Comparing the Experience of Regret and Its Predictors Among Smokers in Four Asian Countries: Findings From the ITC Surveys in Thailand, South Korea, Malaysia, and China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Nearly all smokers in high-income Western countries report that they regret smoking (Fong, G. T., Hammond, D., Laux, F. L., Zanna, M. P., Cummings, M. K., Borland, R., & Ross, H. [2004]. The near-universal experience of regret among smokers in four countries: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey. Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 6, S341-S351. doi:10.1080/14622200412331320743), but no research to date has examined the prevalence of regret among smokers in non-Western, low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Data were from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Surveys of smokers in 4 Asian countries (China, Malaysia, South Korea, and Thailand); N = 9,738. Regret was measured with the statement: "If you had to do it over again, you would not have started smoking." RESULTS: Prevalence of regret in 3 countries (South Korea = 87%, Malaysia = 77%, and China = 74%) was lower than that found by Fong et al. in the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom (89%-90%); but was higher in Thailand (93%). These significant country differences in regret corresponded with differences in tobacco control and norms regarding smoking. The predictors of regret in the Asian countries were very similar to those in the 4 Western countries: Regret was more likely to be experienced by smokers who smoked fewer cigarettes per day, perceived greater benefits of quitting and higher financial costs of smoking, had more prior quit attempts, worried that smoking would damage their health, and felt that their loved ones and society disapproved of smoking. Regret was also positively associated with intentions to quit (r = 0.23, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Across the Asian countries and high-income Western countries, the prevalence of regret varies, but the factors predicting regret are quite consistent. Regret may be an important indicator of tobacco control and is related to factors associated with future quitting.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".