‘Every space is claimed’: smokers’ experiences of tobacco denormalisation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, the strategy of 'denormalising' tobacco use has become one of the cornerstones of the global tobacco control movement. Although tobacco denormalisation policies primarily affect people on the lowest rungs of the social ladder, few qualitative studies have explicitly set out to explore how smokers have experienced and responded to these legislative and social changes in attitudes towards tobacco use. Drawing on a qualitative study of interviews with 25 current and ex-smokers living in Vancouver, Canada, this paper examines the ways they interpret and respond to the new socio-political environment in which they must manage the increasingly problematised practice of tobacco smoking. Overall, while not opposed to smoking restrictions per se, study participants felt that recent legislation, particularly efforts to prohibit smoking in a variety of outdoor settings, was overly restrictive and that all public space had increasingly been 'claimed' by non-smokers. Also apparent from participants' accounts was the high degree of stigma attached to smoking. However, although the 'denormalisation' environment had encouraged several participants to quit smoking, the majority continued to smoke, raising ethical and practical questions about the value of denormalisation strategies as a way of reducing smoking-related mortality and morbidity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it