A Multivariate Model of the Determinants of Cigarette Smoking Among Adolescents

Author(s): Felipe G. Castro, Ebrahim Maddahian, Michael D. Newcomb and P. M. Bentler

Source: Journal of Health and Social Behavior , Sep., 1987, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Sep., 1987), pp.
273-289
Published by: American Sociological Association

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2136846

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2136846?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of Health and Social Behavior

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A Multivariate Model of the Determinants of Cigarette
Smoking Among Adolescents*

FELIPE G. CASTRO
EBRAHIM MADDAHIAN
MICHAEL D. NEWCOMB
P.M. BENTLER
University of California, Los Angeles

Journal of Health and Social Behavior 1987, Vol. 28 (September):273-289

A multivariate stress-coping model was used to test a set of hypotheses about antecedents to cigarette
smoking in a general sample of adolescents. In corroboration with other studies, the peer influence
factor was the strongest predictor of cigarette smoking. However, the data supported a more complex
mediational model in which social conformity, along with peer influence, appeared as mediators
between stress factors (disruptive family events and perceived stressfulness) and the coping response
factor of cigarette smoking. Ethnic group comparisons between white, black, Hispanic, and Asian
Pacific adolescents on variables relevant to cigarette smoking revealed a pattern in which the highest
vulnerability was observed for blacks, intermediate risk for smoking was observed for Hispanics and
whites, and lowest vulnerability was observed for Pacific Asians. Latent variable measurement models
for each ethnic group revealed that adequate indicators of the two stress factors and the social
conformity factor were found for whites, whereas one or more of these indicators were inadequately
identified for each of the ethnic groups. This suggests that important cultural differences exist in the
assessment of these constructs. Results also indicate that smoking prevention/cessation programs should
do more than teach resistance to social influence, i.e., saying "no" to friends' suggestions to smoke
cigarettes. More effective interventions, especially for preventing cigarette smoking among adolescents,
may require attention to other factors which precede an affiliation with cigarette smoking peers (peer
influence), such as attention to disruptive or stressfulfamily environments in addition to attention to any
existing deficits in stress-coping skills, and to certain aspects of personality such as nonconformity/rebel-
liousness.

Several large scale smoking prevention/cessa-
tion programs have adopted a general social
learning perspective as a conceptual framework
for guiding their interventions. These programs
have differed from each other mainly in the
extent to which they emphasize each of three
intervention strategies: (1) resisting social influ-
ence by saying "no" when offered a cigarette,
(2) developing decision making skills along with
a commitment to avoid cigarettes, and (3)
improving general coping skills (Botvin and Eng
1980; Evans, Rozelle, Maxwell, Raines, Dill,
Guthrie, Henderson and Hill 1981; Flay and
* Direct all correspondence to: Felipe G. Castro,
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los
Angeles, CA 90024.
This research was partially supported by grant
DAO 1070 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
The assistance of Sandy Yu and Julie Speckart is
gratefully appreciated.
Best 1982; Hurd, Johnson, Pechacek, Jacobs
and Luepker 1980; McAlister, Perry, Killen,
Slinkard and Maccoby 1980).
Evaluative studies for some of these programs
have shown that such programs are effective in
reducing the onset of cigarette smoking for
adolescents "experimenting" with cigarettes and
for "recent quitters." However, program effec-
tiveness has been less convincing for adoles-
cents who were already smoking regularly at the
program's pretest (Botvin, Renick, Baker 1983;
Flay, Ryan, Best, Brown, Kersell, d'Avernas,
and Zanna 1985). Perhaps regular cigarette
smoking adolescents constitute a group for
whom programmed behavior change strategies
to avoid cigarette smoking are significantly
more difficult to implement in comparison with
other groups of adolescents who are only
dabbling with cigarette smoking. Regular ciga
rette smoking adolescents may have already

273

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 274 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
integrated cigarette smoking as a habitual part of
their daily lifestyle, thus making smoking
cessation more difficult (Shiffman, Read, Mal-
tese, Rapkin and Jarvik, 1985). Moreover,
among the more "committed smokers," having
close relationships with cigarette smoking peers,
engaging in cigarette smoking as a coping
behavior when confronted with potentially
stressful events, and having certain personality
characteristics, are all factors which may
compete strongly with messages to stop smok-
ing and other strategies promoted by antismok-
ing programs.
From a broader sociocultural context, teach-
ing regular cigarette smoking adolescents to say
"no" to friends who offer them cigarettes can
mean saying no to longtime cigarette smoking
companions. Furthermore, for cigarette smoking
adolescents saying "no" to cigarettes may be
difficult if it also means changing an established
self-image as one who needs or wants to be
rebellious, nonconforming or somehow differ-
ent, when cigarette smoking is part of this
image.
Being affiliated with cigarette smoking peers
and having a rebellious/nonconformist self-
image are not necessarily positive or endorsable
attributes. Nonetheless, these contextual factors
may contribute to a "resistance" to smoking
avoidance. Thus, a broader understanding of the
multiple and early determinants of cigarette
smoking in adolescents may provide additional
information for further improving present smok-
ing prevention/cessation strategies which may
increase program success with regular cigarette
smoking adolescents (Baugh, Hunter, Webber,
and Berenson 1982; Johnston, Bachman, and
O'Malley 1982).
FACTORS ANTECEDENT TO
CIGARETTE SMOKING
Motivational Factors
From a stress-coping perspective, the major
factors which can contribute to the onset and
maintenance of cigarette smoking among adoles-
cents can be classified as: (1) potential stressors
(disruptive although not necessarily stressful life
events) and (2) stress appraisal, the subject's
evaluation (appraisal) that these events are
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
indeed stressful. Personal response to these
stress factors can, in turn, be mediated by (3)
personality traits or dispositions (internal medi-
ators) and by (4) social factors (external
mediators) (Botvin, Eng and Williams 1980;
Cervantes and Castro 1985).
Disruptive life events, including family prob-
lems such as parental conflict or divorce,
financial instability or family illnesses, may
serve as early antecedents in a chain of events
which lead to cigarette smoking. Such disrup-
tions in home life might promote cigarette
smoking as a behavior which the adolescent
associates with coping and relaxation, despite
the central nervous system stimulatory effects of
nicotine (Russell 1979).
Cognitive or personal factors (internal media-
tors) previously observed as antecedents of
cigarette smoking have included: low school
achievement, negative expectations for future
achievement, a short future-time perspective
(Brunswick and Messeri 1984), believing that
smoking promotes a sophisticated or precocious
self-image (Clausen 1968), believing in one's
invulnerability to chronic disease (Brunswick
and Messeri 1984; Horn 1979; Weinstein,
1982), rebelliousness (Jessor and Jessor 1977),
risk-taking tendencies (Williams 1973), and
having a liberal or socially nonconforming
attitude towards the use of drugs and other
pharmacological agents (e.g., Huba and Bentler
1982). Major social influences (external media-
tors) on cigarette smoking among adolescents
have included role modeling by parents (O'Con-
nell, Alexander, Dobson, Lloyd, Hardes, String-
thorpe and Leeder 1981), by peers (Evans 1976;
McAlister, Perry, Killen, Slinkard and Maccoby
1980), and by mass media advertising which
sells the "chic look" associated with smoking
(Syme and Alcalay 1982).
For a more complete explanation of the
complex process which leads to habitual ciga-
rette smoking in adolescents, some investigators
have encouraged the use of multivariate,
interactive models, those which examine the
temporal linkages between theoretically mean-
ingful factors such as those mentioned above
(Flay, d'Avernas, Best, Kersell, and Ryan
1983). A well specified and comprehensive
model of this kind could provide a general
integrative paradigm for testing postulated
linkages between environmental factors, person
 MULTIVARIATE MODEL 275

factors, and peer influences as these precede significant predictors of habitual drug use
cigarette smoking in adolescents. Furthermore, among the adolescents in their sample. Addition-
with such a model, differences by ethnic status ally, they found that various ethnic subgroups
could also be tested. indeed differed in the specific pattern of
antecedents associated with cigarette smoking.
Thus, a single preventive strategy or program
Ethnicity: A Moderator of designed for the general population of adoles-
Population Differences cents might not yield a desired outcome or
might be entirely ineffective for members of a
In the heterogeneous U.S. population, ethnic- given subgroup of adolescents who are moti-
ity can be an important moderator variable for vated by a different set of beliefs, attitudes or
identifying relatively homogenous subgroups of values from those which motivate white nonminor-
individuals who have similar cultural beliefs and ity adolescents (Leventhal and Cleary 1980).
habits (Harwood 1981). Many adolescents from
a given ethnic minority group are raised in a
A MULTIVARIATE MODEL OF
family system which may differ in several
CIGARETTE SMOKING
respects from mainstream American family
values and lifestyles (McGoldrick, Pearce, and Cervantes and Castro (1985) have proposed a
Giordano 1982). Many such ethnic minority generic multivariate stress-coping-outcome model
families are guided by "old country" cultural for conducting a causal analysis of factors
rules and expectations about parent-child rela- associated with various health-related behaviors
tionships, patterns of religious belief, rules of such as cigarette smoking. This multivariate
conduct, and appropriate behavior in a given stress-coping-outcome model examines the inter-
situation (McGoldrick 1982). As an ethnic active effects of seven general constructs: (1) the
minority adolescent matures, these cultural/fam- occurrence of a potential stressor, (2) a stress
ilial beliefs and standards of conduct are appraisal of the threat and loss of control
assimilated, in part, as that adolescent estab- associated with a given potential stressor, (3) the
lishes his or her own attitudes and standards for effects of internal mediators such as sociocul-
appropriate conduct. Thus, among ethnic adoles- tural beliefs, attitudes, and values, and (4) the
cents, drug use behavior, including the accept- influence of external mediators such as support-
ability of cigarette smoking, is influenced in part
ive or influential family members, friends, and
by these culturally based beliefs, attitudes and significant community institutions.
values (Ajzen & Fishbein 1980). A consequence of this interactive process of
Understanding ethnic subcultural antecedents appraisal is (5) the person's coping response
of cigarette smoking may provide more specific (e.g., cigarette smoking or some other behav-
information on how general interventions to ior), which is enacted in an effort to defuse a
prevent cigarette smoking among adolescents stressful situation. A consequence of enacting
should be "fine-tuned" by taking into account such a coping response will be one or more (6)
the unique conflicts and potential stressors faced short-term outcomes, situations which, after
by various ethnic minority adolescents (Clausen several episodes or coping cycles, will eventu-
1968; Santisteban and Szapocznik 1982). In this ally produce (7) a long-term outcome, e.g.
regard, Newcomb and Bentler (1986) have addiction, depression, lung cancer, return to
found ethnic differences in the utilization rates normalcy, successful goal attainment, etc.
of four classes of drugs: beer/wine, liquor, Short-and long-term outcomes may be positive
cannabis, and pills. In their study, ethnicity was (adaptive) or negative (maladaptive), depending
an independent predictor of adolescent drug upon the specific social context in which they
consumption above and beyond the effects of occur and based upon the individual's goals and
peer and adult drug use models. Similarly, aspirations (Oatley and Bolton 1985).
Maddahian, Newcomb, and Bentler (1986) Based upon this general theory, a specific
found that income, drug availability from five-factor model is presented for the present
friends, ease of drug acquisition, and drug usage
study, in order to examine how postulated
at a very early age, as well as ethnicity, were all factors and their linkages may help to explain

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 276 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

the process involved in cigarette smoking by
using a method for the analysis of linear
structural equations. This proposed specific
five-latent-factor model is composed of the
following five factors: (1) Disruptive Family
Events (potential stressors), (2) Perceived Stress-
fulness (appraisal), (3) Social Conformity (inter-
nal mediators), (4) Peer Influence (external
mediators) and (5) Cigarette Smoking (a coping
response). This model is depicted graphically in
Figure 1. In the present study, this model will be
tested for its applicability in explaining the
maintenance and continuation of cigarette smok-
ing among adolescents, rather than trying to
explain the initiation of cigarette smoking per
se.
Most habits, particularly habitual drug use,
involve frequently enacted behaviors, some of
which are self-regulatory in nature, and which
are enacted in order to modulate level of
stimulation (Bandura 1977; Leventhal, Zimmer-
man and Gutmann 1984). Similarly, coping
behaviors may also be conceptualized as actions
taken to modulate the level of stress experi-
enced. Thus, habitual drug use, including
cigarette smoking, can be conceptualized as a
coping behavior, an action taken to modulate the
level of tension occurring when one confronts a
threatening situation (Fleming, Baum and Singer
1984). A person may utilize a variety of coping
behaviors including drug use and cigarette
smoking in order to "feel better" either during
or after a stressful episode (Marlatt and Gordon
1985).
For adolescents, the present model predicts
that exposure to disruptive family events
(potential stressors, FL) when these are ap-
praised as stressful (appraisal, F2) leads to
cigarette smoking (a coping response, F5).
Certain mediating factors, however, may also be
involved in this process. The presence of certain
internal mediators (F3) and stable personal
attitudes such as nonconformity may increase
the likelihood of cigarette smoking, as may

Figure 1. Generic stress-coping structural model. General designators for each latent factor
parentheses, whereas respective designators for this model which are specific to cigarette sm
appear without parentheses. Postulated directions of influence are shown by (+) and (-)

Social
Conformity
(Internal
Mediators)
F3

isrup e

F\aily Cgarette
Smoking
(Coping
Response)
F5
Events ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ If ec
(Potential ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Exera
Stressors) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Mditos

Peer
Influence
(Externa

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MULTIVARIATE
certain external mediators (F4) such as an
affiliation with cigarette smoking peers. Whether
these two specific internal and external media-
tors are indeed important and necessary anteced-
ents in the establishment of regular cigarette
smoking in adolescents should be tested. The
present model provides a framework for doing
so.
A criticism of many previous studies on the
antecedents of cigarette smoking among adoles-
cents is that they lack an explicit theoretical
model for conducting coherent yet simple
multivariate analyses of the major factors
involved in the process of cigarette smoking,
i.e., they lack a set of unifying conceptual
variables which are well measured and which
can be examined simultaneously in a well
specified model (Bell and Grabowski 1983).
The primary purpose of the present paper is to
test a specific multivariate model of the major
antecedents of cigarette smoking among adoles-
cents.
A secondary purpose of this paper is to
explore cultural similarities and differences on
these five factors as they relate to cigarette
smoking in adolescent members of three major
U.S. ethnic minority groups: blacks, Hispanics,
and Asian Pacific Islanders.
Hypotheses. The aforementioned theory sug-
gests the following complementary or compet-
ing hypotheses:
(1) There should be an association between
the Disruptive Family Events factor (FL) and the
Perceived Stressfulness factor (F2), i.e., (Fl-
F2). Disruptive family events would constitute
potential stressors, events which are likely to be
stressful although their stress value is ultimately
determined by the individual's appraisal (evalu-
ation) of their unique threat value to the self
(Lazarus 1966; Lazarus and Folkman 1984). By
contrast, the individual's anticipation of the
possible occurrence of a disruptive family event
may in itself also induce stress even if the
anticipated event never occurs. The relationship
between (FL) and (F2) would be positive if
adolescents evaluate the occurrence of disrup-
tive life events as indeed stressful. By contrast,
this linkage could be negative if adolescents
evaluate such events, upon their occurrence, as
being less stressful than anticipated.
(2) There should be a negative association
between the Social Conformity factor (F3) and
the Peer Influence factor (F4). Persons who
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MODEL 277
develop strong conformist (conservative) values
are unlikely to associate with and be influenced
by adolescents who smoke cigarettes. Con-
versely, cigarette smoking adolescents would
likely develop a low value for social conformity
and would be unlikely to associate with socially
conformist peers.
(3) The Disruptive Family Events factor (FL)
will be a direct antecedent of Peer Influence
(F4), i.e., (FL-F4). Moreover, the Perceived
Stressfulness factor (F2) will also be a direct
antecedent of the Peer Influence factor (F4),
i.e., (F2-F4). The occurrence of disruptive
events in the adolescent's family system (serious
money problems; parental conflict, divorce, job
loss, alcohol abuse; family relocation, accident
or illness), whether or not the adolescent
perceives these as stressful, may reliably
precede the adolescent's association with ciga-
rette smoking peers. Moreover, the adolescent's
anticipation of such disruptive family difficul-
ties, whether or not they actually occur, might
also reliably precede an association with ciga-
rette smoking peers.
(4) The Disruptive Family Events factor will
be a direct antecedent of the Cigarette Smoking
factor (FL -F5), and the Perceived Stressfulness
factor will also be a direct antecedent of the
Cigarette Smoking factor (F2-F5). As noted
above, major disruptions in the adolescent's
family system could precede cigarette smoking
in a direct (unmediated) process. Similarly, the
adolescent's experience of stress could involve
anticipations of family disruption and could lead
to cigarette smoking as a behavioral response for
coping with stress. This also would be a direct
causal process, one which could occur unmedi-
ated by other factors.
(5) By contrast, the influence of Perceived
Stressfulness (F2) upon Cigarette Smoking (F5)
could be mediated by the factors of Social
Conformity (F3) and Peer Influence (F4), rather
than being a direct process. When the adolescent
is under family-related stress, whether this stress
is the result of the actual occurrence of
disruptive family events or their anticipated
occurrence, cigarette smoking may appear as an
emergent coping behavior. However, this stress-
coping relationship may not be a direct one. Its
occurrence may be conditional. It may be
hypothesized that this particular stress-coping
process as it leads to habitual cigarette smoking
is more likely to occur when mediated by the
 278 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

adolescent's development of nonconformist atti- by two or more measured variables as indicated

tudes and by his or her association with cigarette
smoking peers.
METHOD
Subjects
The participants in this study were 810
subjects from the tenth through twelfth grades
who were part of a longitudinal study of
adolescent growth and development (see Huba
and Bentler 1982; Newcomb, Maddahian, and
Bentler 1986). Among the study subjects 63
percent were white (n 507), 16 percent were
black (n = 130), 13 percent were Hispanic
(n = 109), and 8 percent were Asian Pacific
Islanders (n = 64). Table 1 shows the mean age
for subjects of each ethnic group by grade levels
10th, 11 th, and 12th. There were no significant
differences in mean age between ethnic groups
at each grade level. Ethnic by gender distribu-
tions were as follows: white male 22 percent
(n = 177), white female 41 percent (n = 330),
black male 4 percent (n = 35), black female 12
percent (n = 95), Hispanic male 4 percent (n =
35), Hispanic female 9 percent (n = 74), Asian
Pacific male 3 percent (n 20) and Asian
Pacific female 5 percent (n = 44).
Measures
Interrelationships were examined among the
five latent constructs of this causal model: (1) asked about the occurrence of: change of job for
potential stressors, (2) perceived stressfulness, mother or father, change of school for the
(3) social conformity, (4) peer influence and (5) subject, a family move to a new neighborhood.
cigarette smoking (a coping response) (See
Figure 1). Each latent construct was identified
TABLE 1. Age by Ethnic Group and Grade Level
(N = 81f)
Ethnic Group
Asian
Grade White Black Hispanic Pacific
10th 13.7 13.6 13.6 14.0
(193) (59) (53) (14)
11th 14.7 14.4 14.6 14.4
(203) (42) (44) (15)
12th 15.6 15.6 15.8 15.7
(111) (29) (12) (35)
Note: Number of subjects per ethnic-grade group
is shown in parentheses.
below. This five-factor model consisted of three
temporal stages: retrospective, present, and
future. Factors F1 and F4 were measured in
Year 4. However, conceptually, items for the
Disruptive Family Events factor (Fl) and for the
Perceived Stressfulness (F2) factor asked about
(past) stressful events and their impact for the
six-month period prior to Year 4. By contrast,
the Social Conformity (F3) and the Peer
Influence (F4) factors were conceptualized as
(present time, Year 4) internal and external
mediators respectively. These variables were
conceptualized as mediating the relationship
between (past) stressful events and (future)
behavior, i.e., cigarette smoking (F5), a coping
response measured in Year 5.
The potential stressor latent variable (Fl) was
identified by three measured variable scales.
Each scale contained life event items coded (1)
yes to indicate the occurrence of the event
during the last six months and (0) no to indicate
that the event did not occur. Each of these scales
tapped a different domain of potentially disrup-
tive family events: (1) parental happenings, (2)
relocation happenings, and (3) accident/illness
happenings (Newcomb, Huba and Bentler 1981,
1986a).
The Parental Happening scale consisted of
five items which asked about the (past)
occurrence of: parental divorce or separation,
serious money problems, conflict between
parents, remarriage of mother or father, and
abuse of alcohol by mother or father. The
Relocation scale consisted of three items which
The Accident-Illness scale consisted of four
items asking about the occurrence within the last
six months of: a, serious accident or illness
within the family, the subject's need to take
prescription medication, a death in the family,
the subject's having suffered a serious accident
or illness.
The latent variable of Perceived Stressfulness
(F2) was identified by three scales, one for each
of the three domains also examined for the
potential stressor latent factor (Disruptive Fam-
ily Events): parental, relocation, and accident/ill-
ness. Item content for each of these Perceived
Stressfulness scales was the same as for its
respective item of the Disruptive Family Event

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MULTIVARIATE
scales, although the responses for the Perceived
Stressfulness factor scales were rated on a
five-point stressfulness dimension which ranged
from: not at all stressful (1) to very stressful (5)
(Newcomb, Huba, and Bentler 1986b). Per-
ceived Stressfulness was rated by all subjects,
whether or not they had experienced the
disruptive family event. This approach is based
upon a working assumption that anticipated
events may still have some ratable stress value,
even if they have not occurred.
The Social Conformity latent variable (F3)
was identified by three (present time) measured
variable scales of: law abidance, liberalism and
religiosity. Each of these scaies consisted of
four "self-description" items in a five-choice
semantic differential format with opposite adjec-
tive phrases as anchor points (Huba and Bentler
1982). Each scale asked the subject to rate
himself or herself nearest the adjective phrase,
"Which describes you most of the time." The
Law Abidance scale consisted of these four
items: (1) return incorrect change-willing to
keep extra change, (2) might use a false ID-
afraid of getting caught, (3) might shoplift-
wouldn't know how or want to, (4) goodie-
goodie honest type-not quite so honest. In
scoring, the polarity of items 1 and 4 was
reversed. The Liberalism scale consisted of
these four items: (1) support women's libera-
tion-don't feel women need or want it, (2) see
cops as law enforcers-see cops as "pigs," (3)
think police should carry guns-think cops
shouldn't carry guns, (4) approve of many
protests-approve of few protests. In scoring,
the polarity was reversed for items 1 and 4. The
Religiosity scale consisted of these items: (1) am
not religious -am a religious person, (2) believe
in religion or the Bible-believe in science, (3)
feel that prayers are answered-feel that praying
is a waste, (4) think religion is outdated-think
religion is not outdated. In scoring, the polarity
was reversed in items 2 and 3.
The Peer Influence latent variable (F4) was
identified by two items: "How many of your
friends have smoked cigarettes?" and "How
many of your friends have given you ciga-
rettes?" Each of these items was rated on a scale
of (1) none to (5) all.
The (future) Cigarette Smoking latent factor
(F5) was identified by these items: (1) Intention
to smoke cigarettes in the future (asked in the
fifth year of this study), (2) Frequency (episodes
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MODEL 279
of) cigarette use in year five of this study, and
(3) Quantity of cigarette use in year five of this
study. Intention to use cigarettes in the future
was measured by a five-point scale asking, "Do
you plan to use cigarettes in the future?" which
was rated on a scale from "never" (1) to "yes
for sure" (5). Frequency (episodes of) cigarette
smoking in year five of the subject's participa-
tion was measured by the subject's answer to the
question: "About how often did you use
cigarettes or some kind of tobacco in the last six
months?" This item was rated on a scale from
"never" (1) to "more than once a day" (7). The
quantity of cigarette smoking during year 5 was
measured by asking, "During the last six
months, about how many cigarettes did you
smoke in a day?" Subject responses were rated
on a seven-point scale ranging from "no
cigarettes" (1) to "more than two packs of
cigarettes a day" (7).
RESULTS
Group Comparisons
For each of the 14 dependent (measured)
variables, a one-way analysis of variance with
post hoc comparisons was conducted to compare
the ethnic groups. A summary of these analyses
is given in Table 2. For five of six measured
variables (all except Relocation Impact) in
which significant differences were observed, a
pattern was evident in which scores for blacks
were highest, whites and Hispanics were
intermediate, and Asian Pacific Islanders had
the lowest scores. For Relocation Happening, an
indicator of the Disruptive Family Events latent
factor, black adolescents reported a significantly
greater number of relocations than did the Asian
Pacific adolescents (.41 vs .20). However, for
Relocation Impact, an indicator of the Perceived
Stressfulness (appraisal) factor, black adoles-
cents had a significantly lower stress appraisal
score than did their peers from each of the other
ethnic groups. By contrast for Religiosity, an
indicator of the Social Conformity latent factor,
black adolescents had significantly higher scores
than did their Asian Pacific and white peers.
Also, Hispanics had significantly higher religi-
osity scale scores than did their Asian Pacific
peers.
Similarly for number of Friends who Smoke,
 280 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

TABLE 2. Means and Standard Deviations of Measured Variables Across Ethnic Groups

Group

White Black Hispanic Asian Pacific

Variable (507) (130) (109) (64) F-value

I. Disruptive Family Events

1. Family Happening 0.46 0.52 0.40 0.31 1.59
(0.79) (0.79) (0.70) (0.61)
2. Relocation Happening 0.35 0.41a 0.36 0.20a 2.93*
(0.63) (0.66) (0.62) (0.41)
3. Accident/Illness 0.77 0.85 0.81 0.67 0.62
Happening (0.88) (0.92) (0.96) (0.93)
II. Perceived Stressfulness
(Appraisal)
7. Family Impact 4.31 4.24 4.34 4.43 2.41
(0.52) (0.52) (0.52) (0.45)
8. Relocation Impact 3.63c 3*33a~b~c 3.79a 7.81
(0.74) (0.90) (0.61) (0.58)
9. Accident/Illness 4.58 4.55 4.60 4.57 0.28
Impact (0.36) (0.47) (0.41) (0.41)
III. Social Conformity
(Internal Mediators)
4. Law Abidance 12.83 13.17 12.64 13.77 1.72
(4.00) (3.42) (3.93) (3.49)
5. Liberalism 10.04 10.38 10.26 10.18 0.79
(2.64) (2.34) (2.32) (2.06)
6. Religiosity 14.86b 16.85a b 15.81c 14.19a c 14.01***
(4.12) (3.26) (3.34) (3.81)
IV. Peer Influence
(External Mediators)
10. Friends Who Smoke 1.79bse 2.65a~bc 2.00cd 1.48a~de 25.92***
(1.03) (1.21) (1.05) (0.69)
11. Friends Who Give 1.55 1.71V 1.68 1.30a 3.48*
Cigarettes (1.00) (1.16) (1.09) (0.79)
V. Cigarette Smoking
12. Intention To Use 1.89 1.99 2.00 1.88 0.36
in Future (1.91) (1.32) (1.37) (1.37)
13. Frequency (Year 5) 2.39 2.74a 2.41 1.92a 2.53*
(2.19) (2.41) (2.15) (1.68)
14. Quantity of Smoking 11.54 1.64 1.56 1.33 1.49
(Year 5) (1.12) (1.11) (1.05) (.91)

* p<.05; ** p<.01; *** p<.001.

Note. Same letters in a row indicate that these groups have significantly different means.

an indicator of the Peer Influences factor, blacks
reported having significantly more cigarette
smoking friends than did the adolescent mem-
bers of each of the other groups. Hispanics also
had significantly more cigarette smoking friends
than did their Asian Pacific peers. Also, on the
Friends Who Give Cigarettes variable, blacks
reported significantly more friends who gave
them cigarettes than did their Asian Pacific
peers. Finally, on the smoking frequency
variable, black adolescents reported smoking
significantly more cigarettes than did their Asian
Pacific peers in Year 5 of this study. Based upon
a "high-risk" criterion for establishing and
maintaining cigarette smoking, a criterion which
involves having two or more close and signifi-
cant others as users of cigarettes (Flay, Ryan,
Best, Brown, Kersell, d'Avernas, and Zanna
1985), the black adolescents appeared to be at
highest risk, with a lower risk attributable to
Hispanics and whites, and a lowest risk
attributable to Asian Pacific Islanders.
MEASUREMENT MODEL
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. A confirma-
tory factor analysis was then conducted to see
whether the 14 measured variables selected for
analysis were indeed statistically reliable indica-
tors of their respective latent construct. Table 3
shows the results of the analysis which was

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MULTIVARIATE MODEL 281

TABLE 3. Confirmatory Model Factor Loadings for Total Sample and for Four Ethnic Groups

Ethnic Groups

Asian
Total White Black Hispanic Pacific
Factor and Variables (n = 810) (n = 507) (n = 130) (n = 109) (n = 64)

(a) Factor Loadings

(Fl) Disruptive Family Events
1. Parental Happening .55*** .45*** .15 1.00*** .40***
2. Relocation Happening .30*** .50*** .11 .09 .52**
3. Accident/Illness Happening .23*** .15* .82* .68** .00
(F2) Perceived Stressfulness
4. Parental Impact .90*** .81*** 1.00*** .63*** .48***
5. Relocation Impact .25*** .26*** .25** .24* .44**
6. Accident/Illness Impact .37*** .42*** .33*** .47*** .80***
(F3) Social Conformity
7. Law Abidance .77*** .75*** .70*** - .73*** .62***
8. Liberalism -.41*** -.48*** -.20* .39** -.23
9. Religiosity .31*** .39*** .24* .02 .51***
(F4) Peer Influence
10. Friends Smoke (Year 4) .61*** .64*** .64*** .63*** .57***
11. Friends Give Cigarettes (Year 4) .89*** .89*** .95*** .67*** .83***
(F5) Cigarette Smoking
12. Present Cigarette Use (Year 5) .89*** .89*** .94*** .94*** 1.00***
13. Future Cigarette Use (Year 5) .83*** .87*** .74*** .90*** .85***
14. Quantity of Cigarette Use (Year 5) .88*** .92*** .71*** .77*** .78***
(b) Factor Intercorrelations
F1 and F2 -.26** -.08 -.36 -.46** -1.00***
F1 and F3 -.15* -.09 -.14 .25* -.35
F1 and F4 .31*** .30*** .10 .50*** .71***
F1 and F5 .31*** .36*** -.03 .15 .54**
F2 and F3 .18*** .25*** .25* -.27 .30*
F2 and F4 -.13* -.10 -.10 -.28* -.22
F2 and F5 -.07 -.05 .05 -.16 -.01
F3 and F4 -.44* -.44*** -.54*** .67*** -.62***
F3 and F5 -.45* -.46*** -.53*** .25* -.66***
F4 and F5 .78* .81*** .72*** .59*** .70***
(c) Test Statistics
Chi-square 62.40 64.25 60.79 66.66 62.21
df 57 58 64 58 62
p-values .29 .28 .59 .20 .47
Normalized Index of Fit .98 .97 .87 .85 .82

* p<.05; ** p<.01; *** p<.001.

conducted using the EQS computer program
(Bentler 1985), a general mathematical and
statistical approach to the analysis of linear
structural equation systems. Since a few of the
measured variables for each group had notewor-
thy kurtosis values, as indicated by the normal-
ized multivariate kurtosis estimate, the preferred
structural modeling approach for these data was
an arbitrary (distribution-free) generalized least- sample (n = 810) indicated that the present
squares approach (Browne 1984). However, this
approach generally provides robust analyses for
large sample sizes, e.g. over 300. Since each of
the ethnic minority groups consisted of samples
of relatively small size, i.e., n < 150, a
maximum likelihood solution was used in
confirmatory model analysis for each group. By
using this approach for all groups (including
whites and the total sample), we took into
account the relatively small sample sizes of the
ethnic groups, while also using a common
method across groups so that comparisons could
be made between groups on various confirma-
tory model parameters.
The confirmatory factor loadings for the total
five-factor model was an effectively fitting
model for these data, x2(57) = 62.40, p = .29.
The Normalized Fit Index (NFI) was .98,
indicating that over 98 percent of the data
covariance was accounted for by this model
(Bentler and Bonett 1980) (See Table 3, (c)).
This model for the total sample included three

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
282 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
least two
a priori correlated errors. The of its measured
inclusion
of seven
other correlated errors provided the good model
fit reported above.
For the white sample, a similar confirmatory
model with correlated errors yielded a similar
good fit, (x2(58) = 64.25, p = .28, NFI
.97). Confirmatory model fit statistics for the
three ethnic groups are also given at the bottom
of Table 3. This five-factor stress-coping model
explained at least 82% of the variance for each
of these minority groups, thus indicating good
fit for each group. For all groups, chi-square
tests were nonsignificant (p > .05), indicating
that the model fit was statistically acceptable for As it was postulated before (see Figure 1) there
all groups.
Latent Factor Identification. Variations across
the ethnic groups were observed in the contribu-
tion of the latent variables to their respective
measured indicators. Summaries of the factor
loadings for each ethnic group are given in
section (a) of Table 3.
For black adolescents, only accident/illness
happening was a significant indicator of the
Disruptive Family Events factor (Fl) whereas
parental happening and relocation happening
were not.
For Hispanics, parental and accident/illness
happenings, but not relocation, loaded signifi-
cantly as indicators of the latent factor of
Disruptive Family Events (Fl). Also, for these
Hispanics, law abidance and liberalism were
significant indicators of Social Conformity (F3),
for the white sample. Also for the total sample,
but religiosity was not. This suggests that
among the Hispanic adolescents in this sample,
preference for religious involvement, as mea-
sured by these religiosity scale items, was
unrelated to the construct of Social Conformity
(conservatism).
For Asian Pacific adolescents, the parental
happenings and relocation happening variables
but not accident/illness happening were ade-
quate indicators of the latent construct of
Disruptive Family Events (Fl). Similarly for the
Asian Pacific adolescents, for the latent variable
of Social Conformity (F3), liberalism was not a
significant indicator, although law abidance and
religiosity were. Thus liberalism, as defined by
support for women's rights and opposition to
law enforcement, was not an important determi-
nant of Social Conformity among these Asian
Pacific adolescents. Except for the Disruptive
Family Events factor for black adolescents, each
latent variable was adequately defined by at
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
variables, thus
providing partial evidence for the construct
validity of each latent factor as relevant to each
sociocultural group.
Intercorrelations Between Latent Factors. As
a part of the confirmatory factor analysis, it is
possible to examine the intercorrelations of the
latent factors in order to screen for the likely
significance of all linkages between latent
factors (see Table 3, part b). These analyses
revealed that several, but not all, of the
postulated linkages between the latent factors
were significant for each of the ethnic groups.
was a significant (albeit negative) association
for the total sample between the Disruptive
Family Events factor (Fl) and the Perceived
Stressfulness factor (F2), (r = -.26, p <
.001). Also observed for the total sample was a
significant (negative) relationship between the
Social Conformity factor (internal mediator)
(F3) and the Peer Influence factor (external
mediator) (F4), (r = -.44, p < .001).
For the total sample, a weak association was
found between the Disruptive Family Events
factor (Fl) and the Social Conformity factor
(F3) (r = - .15, p < .05). This relationship,
however, does not account for more than two
percent of the covariance between these two
factors, and this relationship was not significant
a direct and significant association was found
between the Disruptive Family Events factor
(Fl) and the Cigarette Smoking factor (F5), (r
= .31, p < .001). Contrary to what was
hypothesized, no significant relationship was
observed in the total sample between the
Perceived Stressfulness factor (F2) and the
Cigarette Smoking factor (F5), (r = -.07, p >
.05). Based upon data shown in Table 3(b), the
path from F2 to F5 for all sociocultural groups
would not be expected to attain significance in a
structural model analysis since the correlations
between these factors were quite small. Other
relatively weak associations for all groups were
the (FI-F3) and the (F2-F4) linkages. The
occurrence of a disruptive family event was not
a likely precursor of tendency towards social
nonconformity, and the appraisal of family
events as stressors was not likely associated with
the Peer Influence factor.
 MULTIVARIATE
STRUCTURAL MODELS
Finally, two analyses were conducted to
identify significant structural paths for the total
sample and for the white group only. The main
reasons for excluding each of the minority
groups from the structural analysis was that for
each minority group, one or more of the
measured variables was not a significant indica-
tor of its respective latent construct. This
occurred for at least one latent construct for each
minority group (see Table 3(a)). This outcome
raised a significant methodological and theoret-
ical issue: If a given latent variable, e.g. Social
Conformity, is well identified by each of three
measured variables for the white groups, but this
latent variable is well identified by only two of
these three measured variables for a minority
group (e.g., in the case of Hispanic and Asian
Pacific adolescents in this sample), can this
latent variable be regarded as "the same"
construct for members of both groups? In this
case, this latent construct, despite being the
same for the minority group on two of three
measured variables, is still not entirely the same
construct for members of both groups-even if the
difference is a small one. Two options were
available for making structural model compari-
sons between the white, black, Hispanic and
Asian Pacific groups. We could have: (1)
maintained the same measured variables as
indicators of their latent factor, whether signifi-
cant or not, in order to retain the same
conceptual model across all groups. Alterna-
tively, we could have: (2) excluded nonsignifi-
cant measured variables (and/or used other
significant measured variables) as indicators of a
given latent construct, thereby forming latent
factors identified only by their significant
measured variables. This would have formed a
good measurement model, although in this case
the latent variable models would be somewhat
different for each ethnic group. In either case,
the comparability across groups resulting from
subsequent structural model analyses would
have been open to question. Therefore, the
following structural model analyses were con-
ducted only for the total sample and for the
white adolescent group, in order to test the
hypothesized pathways of the multivariate
model for these two groups which had com-
pletely identified latent factors. Since sample
sizes are large for both these groups, we were
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MODEL 283
then free to use the arbitrary (distribution-free)
generalized least-squares method to estimate
structural coefficients and model fit.
Figures 2 and 3 show the standardized
parameters for each of the hypothesized struc-
tural pathways among the five latent variables
for the total sample and for the white group.
Nonsignificant paths were eliminated in Figures
2 and 3 for clarity of presentation. The initial
structural model for the total sample and for the
white sample provided a fair representation of
the data (total: x2(64) = 112.94, p < .001;
Normalized Fit Index (NFI) = .84; White:
x2(64) = 91.22, p = .01, NFI = .83). After
eliminating the nonsignificant paths, and after
introducing seven correlated errors for the total
sample and six correlated errors for the white
sample, the chi-square values were decreased to:
(Total: X2(59) = 65.00, p = .276, NFI = .91;
White: x2(60) = 67.72, p .23 1; NFI = .97).
The difference between the chi-squares of these
models (represented in Figures 2 and 3) and a
full causal model was not significant.
These findings partially support our original
hypotheses. The salient points are:
(1) The Disruptive Family Events factor and
the Perceived Stressfulness factor (Fl-F2)
were negatively related for the total sample (r =
-.32) but these factors were unrelated for the
white sample (r = - .03). Thus, for the total
sample, the occurrence of greater numbers of
disruptive family events (potential stressors)
was associated with a lesser perception (ap-
praisal) of being under stress in the total subject
sample, albeit not in the white subject sample.
These results suggest the occurrence of a stress
inoculation effect in those adolescents exposed
to disruptive family events (Newcomb, Huba,
and Bentler 1986b).
(2) The Social Conformity factor and the Peer
Influence factor (F3 -F4) were negatively
correlated both in the total sample (r = - .45)
and in the white sample (r = - .50). As
hypothesized, these results suggest that socially
conforming adolescents are less likely to pursue
friendships with cigarette smoking peers.
(3) Although a direct effect was hypothesized
between the Perceived Stressfulness factor and
the Peer Influence factor (F2-F4), this relation-
ship was not observed in the total sample,
although a weak linkage between these two
factors was observed in the white sample. By
contrast, the hypothesized relationship between
284 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

Figure 2. Specific Stress-Coping Structural Model fo

Significance values for standardized coefficients are: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Social
Conformity
(Internal
Mediators)

isrupti .17**
FamilyQ9
Ivents
(Potential
Stressors)

Ciarette
Smoking
(Coping

(. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F5
-32** Response)

Perceived
Stressfulness
(Appraisal) 7

Peer
Influence
(External
iators)
74

the Disruptive Family Events factor and the Peer
Influence factor (Fl -F4) was observed in both
the total and in the white samples. These results
suggest that the occurrence of disruptive family
events, independently of their perceived stress
impact, are antecedents to adolescent affiliations
with cigarette smoking (perhaps more deviant)
peers. By suggestion, efforts to affiliate with
such cigarette smoking peers (F2-F4) are
unrelated (total sample) or inversely related in a
weak manner (white sample) with level of
stress/distress experienced by these adolescents.
(4) A direct but weak linkage was observed
for the hypothesized relationship between the
Disruptive Family Events factor and the Ciga-
rette Smoking factor (Fl -F5) in both the total
and in the white samples. This suggests that the
occurrence of disruptive family events is a direct
albeit weak antecedent to cigarette smoking
among these adolescents. By contrast, the
Perceived Stressfulness factor (F2) did not
appear as an antecedent to Cigarette Smoking in
the white sample, while in the total sample it
appeared as a weak antecedent. These results
suggest that these potential stressors (Fl) and/or
feelings of stress which may be associated with
them (F2) had a direct and positive albeit weak
influence on future cigarette smoking among
these adolescents.
(5) If stress is a weak direct and positive
antecedent of cigarette smoking in adolescents,
according to total sample data, the influence of
stress is stronger yet opposite in nature when
manifested indirectly, as when mediated by
Social Conformity and/or by Peer Influence. An
analysis of the mediated pathways for the total
sample revealed that low level of perceived
stress was associated with low social conformity
(high rebelliousness), with a greater association
with cigarette smoking peers, and subsequently
with a greater frequency of cigarette smoking.
Thus, those adolescents who come from dis-

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MULTIVARIATE MODEL 285

Figure 3. Specific Stress-Coping Structural Model for the White Subject Group. (F's are latent factors, and
D's are residuals.) Significance values for standardized coefficients are: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p <
.001.

Conformity
(Internal
Mediators)

73

isruptive
Finily
Events.9
(Potential
Stressors)
.13*

Smoking
(Coping

-.50*** ~~~~~~Response)
.22*

Perceie
Stressfulness
(Appraisal)

Pee
Influence
(External
Mediators)
P4

rupted households and who do not feel stressed
would tend towards rebelliousness, toward an
association with cigarette smoking peers, and
toward smoking cigarettes themselves.
As hypothesized, Perceived Stressfulness was
positively associated with Social Conformity,
which in turn was negatively associated with
Cigarette Smoking (F2-F3-F5) in both the
total and the white samples (see Figures 2 and
3). The hypothesized linkage between Perceived
Stressfulness, Peer Influence and Cigarette
Smoking [F2-F4-F5] was also observed in
the white sample, where it was indicated that low
stress antecedes an association with cigarette
smoking peers. This Perceived Stressfulness-
Peer Influence linkage was also negative in the
total sample, although it did not attain signifi-
cance. In both samples, Peer Influence was
found to be a strong antecedent of Cigarette
Smoking (F4-F5), a relationship which has
been observed often in studies of cigarette
smoking among adolescents.
In general, the results for this subject sample
indicated that stress factors can be both direct
and indirect antecedents of adolescent cigarette
smoking. However, the mediated linkages
between specific stress factors (Disruptive
Family Events, Perceived Stressfulness) and
specific mediational factors (Social Conformity,
Peer Influence) were stronger antecedents of
Cigarette Smoking than were the direct linkages
between the stress factors and Cigarette Smok-
ing. Thus, a mediational model was superior to
a direct, unmediated model as a descriptor of the
set of factors which antecede cigarette smoking
in adolescents.
DISCUSSION
The results of the present study provided
stronger evidence for a mediational stress-coping-
outcome model over a direct effects stress-
outcome model, regarding the antecedents of

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
286 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
regular (habitual) cigarette smoking in adoles-
cents. These results generally support the
findings of other studies that peer influence is an
important antecedent of cigarette smoking
(Aitken 1980; Jessor, Chase and Donovan 1980).
However, the results of the present study go
beyond this by highlighting the significance of a
disrupted family system (Disruptive Family
Events) as an earlier antecedent of both an
affiliation with cigarette smoking peers (Peer
Influence) and of cigarette smoking itself. It
seems evident that adolescents would appraise
most disruptive family events as stressful. The
present results, however, are contrary to this
anticipated pattern, as Perceived Stressfulness
was negatively correlated with the Disruptive
Family Events factor in the total sample and
uncorrelated with this factor in the white group.
Newcomb, Huba and Bentler (1986a) observed
this inverse relationship between the occurrence
of disruptive life events and their perceived
stress value. These investigators suggested the
occurrence of a stress-inoculation effect in
which adolescents may evaluate occurring
disruptive events as being less stressful than was
anticipated, while overestimating the stress
value of potential stressors which are yet to
occur. The present results suggest that having
family problems is a risk condition for future
cigarette smoking, although being relatively
stress-free would also appear to be a risk
condition among rebellious adolescents. By
contrast, data for the total sample (see Figure 2)
show that experiencing relatively few disruptive
family events while nonetheless being under
high stress is weakly related to cigarette
smoking. Perhaps adolescents who feel under
stress and who are loners, or who at least do not
associate with cigarette smoking peers, may also
be at risk of cigarette smoking.
Based upon results for the total sample, the
present study highlighted the importance of
individual rebelliousness (an internal mediator)
and of having cigarette smoking peers (an
external mediator) as antecedents to cigarette
smoking. In addition the present study high-
lighted the importance of living in a disrupted
family system, as an earlier antecedent of
nonconformity and of peer affiliation, as these
operate in concert as antecedents to cigarette
smoking itself.
The mediated pathways to cigarette smoking
as described for the total sample were also
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
observed for the white sample, although the
similarity in total and white sample results can
be attributed in part to the fact that the largest
proportion of subjects in the total sample were
white. However, some small differences spe-
cific to the white sample were also observed. In
contrast to the results for the total sample, for
the white sample only one direct path was
observed from the stressor factors to cigarette
smoking. Only the Disruptive Family events
factor was linked to the Cigarette Smoking
factor. Additionally and unexpectedly, for the
white sample, no significant linkage was
observed between the Disruptive Family Events
and the Perceived Stressfulness factors.
These results suggest for white adolescents
that living in a disrupted family increases the
risk of eventually affiliating with more deviant
cigarette smoking peers, who would encourage
cigarette smoking. The risk of cigarette smoking
may increase further if, despite an exposure to
family problems, the adolescent has little
anxiety and develops a nonconformist, nonanxi-
ous orientation toward rules and established
social roles. Moreover, as indicated by this
stress-coping model, the combined effects of
family discord, low sense of stress, nonconfor-
mity, and an affiliation with cigarette smoking
peers, may constitute a profile of "highest risk"
for cigarette smoking among white adolescents.
In conclusion, the present results for both the
white and for the total samples underscore the
importance of life in a disrupted family system
as an early (indirect) antecedent of nonconfor-
mity and an early (direct) antecedent of an
affiliation with cigarette smoking (perhaps more
deviant) peers. In turn, this early antecedent is
both a direct and an indirect precursor (as noted
by the stress-coping model) of cigarette smok-
ing.
Overall, this five-factor mediational stress-
coping model of cigarette smoking was sup-
ported for the total subject sample and for white
adolescents. However, one or more of the latent
factors in the measurement models for each of
the three ethnic groups did not fully influence all
the hypothesized respective measured variables.
Thus, structural model comparisons between
ethnic groups could not be conducted with
confidence. These differences in measurement
models, however, suggested cultural or ethnic-
specific differences in the meaning of these
latent constructs. For exatnple, the relocation
 MULTIVARIATE
happening variable was a significant indicator of
the Disruptive Family Event latent factor for
whites and Asian Pacific Islanders, but not for
blacks and Hispanics (See Table 3). Events such
as "change of job for mother or father,"
"change of school for subject," "a family move
to a new neighborhood" can be undesirable yet
frequently occurring or accepted life events
which many blacks and Hispanics no longer see
as being disruptive of family life. For many
black adolescents, the presence of extended
kinship networks (Hines and Boyd-Franklin
1982) may provide an extended system of
support which does not conform to "bloodlines"
and is not restricted to a single household. Such
systems with broader "family" boundaries may
have developed historically as adaptation to
poverty-related disruptions of nuclear black
families. As such, these extended family
systems could provide for many Black adoles-
cents the social support necessary to attenuate
the disruptive impact of parental job loss,
moving to a new school or moving to a new
neighborhood.
Similarly, for Hispanics, cultural values
emphasizing family unity ("familism") encour-
age efforts to remain near the family network
when relocation is necessary (Falicov 1982).
Thus, here also the availability of an extended
family network, a network of supportive rela-
tives not restricted to a nuclear family house-
hold, can attenuate the disruptive impact of
parental job loss or relocation to new school or
neighborhood for many Hispanic adolescents.
The observed cultural differences in the
identification of the latent factors of Disruptive
Family Events and Social Conformity provide
an indication that small but significant cultural
differences must be understood in terms of that
ethnic group's own "emic" culture before
accurate judgments about the meaning of a
behavior or psychological construct can be
made. Future research on the antecedents of
regular cigarette smoking in various ethnic
minority adolescent groups may consider the
five generic latent factors of the present
stress-coping model, albeit fully identified by
measured variable indicators which will provide
adequate (culturally relevant) measures of a
given latent factor, e.g., Disruptive Family
Events, for that ethnic minority group.
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MODEL 287
PROGRAM IMPLICATIONS AND
FUTURE RESEARCH
The present data underscore the strong impact
of associations with cigarette smoking peers as a
precursor to cigarette smoking. Accordingly,
current programs which focus upon attenuating
the social influence of cigarette smoking peers,
are generally on track in offering social skills
training for adolescents to say "no" to peers and
to others who offer cigarettes and other drugs
(McAlister, Perry and Maccoby 1979; Perry,
Killen, Telch, Slinkard and Danaher 1980a;
Perry, Killen, Slinkard, and McAlister 1980b).
However, the present data also suggest that a
broader approach is necessary. In addition, the
present data underscore the importance of
disruptive family events (an environmental
factor) and the importance of social nonconfor-
mity (a person factor) as two essentially
independent factors which function as anteced-
ents of the adolescent's association with ciga-
rette smoking peers. Moreover, those cigarette
smoking adolescents from very disruptive homes,
who are very rebellious and like it, and whose
best friends smoke cigarettes, may also be the
adolescents most resistant to the influence of
smoking prevention/cessation programs. Thus
preventive interventions must go beyond a focus
upon the social influence of peers by also
addressing conditions antecedent to an adoles-
cent's association with cigarette smoking peers,
i.e., a disrupted family environment and noncon-
formist attitudes and values.
The present data suggest that preventing
cigarette smoking among adolescents could be
augmented by family system interventions early
in this causal chain. Such intervention may be
aimed at resolving parental conflict or drug use,
financial difficulties, family illness and other
sources of instability in the adolescent's home
(Santisteban and Szapocznik 1982). Similarly,
such efforts to prevent cigarette smoking should
identify remarkably nonconformist youths, that
is, high risk youths who are experiencing more
than occasional difficulties with compliance
with social norms and authority. Although a
forced imposition of values emphasizing an
adherence to rules and compliance with author-
ities is not a desired intervention for such
youths, a less forceful approach involving a
therapeutic understanding and a working through
288 JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
of the adolescent's conflicts with rules and
authority would seem to be appropriate.
Future research should consider the variable
of ethnicity in greater detail than could be
considered in the present study, and use more
culturally relevant measured variables for religi-
osity, liberalism, etc., in order to better identify
the latent variables of the stress-coping model
for each ethnic minority group. Regarding more
differentiated analyses by ethnicity, provided
that large enough sample sizes could be formed,
the Hispanic and Asian Pacific groups could, for
example, be further differentiated into even
more homogenous "national" subgroups, i.e.,
Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans;
Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Kore-
ans, etc. Furthermore, each of these subgroups
can be meaningfully differentiated by level of
acculturation or by generation level. Analyses of
adolescent cohorts via these more differentiated
subgroupings may provide greater culturally
specific detail and interesting comparisons of
group variations in the antecedents which
influence habitual cigarette smoking among
members of these groups.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, Icek, and Martin Fishbein. 1980. Understanding
Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall.
Aitken, P.P. 1980. "Peer Group Pressures, Parental
Controls and Cigarette Smoking Among 10 to 14 Year
Olds." British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychol-
ogy 61:141-46.
Bandura, Albert. 1977. Social Learning Theory. Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Baugh, Janet G., Sandra Mac D. Hunter, Larry S.
Webber, and Gerald S. Berenson. 1982. "Developmen-
tal Trends of First Cigarette Smoking Experience of
Children: The Bogalusa Heart Study." American
Journal of Public Health, 72, 1161-64.
Bell, Catherine S., and John Grabowski, J. 1983.
"Overview of Smoking Research Issues." Pp. 1-5 in
Measurement in the Analysis and Treatment of
Smoking Behavior edited by J. Grabowski and C.S.
Bell. (Research Monograph No. 48). Rockville, MD:
National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Bender, P.M., and Douglas G. Bonett. 1980. "Signifi-
cance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of
Covariance Structure." Psychological Bulletin,
88:588-606.
Bentler, P.M. 1985. Theory and Implementation of EQS:
A Structural Equations Program. Los Angeles: BMDP
Statistical Software.
Botvin, Gilbert and Anna Eng. 1980. "A Comprehensive
School-Based Smoking Prevention Program." Journal
of School Health 11:209-13.
This content downloaded from
130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Botvin, Gilbert, Anna Eng, and Christine L. Williams.
1980. "Preventing the Onset of Cigarette Smoking
Through Life Skills Training." Preventive Medicine
9:135-43.
Botvin, Gilbert J., Nancy L. Renick, and Eli Baker.
1983. "The Effects of Scheduling Format and Booster
Sessions on a Broad-Spectrum Psychosocial Approach
to Smoking Prevention." Journal of Behavioral
Medicine 6:359-79.
Browne, M.W. 1984. "Asymptotically Distribution-Free
Methods for the Analysis of Covariance Structures."
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psy-
chology, 37:62-83.
Brunswick, Ann F., and Peter Masseri. 1984. "Gender
Differences in the Process Leading to Cigarette
Smoking." Journal of Psychosocial Oncology 2:49-69.
Cervantes, Richard C., and Felipe G. Castro. 1985.
"Stress, Coping and Mexican American Mental
Health: A Systematic Review." Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences. 7:1-73.
Clausen, John A. 1968. "Adolescent Antecedents of
Cigarette Smoking: Data From the Oakland Growth
Study." Social Science and Medicine 1:357-82.
Evans, Richard I. 1976. "Smoking in Children: Develop-
ing a Social Psychology Strategy of Deterrence."
Journal of Preventive Medicine 5:122-27.
Evans, Richard I., Rozelle, R.M., Maxwell, S.E.,
Raines, B.E., Dill, C.A., Guthrie, T.J., Henderson,
A.H., and Hill, P.C. 1981. "Social Modeling Films
Do Deter Smoking in Adolescents: Results of a
Three-Year Field Investigation." Journal of Applied
Psychology 66:399-414.
Falicov, Celia J. 1982. "Mexican Families." Pp. 134-63
in Ethnicity and Family Therapy edited by M.
McGoldrick, J.K. Pearce, and J. Giordano. New York:
The Guilford Press.
Flay, Brian R., and J. Allen Best. 1982. "Overcoming
Design Problems in the Evaluation of Health Behavior
Change Programs." Evaluation in the Health Profes-
sions 5:43-69.
Flay, Brian R., Josie R. D'Averas, J. Allen Best, Mary
W. Kersell, and Katherine B. Ryan. 1983. "Cigarette
Smoking: Why Young People Do It and Ways of
Preventing It." Pediatric and Adolescent Behavioral
Medicine 10:132-83.
Flay, Brian R., Katherine B. Ryan, J. Allen Best, K.
Stephen Brown, Mary W. Kersell, Josie R. D'Averas
and Mark P. Zanna. 1985. "Are Social-Psychological
Smoking Prevention Programs Effective? The Water-
loo Study." Journal of Behavioral Medicine 8:37-59.
Fleming, Raymond, Andrew Baum and Jerome E.
Singer. 1984. "Toward an Integrative Approach to the
Study of Stress." Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 46:939-49.
Harwood, Alan. 1981. Ethnicity and Medical Care.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hines, Paulette M., and Nancy Boyd-Franklin. 1982.
"Black Families." Pp. 84-107 in Ethnicity and Family
Therapy edited by M. McGoldrick, J.K. Pearce and J.
Giordano. New York: Guilford Press.
Horn, D. 1979. "Psychological Analysis of Establish-
ment and Maintenance of the Smoking Habit." Pp.
24-29 in Cigarette Smoking as a Dependence Process
 MULTIVARIATE MODEL 289

edited by N.A. Krasnegor (Research Monograph No.
23). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Huba, George J., and P.M. Bentler. 1982. "A
Developmental Theory of Drug Use: Derivation and
Assessment of a Causal Modeling Approach." Pp.
147-203 in Life-Span Development and Behavior,
Volume 4, edited by P.B. Baltes and O.G. Brim Jr.
New York: Academic Press.
Hurd, Peter D., C. Anderson Johnson, Terry Pechacek,
L. Peter Bust, David R. Jacobs, and Russell V.
Leupker. 1980. "Prevention of Cigarette Smoking in
Seventh Grade Students." Journal of Behavioral
Medicine 3:15-28.
Jessor, Richard, James A. Chase, and John E. Donovan.
1980. "Psychosocial Correlates of Marijuana Use and
Problem Drinking in a National Sample of Adoles-
cents." American Journal of Public Health 70:604-13.
Jessor, Richard, and Shirley L. Jessor. 1977. Problem
Behavior and Psychosocial Development: A Longitudi-
nal Study of Youth. New York: Academic Press
Johnson, Lloyd D., Jerald G. Bachman, and Patrick M.
O'Malley. 1982. Highlights From Student Drug Use in
America 1975-1981. National Institute on Drug
Abuse, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Lazarus, Richard S. 1966. Psychosocial Stress and the
Coping Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lazarus, Richard S. and Susan Folkman. 1984. Stress:
Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer.
Leventhal, Howard, and Paul D. Cleary. 1980. "The
Smoking Problem: A Review of the Research and
Theory in Behavior Risk Modification.'" Psychological
Bulletin 88:370-405.
Leventhal, Howard, Rick Zimmerman, and Mary Gut-
mann. 1984. "Compliance: A Self-Regulation Perspec-
tive." Pp. 369-436 in Handbook of Behavioral
Medicine, edited by W.D. Gentry. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Maddahian, Ebrahim, Michael D. Newcomb and P.M.
Bentler. 1986. "Adolescents' Substance Use: Impact
of Ethnicity, Income and Availability." Advances in
Alcohol and Substance Abuse, 5:63-78.
Marlatt, G. Alan and Judith R. Gordon. 1985. Relapse
Prevention: Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment
of Addictive Behaviors. New York: The Guilford
Press.
McAlister, Alfred, Cheryl Perry, and Nathan Maccoby.
1979. "Adolescent Smoking: Onset and Prevention."
Pediatrics, 63:650-58.
McAlister, Alfred, Cheryl Perry, Joel Killen, Lee Ann
Slinkard, and Nathan Maccoby. 1980. "Pilot Study of
Smoking, Alcohol and Drug Prevention." American Syme, Leonard S., and Rina Alcalay. 1982. "Control of
Journal of Public Health, 70:719-21.
McGoldrick, Monica, John K. Pearce, and Joseph
Giordano. 1982. Ethnicit) and Family Therapy. Weinstein,
York: The Guilford Press.
Newcomb, Michael D., George J. Huba, and P.M.
Bentler. 1981. "A Multidimensional Assessment of Williams, Allen F. 1973. "Personality and Other
Stressful Life Events Among Adolescents: Derivation
and Correlates." Journal of Health and Social
Behavior 22:400-15.
Newcomb, Michael D., and P.M. Bentler. 1986.
"Substance Use and Ethnicity: Differential Impact of
Peer and Adult Models." Journal of Psychology
50:428-38.
Newcomb, Michael D., George Huba, and P.M. Bentler.
1986a. "Life Change Events Among Adolescents: An
Empirical Consideration of Some Methodological
Issues." Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
174:280-89.
.1986b. "Adolescents' Perception of Desirability
of Various Life Events." Journal of Research in
Personality 20:207-27.
Newcomb, Michael D., Ebrahim Maddahian, and P.M.
Bentler. 1986. "Risk Factors for Drug Use Among
Adolescents: Concurrent and Longitudinal Analyses."
American Journal of Public Health, 76:525-31.
Oatley, Keith, and Winifred Boulton. 1985. "A
Social-cognitive Theory of Depression in Reaction to
Life Events." Psychological Review 92:372-88.
O'Connell, D.L., H.M. Alexander, A.J. Dobson, D.M.
Lloyd, G.R. Hardes, H.J. Springthorpe, and S.R.
Leeder. 1981. "Cigarette Smoking and Drug Use in
School Children. II Factors Associated with Smok-
ing. " International Journal of Epidemiology 10:223-31.
Perry, Cheryl, Joel Killen, Michael Telch, Lee Ann
Slinkard, and Brian G. Danaher. 1980a. "Modifying
Smoking Behavior of Teenagers: A School-Based
Intervention." American Journal of Public Health
70:722-25.
Perry, Cheryl, Joel Killen, Lee Ann Slinkard, and Alfred
McAlister. 1980b. "Peer Teaching and Smoking
Prevention Among Junior High Students." Adoles-
cence 15:277-81.
Russell, M.A.H. 1979. "Tobacco Dependence: Is
Nicotine Rewarding or Aversive?" Pp. 100-22 in
Cigarette Smoking as a Dependence Process, edited by
N.A. Krasnegor. (Research Monograph No. 23).
Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Santisteban, David, and Jose Szapocznik. 1982. "Sub-
stance Abuse Disorders among Hispanics: A Focus on
Prevention." Pp. 83-100 in Mental Health and
Hispanic Americans: Clinical Perspectives edited by
R.M. Becerra, M. Karno and J.I. Escobar. New York:
Grune and Stratton.
Shiffman, Saul, Laura Read, Joan Maltese, David
Rapkin, and Murray E. Jarvick. 1985. "Preventing
Relapse in Ex-Smokers: A Self-Management Ap-
proach." Pp. 472-520 in Relapse Prevention: Mainte-
nance Strategies in the Treatment of Addictive
Behaviors, edited by G.A. Marlatt and J.R. Gordon.
New York: The Guilford Press.
Cigarette Smoking from a Social Perspective." Annual
Review of Public Health, 3:170-99.
New Neil D. 1982. "Unrealistic Optimism About
Susceptibility to Health Problems." Journal of Behav-
ioral Medicine 5:441-60.
Characteristics Associated with Cigarette Smoking
Among Young Teenagers". Journal of Health and
Social Behavior 14:374-80.

This content downloaded from

130.82.70.251 on Thu, 08 Feb 2024 11:06:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms