Jump to:

Council for Tobacco Research

the Psychology of Smoking [Smoking Is Determined by Certain Personality Variables and Personal Needs]

Date: Mar 1958
Length: 9 pages
CTRMN003477-CTRMN003485
Jump To Images
snapshot_ctr CTRMN003477_3485

Abstract

MAR

Fields

Depository Date
25 Sep 1995
Master ID
Ctrmn00000667-6967
Related Documents:
Author
Tirc
Dickinson, J., Harvard Univ
Mcarthur, C., Harvard Univ
Waldron, E., Harvard Univ
Request
118
Type
SCIENTIFIC REPORT
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Box
003
UCSF Legacy ID
hoq30a00

Document Images

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size:

Page 1: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
r .+ + ~ .~ 3 . J. ADn. & Soc..Paychr 56: 267-27~, - f:/: OF SMO THE PSYCHOLOG _- ~ sl~~vkltiJ:`eay,y~is ;:rc.q~+~~v . *1 CNARI.ES ua1RTHhR, £I2.lx aAt.DRO•\, sm ~r.'~fP~~i.~64 J=t •m^ 1,7 ~~d l t' ca 14901A '16btg., 4 ) B.nr+I Dadarslrj'. ~~~ .. 2. : : ` ~ ( . v i a[{: , :~a i {7~ .1 -. .. I i Y 10 '. ..-r.. ,.. cou ne,t er darnptrve data answ•ertrtg prop(V,tjons aboat ilse WWW4 d aay ioota- • -r : .; • .t, : . -.. .. .. ~ stop srooktngl Review-tng tbe spane thts ts very tcmpoary. litenture on smoking and persorulityr .re' Our theory bqias with r ? ..v .. . ~~. \?lo stnokei too much? Who men ea .r11 be 'So~Q",tsa0lti~; amokaT R'bo doesri't smokeT -In any ooe ytai, r= r 1..: :_ .. .•. : answers might be deduced. Tberefore, we have compttkive drmbtsa;'O3e f Qttitd Rbtt~yttis ••. .. ....•c.: . ~. these questions nor good theory frrom .rbicb the rulsiwr habit. >atak{ ~j) *Wo 3y atnWdyirtg tnade a first attempt at ddirxating a psycbol- * shows the cra.ia~ZO~e a*eiiolt et ttt6iftwo ' Ou `';Sr4' ~' types of ttnderbiRg lkimedtt: (1) Iotae mted 7i. ot basic ng r•:-*f`4!y.~, .~ '~( data come from 'Ibe Study of or complex of aee8{..ti~tad (2) aa oiienttting . rrs Adult Ik.•eloPment onoer known ai the Grant structure of babitoal asonsht patterns and _-{:% Study. That study has been described elso-'• associated emotiom] jes:tmatiom.':•Drieata- :~ w•hete (6). Out subjects .rere a panel of 252 tioo TSas to come 1&rsi; if the estpaienoe is . . . ..~ r . - ' iv • ;: . - Th~t studY .ru wr.t+oned by tbt Tob.cco IscJvstn•-_ •r}1e soutre o( tkk s~itlae LiiSesaibed '.:.: ~t, .• t Ite.carch Commitue. It M•u eonducted u rart o( lt.e' '~~ rescarch t.rr -,ratn ot Har+ard i l'ni.mity Hralth by \1'eber (23) u the t'rotestant £thie. It is a ccr,icc -.trorl moralil%•, emphasizing the Devil's sjal t s,: had not begun to smole at all. Stxty-one tlrva ooroltzry of aIatle s•a?oe ~ ttzzt these have. That is about 24 per cent of the group: people hold in tontrast toV.ost vt oontem- ~ •.t ppRr1• t10Ciety.. . log,cil, psycholooinl, anthropological, and work their e5ect." In particular, it is tocicty .`r , sociological techniques. We have been follow- •• t:hat determiaa whether the oen babit .eesas ;; ing these men since by annual questionnaire;•: to be "a tncans of rdieving...faner teasiota,: *,: .~:=. . retesting, and visits. Questions about smoking • or whether such a ~~~,,~t aromes a stto ",""b" llg r~'• '-7 habits a•ere routinely asked in the question-- counteran.-jety." '`: ..• . naires during the 6ftc•en or so years the mea• tronvergent theories of aathrapoiogists, f' have been followed. This very full material 'sociologists, and pq•cboiogizit, tevie.red and '• permitted the study sta9 to make comparisons empirically conffrmed dae.r}ere (c0,13,14,15), between smoking habits and hundreds of all suggest that the tttae oi,tobaooo to molvt • variablcs. Only the findings relevant to psycho- taajor personal seeds ir*Ogttt>0e a stron=`,~'` social theory are reported hcret oountrn.nriety"in tfpw•atdb•;tAikinembers JcJf ~ rt!i~'t of Amenca'{ \~'no Dot-sx'r SvotE?''~~{µc~ r Imm eakMle~ ~t~s» h~dy ~ _ •. rl ~ that this amup to.rat•d i1?=q :.~ striling nurnber of our-subjects did not srnol•ing fran peopie s,ebo,#,taad "b above smoke. \\l,en the men w•ere first studied, as and below them ia the soaal ~ F.~~y u+ca•oy. The1T sorhomores, 103 of them (some 13 per cent) attitude to >taso~g anoa~d;'~sesulaubly, be '. 'c~... .. , .. . . , Narvard alumTU who were {elected during found gTatifying, it may be put fnto the aerv- their sophomore years for lack of %is,ble ice of ne•eds. As Bales (3) says,'St is during abnorTnality. During their sophomore yrars;' the formation of the aoettpakivt dabit that the ,. •• Which fell between 1938 and 1942, they w•crt in9uence of the society and its tatlture oome to - , studied by a great rangc of medical, phy:io- a aitinl focus in the individtaal person and .; ~ +ti.me n4 the other 6nefn . ef Zhe rtuA • ataQ .a . ~ . . ntx•ria11y thnse in relation to mcJieal and phy.icat +ari,t•kx, are re1.,r,eJ In Heath. C. DiQerencn trr •• t...cn :Imntrrs and Xnn•Smoten. in preu. A fr.c itemF atqKar in I..lh pat+cn. as thrr accm rckv-ant. * in the original fxotcstant dugnus, was e%i- t .\ tal.lr. ci,ine data fnr cach of the 6ndinn rr- Jenie that a man had not bCen tlpufhq(td tnrtcJ. hat L.rn drrxiteJ .ith the Ann•rican ikxv• Crace. This ethic w-as, as 3111s (18) tnemarks, a t mcntation tn.titutc. nrJcr Dr+cummt Xn. S•tbl, n•• 'mininc SI.:3 inr !5 mm. roirrn:ilm or SI.:S fnr b Lr >t moralit% • of f,MCluCtrf. who abhOtT(d cotm m- `: ::..1.. :. - in %6ert7 lt, t t6~~llt' aftcr nqx- )_ ng in idleness and aelf-indulgertee. It i{ an tthic that abhors as Sin the vrastiag of ooe'{ sub- stance in unprobtabk tritia. since auch waste C ~~ R ~"~ ~`~ ~~ ~~ ~ tl~ ~~ ;'Y
Page 2: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
s = ri i t e O pfm n pLLfpO{tf Mal Ltftn pfYpitt Vr TQI3 lht0 Og) ;10 Oi U'^'W soon secularized in the form of "ticocldly schooh with Harvard roen 3r :~ asatidsm," as Weber iJlustrata from the odkge In pcitate pt•rpantoq~ diaries of Bea}amin Franklin. Indeed, tbe hig3t-.cbool graduate s•bo ;ues 1~4_4u•t-rL :• ~.•,du' llftiars•ard , _ -7 mrwaa nf l.v e.enlih• deaorndinw fem+ .r1:: ka ..:cvttv wri.wt . ==-tgcT vzi' :c : c:; :. .r2 a. Hatvtrd group we are studying, as Allpott (1) study (14) autaeatcd, "His ta4e `Umlly ;- ~ :.,-~~ ,, ti;. . g,ousdogma ts stAl going on, even araong tbe asotabty" dunrtg !us rasring: ;;^ v.i r.: has shown in his study of religion ta the post- often Is that d stardard w1w 1:~:' tional middle-class values werr generated pcep•icbod boy .rho goes t.o is taore'• These values an uoR• being rrpiaad in our ' likely to kuve been bred on a ble :. :: s9ciety, according to sooologists. They have behavior. Ttadition tKu '-ltim ia K! ~l ~.H..•.. ( 1i~,• become the propetty, though perhaps twt terrrts of "what is done," ao~~n~e:ms of ;..:. ucfusively, of the "Old \fiddle Class." •.,~1 ~~,~ •`tworldly asceticism" as a meR as~1~.. ,7?,-..... ~~ttini 7: ~:: t a. a belong to Riezman's (20) "Innet-Directed" abesd." If a oonccatratioa d troetsrn.4ers group, so soon to be replaced by the Outer= exists in our data, then we taay sreil predict : Directed; to Mt11s• (18) •'d,ecrful robots," that it will focus aawnt otts fabiic-.chool. ; . _.... ao soon to become equally cheerful maas coo: paduates:•''•'.~' ,.. ..,r-•,`;,z suroers. Yet it is these values that have" This is the case. In a strady progrrssion '. w'- . T'- pdt tc: genented.vhat Mead (16) calls "the American ' with uatus, 20 per ccnt of the graduates of ~--'YJS_'W v-: .1! - 'nf "•.._ core culture" and .rhat FJuc]c.hohn (10)~ very e=dusive private schools do taot smoke, .`. :I •:;:rstr, desrnbes as the dominant value profile in 30 per cent of the graduates of fess esdusi.~e -:' .•.•.,r" J '+r i.• Americsn culture and upects to lind focusxd priwte schools, and 40 pet ant d ttre jntdu• ;._ ;" or:.r i: - in the middle class, and which McArthur ates from public schools. 3his pattern is '; y' ' ge s e n u u a e n o wm s .- • ri .: .. .rar co atus ot ti atc The ~ di - L. s d nt It' th tL t tb i t t t k t " h L'K* ''• '•I`- --~r:.• Care•crs- As one study (14) shows, "Ti+e -=raduates w•ho smole say that thty bearned to '"0"" i-?•_~„ Future. Doing-oriented family must produce smol•e in prep school or at the time of prep sons te,ared in the 'achie.•cmeat mores,' school; about three-quarters of the public- •: taught to look foncard to by passing or wr- school graduate smokers say t1~ iearned to passing their fathers' occupatiorul roles.:.: smoke in college. As oae peog eR~ from t=r,:,•, It is the hopes of tbe mother that these soas private boarding to private day$;?ublic day _ t tnust realise in order to kel successful. schools, there is a significant (~13~ine in will have introjected her precepts. It is these the proportion of boys .rhol4i~ smoked rii,l~~- boys who will, after college, be expected to ~ at the time they .rae taken iato:~os study.' ast;tn, ka.•e the family and 'make their own wzy.' " However, there is a status didetro0t pperatinR Children tcared in this trad.ition arr still (15) together with this dormitory fac6Of .+•e hold ' - .ceancd and trained early, encouraged to be boarding corutaat, there rernait$x1asnificant d rl'n nd dea inded ( 01 difi aro + a n•m ) ':' . • b' h h b .F-.... .. g. . . ar am +twus, erena et.eeen l e s.xdusrve - ' I know that Andy has a ckan mind," wrote and the less exdusi.~e schoots. ~pattern one father of a nonsmoket, "he does not smoke, tasy well have been generated htl}ie I,amilies be does not loiter on the street with gangs, he who elect to and are able to aemd their sons T+' has been brought up to look for the fine things to these schools, rather thaaa in the schools in life and only by hard work and peru.•erance themselves. Besides, the tacit ether half of can they be achieved and enjoyed." the dormitory argument is that itiqh schools I 1456 a - l 268 CItmSS h1cARTitGR, Ec.ttN WAIDRON, A\•D JOtrY DICI;MSnN- : V7~ Cal.inistic debate, tobacoo.+as settled upon as In the study, we ha.e found (13) that a`' . ' a good th~ing_ because the rro.cing of it produced simple empirical tool for bri.ttf% out middle Iiti.. „r`^,A t. '.:a ~'s. ttpptr t3aft C0a trasta is to t1p~}CTIar Yard C1t: ' F^ • 1 f - t 'i ' e' ~ t T- f ~i[ i~ _n.i d " ' d 1 (13, 14) has empirially shown to be focussed signibant at the .01 level. Part d the aplaru=':: - in the lower middle. It still gives rise in the tion of this fact may be that thepKep•school American middle class to a tx~• gcnentioti boys learned to smoke in their dormitories iastilled with the "achievement mores" whose (rules notR•ithstanding) while the kigh-school opentan in a contemporary urban uttiag is graduate did aot ecperience docmitory life i:. . described by DIcClelland (13). Children rrared' with its peer-orientition until ooming to i+' n. in this tradition are mobile, follo.•ing .chat college. Some facts fit this aotion. In retrospect, -%••' .•S:m•j- • hliller and Form (17) describe as Ambitious about three-qusrters of the pcivate-school CT 4
Page 3: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
, , I I TaE PsYalot.ocY o. S>sou..c 20 L. ics .:,., do not orient their pupils toward smoking. market surroeya in Engl.ind not only confifms This cannot be said. Hollinrshead (8) tclls this di6erence fn rate of srool•ing but alao us that in "Elmtown" high school, "practicallY' documettu in many aayi the fact that aon-` all boys (91 per cent) smoke, LrrapectisY of smoking la widely peroeived as a mark of age or (social) dasLe' Our public-school "middkdacs mpectsbility." norumoten are theref6re somehow ttpecisL` Our data cxrtainly svggat that sraokiag is It rruy be supposed that their rearing for popularly defined as faintly disrcputibk or, mobility, in terms of the old ethic desrn'bed at kast, one of the small tices. '.\onernokers earlier, may have created ' a considerable are signi6cantly often (.01) nondrinkers; "strong eounterantiety" to undermine the indeed, it seems that. as Straus ar3d Baoon (22) orientation from their peer culture to:vard report from 1'ale, drinking precedes smoLing learning to smol•e._s -jn~~M as the student takes up adult foTbla. Our 7 nonsmokers are also significantly often (.01) In Famtr.~n. !nt 5i;ti: • people who do not drink e:offee. La+ and the mora deny lich tchnol ttudents tbe; : ~e.'e t3uy expect some orientation tolrird e tot ac o t ii• d f h d i h • :-' a , eaaura a e ro n c r t to earh e p e t 39o~~~,,,~i~~ to have been uu ht ;an,I,Gng, and akohoL How•evet, tlx te)tJery with ""'"'""b $ these Aata .hich adutta wrround tbe.e arna of beha.ior knda by their rtili.gions. The kind of piety that Weber theT a L(ltclal .-atue wbkb rcems to act u a stimulm describes should spill over into self-denial,• m many .-oune rwrk K ho desi,e to aperience tbe even in the absence of a specibc theological s::pposed thrilt of pteasurr. their aldees deny them. 7be roscri tion. Proscri tion of smolin some- eunspiracy of s+knce .'Mic6 is an auntial part of the p p p $ SanJcstinc riolati,m of the tnores has alrcady uu•rht times does occur. Among Protestant denomina- tbem " easy it is to acoid wtrinions imposed by tions, it is usually those of kss socul standing :a.% and tatrw it thq• arc diumt ahout bo.c, .'bere, (19)-e.g., Fundamentalists-w•ho eonde3un and undce what eircumstanca it is done. Acyuisition .,r tnowkJee of the mnns of tranagrcuin: .pin.t ~oling, Rhik those of morc flshionable sutus akohaL tnl.accn, and t ambtinS uboos .ritbout bdn~ Ep'tscopalians-do not. The lo.cer- cau;ht an,l thc thrill of .;ota7inc thcx ut.ooc tat:e middle-elass focus of nonsmoking auy be thus ,hce for th< most part iw tbe diqo<.•~ overdetermined. At any rate, tce may find oc~er- `' lap among smoking habits, social status, and Presumably any pecr-oriented youngster is piety. "*4.l : '1-, ::, ' likely to smoke. «-hatevcr his social status, as ,- Earlier in the course of the stud~•. Heath part of a kind of defunt claim on adult status. had set up ratings of the de~•outness of the It may be supposed that the tr3orc earnest participants and also of their families. These students in hi •I7 school take adult prohibitions ratings werc based on considerable information :nore scriously and, perhaps, do not al.ca)z fit well with "the clique." Theirs may be a more compliant claim on adulthood. Pcrhaps among the earnest nonsmoking nine per cent of ' ElmtoR•n scniors, there .ns one who applied to Harvard. More went to other colleges and were mobile into white eollar technical and • professional occupations. It is not to be supposed that attendance at anyone university is a potent cause. Census data (3) sho,c a nationwide increase of nonsmokers when professional and technical people are com- pared with other occupational groups: \on- smoline in America is a social elass phenom• . enon. ... . I . It is in England, too. A Hulton survey (7) suggested that nonsmoking was slightly eom• moncr among men of the English middle class while heavy smoking was eomn7oncr amon; En3;lish working•class men. An excellent about theological beliefs, ehurch attendance ar3d atthities, personal use of prayer, etc. (Xo attention.cas paid to \ices. great or small, and hence smoking in itself did not enter this rating.) The boys who did not smol•e when they entered the study had more devout parents (.Qi). 11cy were also more lilely (.01) to nttend church while at Harvard, despite the absencc of am• chapel requirement. Lifelong nonsmoEin; is aswiated e.vn more strongly (.02) with devoutness of parenu. It would seem that the individual lastingly introje•cis his smokin; moralit\ •: Indeed, the nonsmokers are often rated I7ither on det•out- ness than their parents. This introjcctcd piety scems to be more an inJk-idual matter than we expected. In the ' Aarit• F. Ci:•aretec Smotine \totirati.m Studt•. Thir is an un+ut,Iishnt ma+•V*at•h P:m7rett bt• Qe. acIr;h 4ni n Lir:ite.l. t•, rD•,w -e are erateful f•r. a~.:•« tn It U7~' I ~ e. 1457 t t C ~9~'~ ~~`~ !'..~2~~~ •c~~
Page 4: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
I , ...~ :::.. i, ... , .. 270 CnARIF.s h(CARTLtTR, Et-I.E?I WAI.DRON, /tA-D JnrrN ntCCt.\trir/ i---'T'i,"si»a. ~ t ~ and status work quite as expected. It is true '.rfio became scientists, ten txver tcnoke<l . that, as expected, most I'rotestant famtlies and one tried it but stopped. with low incomes w•erc rated high on devout-*: ' In summary, the nonsmoker scems to havc- ' neu and produced s<ons who w•rnr nonsmol:ers:', been oricntal by the mores of a particular `. Presumably, we see here the introjection of American subculture. Ife is often of lower- pietistic standards, at kast in the form of ' micWle-das.s origin and himself upx-ardly mo- ' " tion. Nor did the interaction betwoen pkty V"IwLltc-school boys from bw.ir>cnsne f.m7;" , {, .. Wno Svotcrs HEAV7LY1 '7..ike" to the occupation of Advertixr, non-l; ; smokers responding "D'ulike." Perhaps the •• Whethcr a man smokes or no smns best oonsmoker is so Inner Directed that he doei explained by his social orient:tion. Wbcther not have his "radar" tuned to the fatest fad hc becomea a heavy smoker seems best ex• in mass consumption. He is, perhaps, not yet plained byhispenonal needs. Bala (2) spcaks part of the consumer ethic that is said (18) to of the effectiveneu, once a man has been be appearing now among the middle dass. `'' oriented toward adopting a habit, of •'the ldlii" ibfh wory ascetcsm,n the asence o tco bgical proscription.. ~. The nonsmokers may represcnt suni-vals not only of the protestant ethic and mWdle- class morality but also of the related phenomo non Riesman (20) calls'"Inner Direction." For esampk, in answering the Strong \'ocational Interest Blank, more sophomore nonsmokers (.03) said they preferred "nighu at home" to "nights away from home," and smokers said the opposite. Also, nonsmokers preferred (.02) "belonging to few societies," smokers "belonging to many societies.",Thesc trends . himself be a scientist or engineer. Just what were especially marked among nonsmokers causes underlie this web of correlations is not from public schools, whose earnest individual- ism is thus reaffirmed, but private-school nonsmokers showed some of the same trend. A curious sidelight roay be interpreted variously: more sophomore smokers (.01) say they would prefer "preparing the ad.•crtising for the machine," in the appropriate Strong item, while nonsmokers prefer not to. It is also true (.05) that more smokers responded 1 A related finding, based on Strong-lil•e items in a recent questionnaire, is that smoken respond "Like" •to the occvpation Sales Manager (.01) but'.'Disltlce" to the occupation Scientific Research Worker (.01). This attitude is reHected in carecr choices: the nonsmokers contribute more physical scientists (.01). These facts overlap the status differences already observed; few private-school boys go into science but many go into business. \l'hether the etbos of the physical scientist overdetermines his nonsmoking over and above the eQect of his midqle-clau origins and upward mobility is not clear from our clata. bik. lie shows the "worldly ascrtidsm" that ' hu stemmed from the old 1'rotcstant ethic.. . Often he is pious, perhaps more so than his lurents. It scrms likely that he has nactcd to smul:ing as being one of the "small vicrs" to ahichthefleshisheir.Heis,atanyrate,an, .. Inncr-Directcd fxrson, introjecting the morals " of his youth, perhaps a serious sort, and maybe an introvert. He does not go along with the suggestions for a consumer morality offered by the msss media. He approva scientific rather than business values and may often clear, but existing theory about the ethos of the Old 1`f iddle Class or about the American core culture seems relcvant. The standards this man has introjccted furnish sufficiently "strone counteranxic :y'• to lrccvent his sharing the orientation toward smoking that secros to be common to all the rest of American society both below and rbovc him. degree to which the culture operates to bring about acute needs for adjustment, or inner tensions, in its rfxmbrn. There arc many of these: culturally-produced anxiety, guilt, con- ftict, supprev"l agpession, and sexual ten- sions of various sorts may be taken as aumples." : There is nu duubt that our .rry few rcally heavy smokers• who mcet the aiterion for Ifcavy Smoking now customary in medical research-"twu packs a day for sevcral ycars"-havY more than their fhare of "acute needs for adjuatmcnt." Afost have had marital problems, some rtuitc drnmatir. All arc {;ivcn f 1458 C) 0,3,11 4 6- -) study data, nonsmol•rng ts tbe modal pattern Cettatnly t}te t.ro-mobt7ity and .c;enc,~- ~y for the members of no one religiotu denomini '.w~en combined pull powerfully: of the tw•elve
Page 5: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
.,, arr -.. t ...: _ .,r .1:. . ~:. • a;, ; ~- . .. .. . . 1 i 1 t. I 7ne Psi-cnot.ocY or Suosa.s;c 271 to impulsive acts, some to physical violence,., ttul, OXoeuhtiJy oontrotlcd pcrfornuncc. II if only in the form of volunteering for danger- , eitherAi~berof the ntio e:ceeds 2, one sort ous miuions. Several are hard-driving, tough" or aaotblt~+o[ ttaotional expression has taken competitors. None are usual for our aroup. piace,>•ed the label "coartated" no longer As one observer phrased'it, "they are men a•ho; •-app}iei~'?'• - • . _ • . !ive in overdrh•e1" Their stories are told by,,' Hetipr Heath! • .... >. .:. -i recat!dr<- That the need to smoke hcavily might be produce more (:f1S) coartated dehnition of Heavy Smoking is to incltxle men with lifetime generated by anxiety is, of course, a common - a Of a pack a day, so as to include a sense hypothesis. Our data warns us to view it _~ tnumber of cases.) \\'Fut is more, with caution. We have not been able to corrri ooartated people tend (.01) to increase the late changes in smoking with changes in the amount of their smoking strikingly as the tenseness of a man's life situation, in spite of . years go by. This is not a unirersal trend; the "clinical hunch" of staff inembers that ''taany of our men reach a smoking pleateau this relationship held. Perhaps anxious smol'- early a vacillate between nonsmoking and ing is episodic, so that our yearly question-' moderate t~ing. The coaruted person is naire is too coarse a measure of it. Perhaps`: tnoderate cornmoo aawng that plurality of our people' something is to be learned from the ans.c-trs to whose ssmotiag curve •'cnow•baps," showing a a question about the symptoms of stress that„ positive aoalentioa Tbe appearance of these r,ur participants felt when under prrssure. curves suggests to the eye that they be inter• Half of the smokers said they "smoked more" pneted as showing accelerating habituation. in these circumstances_ The interesting fact, Interestingly, such curves often appear among . though, is that 70 per cent of the heavy smok- people who started smoking kte. (They are ers but only 30 per cent of the light smokers not just "catching up," hoRva; they soon said this. Is smoking, then, a suitable tension surpass the smoking rates of men who started reducer only after it has become a firmly earlier.) • ingrained habit? One thinks of learning This association between accelerating srool•- " theory: a response must be "high in the habit ing rates and coartation is strong enough to hierarchy" before it has the "•availability". override the other trends so far reported. A to reduce tension. Or one may think that this • coartated mirt tends to become a heavy smoker little item is a rather pretty confirmation of _ no matta what his social background or Bales' contention that only after thorough how pious his family-or himself. His orienta- orientation an a compulsive habit be used to tion may show in his being a nonsmoker in satisfy anxious needs. • . •J•. ----•..; college if he came from a nonsmoking type of The most striking correlation between heavy background. Soon after college, he typically smoking and personality is found in our ink- begins to smoke, and the habit accelerates_ One blot test material. In the urh• days of the is resainded of Bales' (2) comment that, "there stuJy, Dr. 1\'clls (24, 25) used an abbreviated . knrschach procedure, allowing one minute for response to each of the standard blots, which he called the Timed Rorschach. The resulting scores are not identical with Rorschach ; scores but seem to be interpretable by similar theory. The Rorschach variable we concen- trated on is the Experience Ralance, defined as the ratio of the number of human movement reslMmses to the weighted sum of the .•arious kinds of color resfwnscs. If both members of this ratio are crlual to or lesc than 2:2, one slxals uf a"coartated" korsxhach, by which 4mc means an emotionally narrow, drily fac- ;Ilcalh, C. DiRcrcncu IKt.ecn 5mnkcrs an.l \on- Smdrrt, in pre.a is reason to believe that if the inner tensions are sttibciently acute, certain individuals will become aompulsively habituated in spite of oppoued ttocial attitudes." . Are our coartated people that badly off? Thae bt tw very detailed Rorscbach theory (9, 21) from which one might interpret their tests. 3'bey do seem to indicate a certain lack or emotional rrsourcn-or unwillingness to use them. Uoderstandably, these men were rated by the psychiatrists (26) as inarticulate, pragmatic, and bland. 71uy.vere not necessar- ily thought to have inner tensions. The•y were, at any rate, quite hard to get to know. Many were rated "Jtut-So" by the psychiatrist; that is, they were compulsive Gddlers, desl•- CT'q: / 1459 C Ea I I N H 0 0 "2t, ~~ ~` :~
Page 6: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
272 CaAr•rs.s 'McAx•tnva, Et tra: \1'awuox, AND JrmH DtcarKsox could undrntandably bccome one. This srry hahit, oncc.cell available, increascs in strcngtb ~ through fussy actititics, of which smoking reasons, been nricnled toxarrl it. In shori, the • 4 t,~ s arrangers, people who allayc•d their trnsions trnsion reducer if they have already, for otha stril•ing (tndirtg about coartation rcmains hard if it servts w•cll tltc pcnon's emotional oconom '4: y to explain. Aor hatro we found the means to.' ;:, ; . v cross-.-alidate it. Since the college Rorschach ~\ tto G~ Sr Ss+ortrtci' ~`- ''~itif~~i pattern predicts lifctirnc smoking, another As evcry habitual smoker knows to his ' long-term study would be netc)cd for idcal sorrow, ability to quit or cut do.rn decrases cross-validation, as smoking increasa. If we divide our lighter Not all hcavy smokeri are coartated, of ' from our hea.icr smokers at an adult lifetime course. Among the nonrnartate<I subjects, average of half a pack a day, the contingency there is a tendcncyfor the assowtionsbctw•een relation between "lighter" and "heavier" vs. amount of smoking and some of the psycho- "an stop" and "can't stop," as showT in pi?iorn:ec-• t;-:- .1 social variables previously discussed to be recent responses to qucstionnairat, gives a 9 • panicuhrly "cteaa." It is as though coartation kss than .001. Evc.n more striking is the march :. Y washes out the array of emotional variations (.01) of the mean numbcrsof dgarettessmokcd "d ~ u:. ^r. .~ . . . variability of the smoking rate. Among these stop smol:ing this figurc (computcd only during, nonco.irtated subjects, it does appear that their smoking years) is 9, for men who don't the psychosocial variables have more to do try to stop it is 18, and for those who cannot with the di8erence between nonsmoking and stop it is 20. The sheer amount of tobacco so moderate smoking (as discussed above) than far eonsumed is by far the largest difference with heavy bctween the group of men who can stop and Io the noncoartated group, moderate smok- the group who, at least so far, cannot. ing and heavy smoking are respectively . The variables that were related to becoming related (.001) to the psychiatrist's rating of a heavy smoker seem also to bcar some rclation Strong Basic Personality and \1'eak Basic to ability to stop. Thus, coartated Rorschachs Personality. One presumes that the latter .:ere frequent among people wbo bccamc hea%y rating is appropriate to the rather uncon- smoken but it is also true that, with hcsvy trolled men who were descn'bed as being among smoking held constant, the presence of a our very heaviest smokers. It is not true that eoartated Rorschach seems related to in• everyone who smoked more than a pacl: a day ability to cut down or stop. Some of our ' ovcr his adult life was rlY integrated. It is scientists have smoked; they could easily p~ true that poorly integrated people were much stop. (T?iey were not heavy smokcrs, of more eommonly found among these heavies eourseJ Perhaps the scientists show that it is .. i h i ' d as eas er to qu en one smokers Again, one sees a pattern suc t whs onmpecrs o not a. v .,.. .. ~.....6 ...~~. ..... v u. . ... . w. .r..... '- - u~~cs w.,u... ,w • ~ .,~_. 1 ; •.. . ^.~; moderate smo •ing ut'•some need or complex Among our hea%ier smokers, the psychiatric ot nceas lor auJus,mcn, raamg to uaczas,vr urrcis oi ooc,au,c, >trong s,t•re s•crionanty, i' habituation. and Practical eharacteriae mostly (~eople who In summary, then, we may hypothcsir•e that can stnp; \1'cak ltasic Personality, Asocial, ' ' .~ • .d starting to smokc is largely brought ahout by. Lck of 1 urpnsc andalucc, Introspcctivc, \ •, betw•e.en persons as well as, perhaps, the per day during adult life. For men who can •. • '~i 1 t b t thai t' t Id 1 d i f'' n n rea e : 1 t d h b one s socu envuo me u c eru rncnt y a ons o eattona , an n u u e rac c once it has started seem to depend in praple who smoking These arc atl small trcnds eannot , , , • good part nn thc pcrsnnal ncrds that thc nc..•ly•, however, and mostly nccur in small numbers of I • - .' establishcd habit is able to gratify. Some people scizc on the habit eonipulsivcly. These t,cople ma%• often I,c emotionally constricted tnics for whom there is grcat Fain in a simltlc "Ili};ht Into bchavior" or they may f,c restlcs.a, active men, for whom smoking is just one mnre (rnl,ulsive activity. It "•uuld also seem that an%inua pcol,lc can scizc nn crnnkim; n% n cases. Yet these rrtatiunihfps seem worth mentinn I,ccausc of their cvngrucnt~e with gcncral thcnry. •11tc .:viahlcc rclatc.l tn smu1,- ing cumpul<ivcly arc mnmly "need" varialrlc.c, us the (talt•c theory wnuld rrquire. A signal fact is this: at,ility lo stop smnkins is dircctly prnlMrrtinnal to the nunihcr of mnnths our sulticct! Mcrc (L.l (rnm their CrR•o :,~; 14G0 INN 00,17-3462
Page 7: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
r I ~ i..-: . `- v... , I Tuc Pavcttot.oGY Or SYOKriG 273 mothers' hrcast! The means march (.OS) as follows: light smukcrf who can stop were w-cAd at 8.0 months; heavy smokcrs who can stop were weaned at 6.8 nwnths; smokers, mostly heavy, who don't try to stop were weancc! at S.0 months; smoken. mostly heavy, who tr-, to stop but cannot were weaned at 4.7 months. We had previously cxploral for a possible relationship between smoking and w-eaning or amount smoked and weaning, but it was not until we explored ability to stop smoking that the relationship to brcastfeeding became so cleancut. Many will wish to eliplain such a finding away. Certainly w•e would not argue that weaning is the cause of smoking. The argu- (cbse to A5) for men who continued to smoke. If one does not think of a psyr}wanalytic e:- (tlarution, tbrn a drive-reduction theory like that of l.evy (11) .ccros to fit the data. :Cot would these Mlas be inooruisteat with the $aks modd: what they sugg>:st is that these "tkeper" t>{cds have httle or no effect on whether ooe smokes but great effect on how tena6ous _ the babit, once adopted, may bcaxna . In summary, the ability to stop smoking is arouly related to the amount of tobacco one h#s consumed. Good mental health, such that one has control over one's habits in general, .eems to be relevant. So, appartntly, is oral gratification received as an Want. This nxnt must proceed through some lalirsM quid. ,"orality" factor may be mediated in many In this wc would agree Kith Linton (12), who ways, but its meaningfulness should not be stresscs that such a crude datum as date of overlooked. weaning or any other data "focussed printan'ly'. ; ~: ~~~nttsrx or zsE Frxntxcs on actual technical operations, without a' ~, correspondingly detailed study of the maternal attitudcs which accompanied these per- formances," is naive. The evcnts of infant training are part of a broader pattern and symptomatic of it. must remember that these i.nflucnccs operate on the child from birth, and continue to operate on him for a long period of time ...." The congruence of infant training, chi.ldhood rearing, and adult values is shnwn by \1cClclland (IS) for two contemporary American subcultures. So, in our data, latc weaning was associatcd with thnsc personality traits that are also related to ahiliiv to stop smoking. \1'c do not have to pnsiulate that infantile frustration and adult cigarctte smoking are unmc(luted cause and cflmt. ' 1'c•t, it is a commonplace that pcoplc* w•ho stop smoking xrk other oral gratifications. To check the reliability of some of these findings, we drew five per cent nndom sam- ples of the cl.ass of 1958 and the class of 1961 from the files of the L'nivenity Health Services. (Ns were 55 and 58.) Every freshman fills in a medical questionruire that contains an item about smoking as well as several items relevant to the variables related to smoking in the Study of Adult Development. Clearly, only the criterion of smoking in college (or near t.he start of college) was avaitable. However, inso- far as these checks bore out our findings, they showed them to be reproducible over a period (1939 to 19S)) of almost twenty years. Both samples showed an lscess (.01) of public-school nonsmokers. In the first sample, the only one for w•hich income data was avail- able, it .cas noted again that income was not as good a predictor of smoking behavior as was All the "r:mall vices" we have corrclatcd with type of preparatory school. t:moking are oral vices: alcohol, coffa, and '. The rclationship betwcen seriousness of pur- tobacco arc taken in through the mouth. So is suy:ar, ..hirh Ifcath show•tt to be related to smoking. More rlircctly to the point: lirouk (4) has experimentally documental the notion that men who give up smoking Fain weight. 7licorctical reasons su{;{tcst that smoking should I,c corrcl.•ucd to Iis)-thoanalytir "oral- ity." Our empirical 4lata suggcsts that it is. Groul,s wiih the ability to stop smoking con- tain a amallrr IK'rccntagc of bottle habics. TliurnLcw kim; Wxs morc commonly rcpnrtcd pose and twnsmoking may be adumbrate by one datum. Within the public-school gr up, there is in both samples an ezcess of non- smokers among thuse boys who characterize as Dcfinitc their pre-collcgc choice Qf carerr. Similarly, in the sample for whiih income data is avail•rb1c, there is a strong tcntlcncy fur the~ boys who are both I'rotatant and poor not td smoke. Thcsc uoukl srcm to be likcly to be the Lads for whum Ilarvard mcant hard work and multility. Or, vicvcivl another -ay, thac wuuld Q ~ 1461 ~` ~~Y ~ ~a~~ ~~ ~"~ C'~ ~ a~~ ~` =~ I
Page 8: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
Zia ` Cl1.tltLr.i f1fCAKTIIUti, ELt.}:N IlVALI/RiIV, .tX•1) JUItY 11/t't IN:r)~ RD :r.~.. . ~~i-.. .. .. . t ..t~..', . ; .' . -r~.• . . ~ :a: . . ... xQ it +... ..-, t . . . . ... : •i I. • noa - , .. .. . • ... ... ;,.,J - I sccm likely to include must of nur mcmbcrs of a/~s Ki IlHtn of nonsmukint; with white-collar, Fut>.lamrntaliil dcnominatitm~':? a'r or mWdlc-claat illcntity was amply rnnfirnuvt, as In l,uth fnshmcn atmplcs, thosc Lwtys who iccll as the delinition of smoking as one of the announce thcir intention of gniny; into cn• mitH/r viccs. 71tc Ilymc futtcrn i..; sug*cstal by gincrring or scicncc tcrxd not to smekc. ` •- ' a natiwwl t<•tmlAc quutional alxwt thcir The csamim; Jthysician rated thcsc fresh= srnnking habits hy the l;. S. Bureau of Census men on "1'crwrulity Intcgr.ttiou." hor botlt (S). kc•sults alrectdy citnl from the University samples, the percentage of smokers marches of \linncsnla are consistcnt with our fm'liny;s. upwards a.s tllc ratings becromc less favorable: 71tc one arr.r in which no emss-vali.fntion For the cornbincvl s.,mPlcs, the pcrccnt.igcs of has been fxxsl>Ic has been that of psycllody- smokcrs arc: for mcn rated "A," 0 per cent; ltamica, cslx•cially the fintlinp,i from the Timed for men rated `•13," 23 Ikr cent; for men r.rtcd korschach. Since thc-c licrsonality inttcrns a rc "C," 37 per ccnt; and for men rated "D," 50 vcry rclcvant to a thcun• of smnkin;,, it is to per cent. There were few A's and few D's. Titc be holxA that something may hr done to check I contingency tnble nudc by combining A and them. ' B ratings in one culumn and combining C and •': L; D ratings in the other and setting these ratings ' ' -,,; ' Srusl.tRv against smoking and nolumoking gives a chi A 1argc part of what we have learned about sqtuie of 3.6, so p is not quite as low as .05. thc correlates of smoking habits may be n>adc . A similar rating by the cxamining physician to fit a conceptual modcl like that of Bales. was a prediction of College Ad justmcnt. The The fact that a man smokes or does not scems percentages again march (though most clearly to be determined by whcthet or no he has for the combined samples) as follows: among been oriented to the habit as a result of his those rated "A," there were 13 per cent social milicu. 11'hcthcr he bceomcs a hcavy smukcrs; among the "Bs," 23 per cent; and smoker or is unable to stop smoking sccros amone both "Cs" and "Ds," there werc 50 per dcterminal by the uscfulncss of the smokin; cent. Combinino A and B and C and D, one habit to his persunal needs. gets a contingency table from which ehi \onsmokerc ,end to be loner-middle class square is 8.0 and p is less than .01. Both thcsc in origin, upwardly mobilc, earnest young men, findings from the physicians' ratings would bred in a work morality that is conducive to seem to parallel the study findings that smok- Inner Direction. 7lteir parcnts anrl they thcm- ing went with psychiatric ratings suggesting selves are of ten pious. '1•hey may pursue scien- poorer mental health. ~ tific or technical careers in many instances. The study finding that smoking and drinking Smokcrs are (in our data) lik•ely to come from are correlated was amply confirmed for the more privileged itackgrounds, often entering class of 'S8 but not so strongly shown in '61. business or humanistic careers, often having In both samples, the tendency for drinking to been raised in a Bcine or lleing-in•Becoming precede smoking was noted. ..,. ., , orientation. lioth subculture and the family as On the whole, then, where we could eross• the mediator of the subculture are important check the study findings, they seemtxl to hold determinants of whether and when the young up well. In this connection, it may be worthh man is oriented to the smoking habit. pointing out that a few of the patterns rcported 11'hcther a smoker becomes a heavy smoker from the Harvard data have bccn found else- seems to dcf,cnd nn whether the habit serves where. An unpublished survey of Yale scnion many of his important needs. Very anxious or shows the public-private differences in smoking agitated men may adopt smoking as a tension habits still pronounced at the end of the reducer, but this use of smoking Ieems to be college career. The priority of drinking to common only %%-hen the habit is already well smoking is noticeable. (This was, of course, established by other circumstances. Emo- first noted at Yale by Straus and Bacon.) The tionally-tonttrictal individuals seem to "l.ake introjection of family standards shows very to" smoking with special eagerne•ss. - cleatly as a source of smoL•ing mores. 11'e have Whether a man can alter his smoking habits already cited notable eorroboratinn from seems to be most "decltly" determined. market research done in F.ngland, where the Efforts to quit or cut dmtn seem to be normal, CrR. I 1462 CrIR ~~~ .~~~~~~-
Page 9: hoq30a00 Log in for more options!
1 0 ! 1 ..' Tne Pa>,'clloiocY or S>+uK1.wG since smoking is quite K'iclcly seen as a "small vice," even by smokers. \C*hNhcr a man can succccd in these e{iorts is first of all a function (,f how much tobacco he has concumcd in his lifetime. Ccrtain personality cariabla are also rc•Ic.ant. In Rencral, il is the needs thal kad to heavy unokinF after thc habit has begun that al.v) militatc against quitting or cutting down. The social variables that were tclatcll to start- in; to smukc play little role in inability to quit. 'lltc cffccts of oral y;ratificatiop at the Lrcatt mat• be relevant to control excessive smuking, once a great deal of tobacco has been consumed. \\'hcrc data were available, the study Gnd- ings were ctoss-valHlatcd against samples from two Harvard classcs, K•ith generally en- cnura);ing results. Some conbrmation of other' finrliny;s has bccn had from unpublished studies at distant faints and from a nationwide study ht the Census Rurcau. Not all that we know about smoking fits into the proferrcd conceptual scheme. However, the schcme outlined makes our major findings han_- tnoether and may serve as a first hy7soth- csis in furthcr exploration of the psychology of smoking habits. RC}•CRC\CF.S 1. Attrott. G. The relitioa of the "t•war eolkx¢ studcnt. J. Pjychel., I'HS, 15. 3-33. 2 It.ut<, k. F. Soeial therap)• for a soeial disnrrkr- enmpul.ive drinking. J. jx. l,rrer, 1945,13, 1 -0l• J. Itelts, k. F. Cultural CiRcrences in rates of akoo- hntism. Qra.t. J. Shrd. .w .4k.bel. l9iG, l, 4b0-i99. 4. IItotts:, 1., & Ktn. A. Changes of }.od)• reiRht in nnrma) men who stop amokinR cirareitts. Srirarq 1957. 125. 1203. S. 11Atwtt, 1V., Snrvtt%, M., & llttl.ca, It. Tnlacco amnlint Ntterns in the United States. 1\'ashinGton: (:. S. Govt. 1 rintint lXrice, 195n. 6. Ilr:ant, C. W. 11'Ia/ ft.#t ua Cambridte, ltaaa : llarvard l:nirer. ('reu, 1945, P. 141. 7. Hos,r., J., & Hnar, H. (Eda_). Patterns of amolint hal.its. Ilrfles rsurrcj N.din .f Iit 0 275 eritit4 auial paturw. London: Ilutton Press, M& ;i. Ilnwnrxnr.w, A. FJ.lwn'a }..t1. Ne. York: u'iky, Iw9. 9. TuKns, g., ir xtu.r, 1). T4 R.eulx4 faA- alfrt. Yonketa.m•lludwm: 11'neld }trr+k, 1N2. 10. )tlcc.tKirrv, }'wsr_ccr_ ik,rninant and sulsti• tuti.c profdcy of cultural arientatinns: their r:xnifKance t"r the ar'Al)sis of ancial stratiGca• tinn. 1'.r. I'«cu, 1910, !b. 37L•393. 11. Lr.3s. n. Tkumb nr f~ncer taxkinc (rorn the rsy• ch7atrk an,;tc. C'k,7d !)r.dpa., 1937. tl. 9'r101. 1:. Lt.-mu, R. C'rlrra ..d as/sl di...itu. SfuinR• 4c41, IU.: Charks C TMmas, 1956. t.t. AicAsntm, C. I'ervxulitks ef rwldic and (x+vate act»ni Lnys. //rrtard .Jrc. kn., 1934, 34 (4). 151r2G2. 1-l. StcArntos, C. t'errmality diRcrcncts hetsreeo middk atul uPrrr cLt.sn !. sha+i.. aa. Piyakr1., 19SS, 60 (2). 247-234. 0. alrtttLL.A>;n. 1).. ktnvLnaAerrn., A., & m. CIIAtl14, R. keliciou. and other .ourtn of Inrcntat attitwks tuw,arJ independtnee training. In 1). T1cCklland (}:d.), Sfrdia is r.eti:aliae. X. Y.: Applctun•Ccntury•Crnlu, 195S.I'p. 3E9- 390. 16. Mr.AU, MAacAatT. J/alr .wd Jnaa)r Xe.. York: )tentw Brwks. 1955. 17. 1fturtt. I). C., i Frotr. \1'. H. Ldrrl.iat axielody. Aew York: Ilarrer, 1951. tb. Mttas, C. W. It hi:r t.!lor. Xew York: Oaford Cniver. Preu. 1931. 19. \ttst•ns, H. R. Tbr r.rial i-rnu ./ dca.ti..• li..wlirn. \eK Ynrl: \lerid'un Bovkf, 1957. 10 RtnrAx, A. Tkr lnedy crord. New Ilas•ea: Yak l:niver. Prcu, 1950. 21. RnsccttArn, H. P,.ri~diaF.at:u ticrn: }-lans Hul.c-r, 1942. 22. SnAr•c, R.. ! BACn., S. Drie4ia ir t.L'rjr. }:e. Ha.•en: 1'ak l'ni% er. Preu, l9SJ. 23. 1l'tsrt, M. Thr Prerrr/ont et4'u. (Tnn.. hy Takott 1'ar.nns) \e. Ynrk: Scril,ners, 1930. 2{ . 11'rLLa, F. Mental factocs in sdjustment to higher edreati.xt. J. tes,rfl. PqrSe1., 1945. 1, s1-56. 23. 11'tlt_a, F. Clinkal rsyeh.xnetrin in higher educa• tton. J. rwr. Av. lka.f II'.wra, 1946, 1. 51-56. X,. %\'tlt.a, F., i• \l'ooo+, W. Outstanding traits: 1n a r.k.ted c(akrc Rrnup, Mith .ome reference to career internts and .ar reconks. Gere). Pjyc6oJ. U.wMr., 1946. 33. 127-249. kecritc.l Gerttmher 27, 1957. Prior pubtiat'an. CTR./ 1463 I ~' ~~ `..~ +~'~ ~ aI - ~` ~~ C 1 0 0 13 4

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size: