical and mental health consequences. The Journal of Black Psychology, 22, 144–168. [Google Scholar]
  24. Landrine H, & Klonoff EA (2000). Racial discrimination and cigarette smoking among Blacks: Findings from two studies. Ethnicity and Disease, 10, 195–202. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Landrine H, Klonoff EA, Corral I, Fernandez S, & Roesch S (2006). Conceptualizing and measuring ethnic discrimination in health research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29, 79–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Levin JS, Taylor RJ, & Chatters LM (1994). Race and gender differences in religiosity among older adults: Findings from four national surveys. Journal of Gerontology, 49, S137–S145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lincoln CE, & Mamiya LH (1990). The Black church in the African-American experience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. [Google Scholar]
  28. Loukas A, Murphy JL, & Gottlieb NH (2008). Cigarette smoking and cessation among trade or technical school students in Texas. Journal of American College Health, 56, 401–407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. McConnell KM, Pargament KL, Ellison CG, & Flannelly KJ (2006). Examining the links between spiritual struggles and symptoms of psychopathology in a national sample. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 1469–1484. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Pargament KI (1999). Religious/spiritual coping. In Fetzer Institute (Ed.), Multidimensional measurement of religiousness/spirituality for use in health research: A report of the Fetzer Institute/National Institute on Aging Working Group (pp. 43–56). Kalamazoo, MI: Fetzer Institute/National Institute on Aging. [Google Scholar]
  31. Pargament KI (2007). The psychology of religion and coping: theory, research practice. New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  32. Pargament KI, Ensing DS, Falgout K, Olsen H, Reilly B, Van Haitsma K, et al. (1990). God help me: (I): Religious coping efforts as predictors of the outcomes to significant life events. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 793–824. [Google Scholar]
  33. Pargament KI, Koenig HG, Tarakeshwar N, & Hahn J (2004). Religious coping methods as predictors of psychological, physical, and spiritual outcomes among medically ill elderly patients: A two-year longitudinal study. Journal of Health Psychology, 9, 715–730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Pargament KI, Smith BW, Koenig HG, & Perez L (1998). Patterns of positive and negative religious coping with major life stressors. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 710–724. [Google Scholar]
  35. Rock VJ, Malarcher A, Kahende JW, Asman K, Husten C, & Caraballo R (2007). Cigarette smoking among adults-United States, 2006. MMWR, 56, 1157–1161. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Schleicher HE, Harris KJ, Catley D, & Nazir N (2009). The role of depression and negative affect regulation expectancies in tobacco smoking among college students. Journal of American College Health, 57, 507–512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2008). 2007 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables (Tables 2.26B, 2.36B). Retrieved 2 July 2009, from http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k6NSDUH/tabs/Sect2peTabs1to42.htm#Tab2.26B. [PubMed]
  38. Tarakeshwar N, Hansen N, Kochman A, & Sikkema KJ (2005). Gender, ethnicity, and spiritual coping among bereaved HIV-positive individuals. Mental Health, Religion, & Culture, 8, 109–125. [Google Scholar]
  39. Taylor RJ, Chatters LM, & Levin JS (2004). Religion in the lives of African Americans. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wills TA, & Shiffman S (1985). Coping and substance use: A conceptual framework. In Shiffman S & Wills TA (Eds.), Coping and substance abuse (pp. 3–24). New York: Academic Press. [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES