Addiction and Other Reasons Adolescent Smokers Give to Justify Smoking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this paper is to examine youth addiction and other justifications for adolescent smoking, and how they affect the level of consumption. METHODS: Data from the Spanish 'State Survey on Drug Use among High School Students' aged between 14 and 18 years old were used in this paper. To account for the nature of the cigarette consumption data, several count data models were estimated in order to select the one that best fits adolescent smoking consumption. RESULTS: Most adolescent smokers smoke because it relaxes them, and about a quarter of them recognize that they are addicted. Moreover, the latter group smoke 44% more cigarettes than the rest (IRR = 1.444), revealing the strong addictive nature of tobacco, even at early ages. Moreover, parents' smoking increases the probability of smoking and has an impact on the level of consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The implications of these findings offer insight for parents, researchers, educators, and cessation interventionists, as awareness of self-reported and other predictors held by smoking youth creates a vantage point to facilitate changes in smoking behavior.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".