Education and Smoking: Confounding or Effect Modification by Phenotypic Personality Traits?
- 180 Downloads
Little is known about whether educational gradients in smoking patterns can be explained by financial measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and/or personality traits.
To assess whether the relationship of education to (1) never smoking and (2) having quit smoking would be confounded by financial measures of SES or by personality; whether lower Neuroticism and higher Conscientiousness would be associated with having abstained from or quit smoking; and whether education effects were modified by personality.
Using data from the Midlife Development in the US National Survey, 2,429 individuals were classified as current (n = 695), former (n = 999), or never (n = 735) smokers. Multinomial logistic regressions examined study questions.
Greater education was strongly associated with both never and former smoking, with no confounding by financial status and personality. Never smoking was associated with lower Openness and higher Conscientiousness, while have quit was associated with higher Neuroticism. Education interacted additively with Conscientiousness to increase and with Openness to decrease the probability of never smoking.
Education and personality should be considered unconfounded smoking risks in epidemiologic and clinical studies. Educational associations with smoking may vary by personality dispositions, and prevention and intervention programs should consider both sets of factors.
KeywordsSocioeconomic status Smoking Personality traits Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) Social epidemiology
The authors wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier versions of this paper.
Preparation of this manuscript was supported by United States Public Health Grant T32 MH073452, to Jeffrey Lyness and Paul Duberstein, and K08AG031328 to Ben Chapman.
- 1.World Health Organization. The world health report 2002: Reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002.Google Scholar
- 17.Institute of Medicine. Genes, behavior, and the social environment: Moving beyond the nature/nurture debate. In: Hernandez LM, Blazer DG, eds. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006Google Scholar
- 18.Black DS, Townsend P, Davidson N. Inequalities in health: The black report. Harmondsworth: Penguin; 1988.Google Scholar
- 19.Blane D, Bartley M, Davey Smith G. Making sense of socio-economic health inequalities. In: Field DTS, ed. Sociological perspectives on health, illness, and health care. Bodmin, Cornwall: Blackwell Science; 1998:79-96.Google Scholar
- 22.Borghans L, Duckworth AL, Heckman JJ, ter Weel B. The economics and psychology of personality traits. NBER;Working Paper No. 13810Google Scholar
- 29.Brim OG, Ryff CD, Kessler RC. The MIDUS National Survey: An overview. In: Brim OG, Ryff CD, Kesller RC, eds. How healthy are we? A national study of well being at midlife. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 2004:1-34.Google Scholar
- 30.Lachman ME, Weaver SL (1997) The Midlife Development Inventory (MIDI) personality scales: Scale construction and scoring. Brandeis University Psychology Department MS 062Google Scholar
- 33.Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate—a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Series B Methodol. 1995;57(1):289-300.Google Scholar
- 35.Rothman KJ. Epidemiology: An introduction. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002.Google Scholar
- 51.Wikler D. Who should be blamed for being sick? Health Ed Q. 1987;14(1):11-25.Google Scholar