IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i17p10722-d900010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-Sectional Associations of Self-Reported Social/Emotional Support and Life Satisfaction with Smoking and Vaping Status in Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Zidian Xie

    (Department of Clinical and Translational Research, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 14642, USA)

  • Francisco Cartujano-Barrera

    (Department of Public Health Sciences and Cancer Center, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 14642, USA)

  • Paula Cupertino

    (Department of Public Health Sciences and Cancer Center, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 14642, USA)

  • Dongmei Li

    (Department of Clinical and Translational Research, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 14642, USA)

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the cross-sectional association of self-reported social/emotional support and life satisfaction with smoking/vaping status in US adults. The study included 47,163 adult participants who self-reported social/emotional support, life satisfaction, and smoking/vaping status in the 2016 and 2017 BRFSS national survey data. We used multivariable weighted logistic regression models to measure the cross-sectional association of self-reported social/emotional support and life satisfaction with smoking/vaping status. Compared to never users, dual users and exclusive smokers were more likely to have low life satisfaction, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.770 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.135, 2.760) and an aOR = 1.452 (95% CI: 1.121, 1.880) respectively, especially for the age group 18–34. Exclusive cigarette smokers were more likely to have low life satisfaction compared to ex-smokers (aOR = 1.416, 95% CI: 1.095, 1.831). Exclusive cigarette smokers were more likely to have low social/emotional support (aOR = 1.193, 95% CI: 1.030, 1.381) than never users, especially those aged 65 and above. In addition, exclusive cigarette smokers were more likely to have low social/emotional support than ex-smokers, with an aOR = 1.279 (95% CI: 1.097, 1.492), which is more pronounced among the age group 18–34, as well as 65 and above. Our results suggest that life satisfaction and social/emotional support may play important roles in smoking and vaping, which should be incorporated into behavioral interventions to reduce tobacco use.

Suggested Citation

  • Zidian Xie & Francisco Cartujano-Barrera & Paula Cupertino & Dongmei Li, 2022. "Cross-Sectional Associations of Self-Reported Social/Emotional Support and Life Satisfaction with Smoking and Vaping Status in Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-10, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:17:p:10722-:d:900010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/10722/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/10722/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Floor A. van den Brand & Puck Nagtzaam & Gera E. Nagelhout & Bjorn Winkens & Constant P. van Schayck, 2019. "The Association of Peer Smoking Behavior and Social Support with Quit Success in Employees Who Participated in a Smoking Cessation Intervention at the Workplace," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-12, August.
    2. Shayna Fae Bernstein & David Rehkopf & Shripad Tuljapurkar & Carol C Horvitz, 2018. "Poverty dynamics, poverty thresholds and mortality: An age-stage Markovian model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Celia Lo & Tyrone Cheng & Gaynell Simpson, 2016. "Marital status and work-related health limitation: a longitudinal study of young adult and middle-aged Americans," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 61(1), pages 91-100, January.
    4. David G. Blanchflower, 2021. "Is happiness U-shaped everywhere? Age and subjective well-being in 145 countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 575-624, April.
    5. Anna Maccagnan & Tim Taylor & Mathew P. White, 2020. "Valuing the Relationship Between Drug and Alcohol Use and Life Satisfaction: Findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 877-898, March.
    6. Nkiruka C. Atuegwu & Cheryl Oncken & Reinhard C. Laubenbacher & Mario F. Perez & Eric M. Mortensen, 2020. "Factors Associated with E-Cigarette Use in U.S. Young Adult Never Smokers of Conventional Cigarettes: A Machine Learning Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-16, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abhijit Banerjee & Esther Duflo & Erin Grela & Madeline McKelway & Frank Schilbach & Garima Sharma & Girija Vaidyanathan, 2022. "Depression and Loneliness Among the Elderly Poor," NBER Working Papers 30330, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. David G. Blanchflower & Alex Bryson, 2024. "Wellbeing Rankings," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 171(2), pages 513-565, January.
    3. Biermann, Philipp & Bitzer, Jürgen & Gören, Erkan, 2022. "The relationship between age and subjective well-being: Estimating within and between effects simultaneously," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    4. Hudomiet, Péter & Hurd, Michael D. & Rohwedder, Susann, 2021. "The age profile of life satisfaction after age 65 in the U.S," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 431-442.
    5. Leonardo Becchetti & Massimo Cermelli & Dalila Rosa, 2024. "Three times more than money: generativity, relational goods and life satisfaction," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 71(4), pages 753-784, December.
    6. Baktash, Mehrzad B. & Heywood, John S. & Jirjahn, Uwe, 2022. "Worker stress and performance pay: German survey evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 276-291.
    7. Georgellis, Yannis & Clark, Andrew E. & Apergis, Emmanuel & Robinson, Catherine, 2022. "Occupational status and life satisfaction in the UK: The miserable middle?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 509-527.
    8. Sean F Altekruse & Candace M Cosgrove & William C Altekruse & Richard A Jenkins & Carlos Blanco, 2020. "Socioeconomic risk factors for fatal opioid overdoses in the United States: Findings from the Mortality Disparities in American Communities Study (MDAC)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Junji Kageyama & Kazuma Sato, 2021. "Explaining the U-shaped life satisfaction: dissatisfaction as a driver of behavior," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 179-202, July.
    10. Qiuyue Zhang & Yi Wang & Yili Lin & Yu Cao & Shaoxu Qu, 2024. "From Handouts to Empowerment: Impacts of Policy Subsidies and Employment Support on the Well-Being of Disabled Veterans," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 1-25, October.
    11. Coen van de Kraats & Titus Galama & Maarten Lindeboom, 2022. "Why life gets better after age 50, for some: mental well-being and the social norm of work," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-081/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Li-Jun Ji & Faizan Imtiaz & Yanjie Su & Zhiyong Zhang & Alexa C. Bowie & Baorui Chang, 2022. "Culture, Aging, Self-Continuity, and Life Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 3843-3864, December.
    13. Giulia Bettin & Claudia Pigini & Alberto Zazzaro, 2020. "Financial inclusion and poverty transitions: an empirical analysis for Italy," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 164, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    14. David G. Blanchflower & Alex Bryson, 2024. "The female happiness paradox," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(1), pages 1-27, March.
    15. Blanchflower, David G. & Piper, Alan, 2021. "The well-being age U-shape effect in Germany is not flat," GLO Discussion Paper Series 921, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    16. David N. F. Bell & David G. Blanchflower, 2021. "The U‐shape of happiness in Scotland," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 68(4), pages 407-433, September.
    17. Daniel J. Benjamin & Kristen Cooper & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball, 2023. "From Happiness Data to Economic Conclusions," NBER Working Papers 31727, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Victoria Ateca-Amestoy & Anna Villarroya & Andreas Joh. Wiesand, 2021. "Heritage Engagement and Subjective Well-Being in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-16, August.
    19. Jürgen Bitzer & Erkan Gören & Heinz Welsch, 2024. "How the wellbeing function varies with age: the importance of income, health and social relations over the lifecycle," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(363), pages 809-836, July.
    20. Christoph K. Becker & Stefan T. Trautmann, 2022. "Does Happiness Increase in Old Age? Longitudinal Evidence from 20 European Countries," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 3625-3654, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:17:p:10722-:d:900010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.