In the present day in which we live, the harmful effects of tobacco consumption have been witnessed by nearly everyone in our country. It is indisputable that within our society, cigarette smoking has become almost taboo, in a sense. Smoking has been banned in many restaurants, malls, corporate buildings, and some colleges have even banned smoking on campus grounds. Whether or not you agree with these laws, it is evident to see that our society has had enough of this destructive and dangerous addiction. Although tobacco companies have been scrutinized amidst a great amount of controversy involving legal disputes, they continue to flourish in profit as smokers pay the bill. It is clear to comprehend that the addiction to this drug poses a disguise to the user, making them incapable of justifying what is right, and what is wrong.
I chose to introduce healthy influence on a smoker because I feel
the only way to beat this addiction is to exploit it's harmful
effects to the smoker through the use of factual and pro-health
information. This information, however, must be persuasively implemented
in such a way that the smoker may uncover the blindfold that nicotine
often places upon them, to enable the addict to think rationally
about the issue, on a central processing level. Making the smoker
aware of his or her addiction is certainly forward progress in
the direction of a healthy lifestyle. The focus of my study targeted
this forward progress, and possible cessation for the subject
being influenced. I used various persuasion techniques in my studies
to help justify my arguments to the target, and to also help influence
the smoker to the benefits of a nonsmoking lifestyle. Furthermore,
the persuasive content was subtle and meaningful in the duration
of time that healthy influence was carried out.
As time persists, the dangers of cigarette smoking have become
parallel to epidemic standards. The American Lung Association
(1995), presumes that over 410,000 deaths are directly linked
to smoking each year. The statistic for these deaths surpasses
all other addictive drugs combined (Henningfield & Keenan,
1993). Although heroin and morphine are perceived as more dangerous
than nicotine, it is apparent that addiction to nicotine, has
become as widespread as the plague. The irony involved here, however,
is that tobacco use is the number one preventable cause of death
in the United States. Therefore, there is a cure to this epidemic.
However, this cure is many times neglected until substantial damage
has occurred both physically and mentally to the addict.
The victims of nicotine frequently get an early start in the addiction process. Studies have concluded that at least 3000 adolescents take up cigarettes each day (Guba & McDonald, 1993). This early start gives nicotine the opportunity to implement the elusive and tantalizing mindframe that most would call an addiction. Nicotine has built an empire of followers, capturing them one at a time, when they are defenseless and uninstructed of the danger that is involved with tobacco consumption.
The attack nicotine delivers is powerful and shrewd. Because nicotine
is a tiny water soluble, lipid molecule, it is absorbed expeditiously
by the skin, nose, and lining of the mouth (Henningfield & Keenan, 1993). By inhaling
nicotine through tobacco smoke, the individual experiences rapid
physical and mental changes. This process takes a mere 7 seconds
to experience, and is almost twice as quick as injection of heroin
to a main artery or vain (ALA, 1995). Since the physical and mind
altering effects are virtually undetected by the smoker, they
continue to inhale the smoke repeatedly to fulfill a level of
satisfaction. Usually this level of satisfaction can be achieved
through one cigarette at a time, however, this satisfaction is
not the product of an achievement. It is rather the acquisition
of an addiction.
Unlike the complexity of an addiction to a drug like heroin, which is usually injected with hypodermic needles, the addiction to cigarettes is rather simple on the surface, since it is legal to consume tobacco. Better yet, it's cheap, or is it? For someone buying a pack a day, at $2.00 a pack, the cost for one year is $730. Since smoking usually lasts more than one year, you're talking quite a bit of money in the long run. This is another example of how deceiving the addiction to smoking really is. As with any other addictive drug, when one becomes addicted to nicotine, it is an addiction that may persist for a lifetime, even in times of cessation.
In a study conducted on the effects of smoking cessation, Kalra, Carey, and Greaud Folk (1992), found that ex-smokers found fewer positive aspects from quitting smoking than did current smokers. Although Kalra et. al. stated that the sample of nonsmokers may have overlooked the benefits of not smoking because they had already abstained from smoking, there is an implication here. The study concluded that the perceived losses obtained from cessation were analogous, regardless of smoking status. Implying that, nicotine manipulates the minds of those who have been, or are presently addicted, invading when the addict has forgotten the benefits of the nonsmoking lifestyle, forcing the addict to submit to the craving. The ex-smoker is very vulnerable to this attack and many times is found regressing back to nicotine, .
When parted from this fixation, a relapse to smoking is extremely
common for the addict. Out of twenty million smokers who try to
kick the habit every year, more than 93% relapse within a year (Henningfield and Keenan, 1993).
Of the 7% who successfully do quit for over one year, over 2%
of them crawl back to their remorseless addiction (Henningfield
& Keenan, 1993). It is apparent that once you start smoking,
trying to quit is a life long struggle.
In a study conducted in 1990, over half of the American population of adults admitted that they had tried smoking before (Guba & McDonald, 1993). Over 25% of these people were smokers at the time, and, nearly 50% of them used to be smokers. Although the trend of smoking has declined since the mid 60's among adults, the American population has only grown in that time. There is still a significant population that smokes in this country.
Guba and McDonald (1993), stated that a Canadian Survey reported females under the age of 18, may be the most prevalent smokers today. This may be a direct cause of the pressures for women to be thin. Nicotine helps decrease the appetite, therefore, these girls become thin and learn to control their weight through the dependence of nicotine. Nicotine, once addicted to, leads the body to think that it is natural chemical in the internal physical cycle, therefore, removing it may eventually lead to extreme discomfort for these women, with weight gain often following thereafter.
Nonetheless, smoking has also become popular for both sexes in the United States. Nearly 30% of men, and nearly 23% of women smoke tobacco in the U.S. Men do pose a prevalent portion of the smoking population, however, scientists conclude that by the year 2000, there will be an almost equivalent population of women and men smokers (Guba & McDonald, 1993). A similar prediction was made by the Surgeon General's 1989 Report. The report stated that by the year 2000, women will have surpassed men at 23%, and men will have decreased to 20% of the American population (Guba & McDonald, 1993). Although these predictions show a decrease in the smoking population as a whole, it is evident that a large amount of the population (over 40%), will still be slaves to this addiction.
As far as ethnicity is concerned, Native Americans seem to be far ahead of all other ethnic groups (Guba & McDonald, 1993). The addiction for Native Americans has been accepted and passed down from generation to generation for many years now. Guba and McDonald (1993) also suggest that the population of African- Americans smokers is much higher than that of White Americans. They suggest that this may be the direct cause of educational factors. Since a healthy portion of African Americans are still poverty stricken and residing in lower level societies, education about smoking is usually not obtained as easily as it is for the white population living in higher level communities.
Smoking statistics among the older American citizens seem to be the most frightening of all. There are over 13 million people over the age of 50 that currently smoke tobacco in the United States (ALA, 1994). These older smokers are in a class by themselves. Most of the older smokers have let nicotine become a very significant part of their everyday lives. The American Lung Association (1994) reveals that older smokers favor cigarettes with much higher levels of nicotine, possibly 1.0 mg of nicotine per pack or more. Older smokers usually are very dependent on nicotine and often cannot wait more than a half hour after they wake up to light up a smoke.
Older smokers are usually the hardest to pull away from this addiction,
especially after many years of smoking. A smoker between the age
of 50 and 74 is much less likely to have tried to quit smoking
than a smoker between 21 and 49 (ALA, 1994). With this generation
of older smokers averaging 40 years of smoking, the health consequences
involved are quite disturbing.
Who said cigarettes were cheap? Cigarettes cause the U.S. to lose $65 billion dollars each year for health care and lost productivity costs (ALA, 1994). Not only does it cost our country a ton of money, it costs many people their lives. In 1989, more than one out of every six deaths were due to smoking (Schmidt & Viswesvaran, 1992). In 1994, the American Lung Association (1994) assessed that more than one out of every five deaths were directly related to smoking. Over 1100 people die everyday because of smoking. Smoking is related to 82% of emphysema and chronic bronchitis deaths, 30% of cancer deaths, 21% of heart disease deaths, and 18% of deaths by strokes (ALA, 1994). For smokers over the age of sixty, smoking one pack a day, the ratio of deaths from smoking are one in every three. The National Cancer Institute (1990) stated that 85% of lung cancer deaths can be attributed to smoking cigarettes every single year.
The harmful effects of smoking seem infinite in their nature. As we reach the end of this century, we will witness even more drastic numbers, as there will be many more people who will have smoked more than 40 years. Although filtered cigarettes have been used for several decades now, research has suggested that foreign chemicals found in filters may lead to even more detrimental diseases in the future of many present smokers' lives.
It is obvious to see that these people need assistance in trying
to rid this addiction. Because of the bureaucracy and money involved
in obtaining professional help, an effective alternative measure
can be taken. This meaure, of course, is becoming a healthy influence
upon the smoker.
Although the statistics seem overwhelming, introducing healthy influence to a smoker is certainly a positive step in trying to rid this powerful addiction. Many smokers ignore the facts or are simply unaware of them, surprisingly. More importantly, many addicts do not have the time nor money to spend on seeking professional support. Nicotine, however, may be stopped if the facts are exploited to the addict through healthy influence.
Nevertheless, while proposing healthy influence may seem to be
a great idea, one must not set very high expectations in the process.
The persuader must set feasible standards to work with, and, should
not be distraught by failure. Expecting an addict to quit is absurd,
expecting them to consider quitting is however, much more sensible
and should be the focus of the healthy influence.
Trying to persuade smokers can probably be one of the most frustrating
trials a person can experience. The strength of this addiction
is so powerful that even the best persuaders, per say, have tried
and failed. To change this addiction, persuasion must focus on
the smokers will to deliberate the cessation of smoking. If the
smoker is however, content with smoking, persuading them to consider
quitting can be an uphill struggle. Therefore, the primary focus
of persuasion should lie in the beliefs and attitude of the smoker.
Nicotine obtains such a tight grasp of the smoker's character in the addiction, that often times the victim becomes brainwashed with the belief that he or she is invincible to the dangers. Some smokers know the dangers and continue to smoke because of this brainwashing effect. In order to effectively persuade a smoker, one must first acknowledge the attitude and beliefs they hold.
If the addict believes that smoking is harmless and enjoyable, then persuasion would probably not be an effective strategy. If the addict is aware that smoking is harmful, success of persuasion poses much better odds, this is evident within studies concluded on cognitive dissonance.
There are many smokers who consider the thought of quitting everyday. The attitudes the smokers have can be very unstable, however, because the addiction works to manipulate the mind with every drag the addict takes. Some smokers hate to smoke even while inhaling the cigarette. Helping the smoker to stabilize his or her attitude can be the first steps in evaluating whether or not persuasion will work.
Attitudes are tough to change, but, they are not innate. This
meaning that attitudes are learned through experience. Nicotine
is so clever that, once a person is addicted, remembering how
life was before smoking is virtually impossible. This lack of
remembrance can be compared to selective recall, where a person
only remembers what is significant to them at the present time.
Selective recall is a very complex obstacle to jump, in terms
of persuasion. The persuasion process can be meticulous, and the
rewards rare when dealing with these smokers, because they do
not know how to live without smoking. Nevertheless, there is a
chance to overcome existing attitudes through effective and consistent
persuasion. Persistence is an effective way to try and kill this
addiction. In persisting to transform the attitude of the smoker,
however, you must be ready, willing, and able to cope with high
failure and low success rates in the process.
The target of this healthy influence project was my father. He
is 66 years old and currently retired from working. As his last
child, I felt it was my duty to make forward progress for my father
and myself, to try and fight the horrible addiction we have to
smoking, regardless of the odds.
My father was born in San Lupo, a small town just outside Naples, Italy. He was the only male child in his family, and care taker of the family farm when he was only 10 years old. At the age of 13, my father became addicted to cigarettes.
Europeans favor smoking much more than Americans do, as does my father. Life without cigarettes for him is simply unthinkable. After 53 years of smoking, my father still remains in very good health, with normal cholesterol and blood pressure levels that assure him that everything is working fine. However, in the recent past, the addiction has begun to take a turn in the opposite direction.
Because my father is retired now, finding a place to smoke is no longer a problem. When he was working, there was no smoking permitted upon the premises.
This restriction helped his addiction in a great way. In the past several months, however, my father is finding it hard to keep busy, and to keep from smoking. He increased his tobacco intake in the past year from roughly a half a pack of cigarettes, to a full pack of cigarettes. For a sixty-six year old man, this is a great leap. Just as his smoking has increased, so have his illnesses. A constant cough persists, and his overall health is beginning to take a decline.
After beginning this project, there was no doubt that healthy influence could work for my father. One reason why is that my father is simply repulsed by illness. My father has always thrived on his health, considering he might lose it, is a significant factor for his withdrawal from cigarettes. Another point being that exercise has recently been implemented into his daily schedule. Speaking from personal experience, it is rather obvious that smoking and exercise do not work well with one another. Finally, taking into consideration my father's failure to respect this ambiguous addiction, I saw the opportunity to enlighten him with the facts he has never recognized.
Acknowledging the influence I have upon my father, as he does upon me, became the basis for my decision. My father listens and interprets what I tell him in a very elaborative way. He and I have built a stable relationship that is quite meaningful and exciting. I acknowledged that an addiction of this magnitude may possibly have led us into turmoil, but, the faith I had in our bond was much stronger than any drug.
The strategies that were implemented in my persuasion began with a very indirect approach. When an attitude is formed people strive to maintain it, however, if this attitude is attacked on a basis other than the one it was formed upon, the target attitude is much more vulnerable (Dillard, 1993). Since the target had but one attitude towards smoking, attacking this attitude in a subtle way by picking different aspects of the same attitude could be the only technique to begin with.
The first step was the assessment of the attitude. Since the target displayed cognitive dissonance by knowing that smoking was dangerous and continuing to smoke anyhow, trying to alleviate the amount of dissonance present in the subject could possibly produce a more negative attitude towards smoking. Therefore, by administering peripheral cues that place less of an importance on the health consequences, and more emphasis on the habit itself, a foot-in-the door technique was induced, enabling the target to become vulnerable to the attack, by having him assess the annoyance that cigarette smoking produces. This technique focused on a different dimension of his attitude and created a path for increased persuasion. The approach may also be compared to the Social Judgment Theory, in that I was trying to impel the target to assimilate to the negative aspects of smoking rather than contrasting with them. I was trying to have him relate with me about the annoyance that cigarettes can impose on your daily life.
Social Judgment Theory suggests that to effectively persuade using this theory, you must make the individual assimilate with the position your are trying to advocate rather than making the individual feel detached and not relating to your position (O'Keefe,1990). Besides being bad for you physically, I made the target aware that it can also damage your credentials, as some people look down upon smokers. I wanted the target to acknowledge that there really aren't any benefits from smoking, especially at sixty-six years of age.
In the first two weeks, the telephone became the grounds for my attack. I used implications that suggested the negative social aspects of smoking, rendering more towards the Social Judgment Theory. Making the target aware of how obnoxious the addiction is, and has been for a lifetime, promoted a direct opening for central processing, also. Without degrading the character of the target, the use of simple phone calls were implemented to gain the attention of the target to be interested in a nonsmoking lifestyle, and, to help him become defenseless to central processing efforts. I wanted the target to really think about this rationally, to think how much time, money, and anguish this addiction had disguised for 53 years. I felt that by presenting my father with facts that he has neglected to see over the years, I could actually make him think logically about the consequences of smoking, possibly enabling him to become aware of how it has really effected his life.
Morley and Walker (1987) suggest that drawing a distance between an old attitude and an existing attitude on the same concept, provides substantial potential for persuasion. By helping the target compare his current attitude towards smoking with the attitude that was held in the first years of smoking, a distance was placed between the two, increasing the possibility of persuasion. My father may have thought cigarettes were beneficial at one time, but he no longer does. By comparing these two attitudes, I was able to show my father how he really felt towards the addiction at the present time.
On the third week I made the target aware of smoking solutions, such as the patch, as it is the most widely used substitute for smoking cessation (Hughes and Glaser, 1993). Because the target had been smoking for so long, trying to persuade him to go "cold turkey" could cause severe withdrawal symptoms upon success of cessation. Transdermal nicotine can alleviate these side effects, letting the smoker concentrate more on the nonpharmacological elements involved with smoking (Hughes and Glaser, 1993). By bringing home information about transdermal nicotine, my father became aware that there was a safe solution to end this addiction.
While trying to persuade the target, interfering with the negative temperament that could arise from the persuasion was certainly a concern. Persuasion was undetectable, furthermore, it employed a keen awareness upon the individual to enable cognitive thought while implementing all of the decisive recommendations. Studies have proven that smoking cessation must be gradually administered to produce the highest success rates (Hughes and Glaser, 1993). Hence, I understood that this process could take quite a while, therefore my persuasive suggestions were very disguised.
In the final phase of the healthy influence, I began to introduce a few of compliance cues described in CLARCCS Theory. I used liking, comparison, and commitment/consistency, by suggesting to the target that cessation be done as a team effort. I knew because my father liked me, the idea could possibly work. I also knew that by stating that I would be a part of the effort, he would most likely feel obligated by the comparison to be a part of the effort. By choosing a specific date to attempt the cessation process, which we chose to be the Great American Smoke Out, we made a commitment to try to be consistent with our effort.
After making a precise deciscion to face our addiction, my father
and I began a proposal to one another to at the very least, try
to quit. Trying, led to a very interesting result, a result that
would be welcomed into any conversation involving persuasion.
THE INCREDIBLE CHANGE
Although my persuasion focused on gradual cessation, apparently healthy influence worked for my father better than I thought it would. On November 14, 1996, after 53+ years of smoking, my father quit cold turkey, as a result of the Great American Smoke Out deal. I was baffled to find that not only did my father compare himself to me, but the whole concept of a smoke out, actually led him to compare himself to the whole country. He figured if everyone else was doing it, why not do it too. My father was astonished to see all of the media publicity targeted towards smoking cessation, he claimed that in previous years he had never heard of such a thing. It has almost been two weeks since my father had his last cigarette, however, the same is not true of me, sadly, probably because I was too concerned on having my father quit.
IT REALLY WORKED!
After realizing that my father actually quit, I took some time to talk with him and try to decipher why this change came so abruptly, because of my own failure to quit. My father claimed that he was so accustom to all of the external factors associated to smoking (e.g. ashtrays, ashes, filthy air), that he really never paid attention to them. He stated that because I made him relate to these negative external factors, he reevaluated his judgment on these factors. My father stated that he never realized all of the aggravation you have to put up with when you are a smoker. By helping him think on a central level about a nonsmoking lifestyle, my father's "real" attitudes began to appear, he was no longer being persuaded by nicotine, but was being persuaded by what I had proposed. His new attitude was driving his behavior.
I do not believe that his cessation was totally influenced by the persuasion techniques used. However, I certainly feel that they served their purpose. Evidently, my father had never really had his addiction exploited in such a way. It was incredible to see that someone who had been very low watt on the aspect of smoking, could actually reverse to central processing and think rationally about this deviant behavior.
Although I was, and still am, concerned with this abrupt cessation, my father is taking it very leisurously. He has devised plans and activities to take the place of his smoking habits, preferably activities that oppose a smoking lifestyle. As far as weight gain is concerned, he developed a strategy of his own, a celery bucket. It may sound a bit awkward, but when the temptation to eat arises, this healthy snack comes in very handy.
I am certainly very proud of my father for finally achieving a
goal he should have set years ago. As for myself, I am glad my
strategies played a big role in this healthy influence project,
however, I wish the same strategies would have worked for me because
I was supposed to be the healthy influence. In the end, it is
now my father who is a healthy influence on me.
If I were to do this project in the future, because persuasion worked, I would not make any significant changes in the design. Although I feel that I was lucky to obtain some external assistance in this project, such as the Great American Smoke Out event, I feel that without my healthy influence the target would have never been persuaded effectively. Because of my desire to unleash awareness upon the individual, he eventually became forced to become persuaded and to centrally process, moreover, processing in this way made the target deliberate with himself until producing a solid and stable attitude. Once this attitude went into effect, the behavior that followed was equally consistent.
The only thing I would change in this design would be the aspect
of only one person being a healthy influence. There was no one
else involved other then me and my father in this project. I feel
that if this healthy influence was introduced with a group or
team effort to persuade, the results could possibly work on a
larger scale.
REACHING THE PUBLIC
Although associations such as the American Lung and Cancer Societies offer information on the cessation of smoking, how many smokers do you think visit these places very often? Probably very few, to say the least because they work by having the smoker have to go and get information on their own. If this information is force fed to the individual in a persuasive manner, the ability to persuade these people to abstain from cigarettes may increase. It is obvious that to make the smoker aware, healthy influence can be an excellent way to get the message across, even if the outcome is failure. A nationwide healthy influence design such as this one, in my opinion, has already been made, it can be summed up in the whole idea of the Great American Smoke Out.
For this design to work on a larger scale, with more targets, it must impose the same style of indirect persuasive messages. By making the smoker capable to understand other harmful effects of smoking besides the loss of health, they feel as if they have been taken advantage of by this habit, a thought rarely distinguished by the smoker. If you attack the smoker on issues he or she has taken for granted, they will eventually realize how beneficial it would be to reconsider the smoking lifestyle.
Nevertheless, it would be hard to predict if it could actually work on so many people. Because of the immensity of this addiction, many groups have tried and failed, over and over,even the Great American Smoke Out has a high failure rate. Professionals have tried to make people quit smoking with more techniques than you can imagine. In my opinion an addiction of this magnitude is only stopped if the smoker firmly believes in the attitude that he or she possesses. Many times these opinions lack equilibrium and therefore keep the individual from making reasonable judgment. If the smoker believes in smoking then he or she will most likely accept and continue the addiction. If a smoker wants to quit, however, he or she will be more vulnerable to eventually be persuaded to become part of the nonsmoking world, and to be a product of healthy influence.
Back to Healthy Influence Page
Used with author's permission for the Comm 221 course.