Advertisement

Secular Versus Religious Norms Against Smoking: Which Is More Important as a Driver of Quitting Behaviour Among Muslim Malaysian and Buddhist Thai Smokers?

  • Hua-Hie Yong
  • Steven Savvas
  • Ron Borland
  • James Thrasher
  • Buppha Sirirassamee
  • Maizurah Omar
Article

Abstract

Background

This paper prospectively examined two kinds of social normative beliefs about smoking, secular versus religious norms.

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to determine the relative importance of these beliefs in influencing quitting behaviour among Muslim Malaysian and Buddhist Thai smokers.

Methods

Data come from 2,166 Muslim Malaysian and 2,463 Buddhist Thai adult smokers who participated in the first three waves of the International Tobacco Control Southeast Asia project. Respondents were followed up about 18 months later with replenishment. Respondents were asked at baseline about whether their society disapproved of smoking and whether their religion discouraged smoking, and those recontacted at follow-up were asked about their quitting activity.

Results

Majority of both religious groups perceived that their religion discouraged smoking (78% Muslim Malaysians and 86% Buddhist Thais) but considerably more Buddhist Thais than Muslim Malaysians perceived that their society disapproved of smoking (80% versus 25%). Among Muslim Malaysians, religious, but not societal, norms had an independent effect on quit attempts. By contrast, among the Buddhist Thais, while both normative beliefs had an independent positive effect on quit attempts, the effect was greater for societal norms. The two kinds of normative beliefs, however, were unrelated to quit success among those who tried.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that religious norms about smoking may play a greater role than secular norms in driving behaviour change in an environment, like Malaysia where tobacco control has been relatively weak until more recently, but, in the context of a strong tobacco control environment like Thailand, secular norms about smoking become the dominant force.

Keywords

Secular norms Religious norms Smoking Quitting Muslims Malaysia Buddhists Thailand 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research reported in this paper was supported by grants P50 CA111236 and R01 CA100362 (Roswell Park Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center) from the US National Cancer Institute, Canadian Institutes for Health Research (57897 and 79551), Thai Health Promotion Foundation and the Malaysian Ministry of Health. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of the other members of the ITC-SEA project team.

References

  1. 1.
    Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour. In: Kuhl J, Beckman J, editors. Action-control: from cognition to behaviour. Heidelberg: Springer; 1985. p. 11–39.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fekadu Z, Kraft P. Expanding the theory of planned behaviour: the role of social norms and group identification. J Health Psychol. 2002;7:33–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behaviour: an introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fishbein M, Yzer M. Using theory to design effective health behaviour interventions. Commun Theor. 2003;13:164–83.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fishbein M. The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care. 2000;12:273–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Armitage C, Conner M. Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol. 2001;40:471–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Conner M, Armitage C. Extending the theory of planned behaviour: a review and avenues for future research. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1998;28:1429–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cialdini R, Kallgren C, Reno R. A focus theory of normative conduct. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1991;24:201–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wiium N, Torsheim T, Wold B. Normative processes and adolescents’ smoking behaviour in Norway: a multilevel analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62:1810–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van den Putte B, Yzer M, Brunsting S. Social influences on smoking cessation: a comparison of the effect of six social influence variables. Prev Med. 2005;41:186–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Albers A, Siegel M, Cheng D, Biener L, Rigotti N. Effect of smoking regulations in local restaurants on smokers’ anti-smoking attitudes and quitting behaviours. Tob Control. 2007;16:101–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Alamar B, Glantz SA. Effect of increased social unacceptability of cigarette smoking on reduction in cigarette consumption. Health Policy Ethics. 2006;96:1359–63.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gilpin E, Lee L, Pierce J. Changes in population attitudes about where smoking should not be allowed: California versus the rest of the USA. Tob Control. 2004;13:38–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hosking W, Borland R, Yong H, Fong G, Zanna M, Laux F, et al. The effects of smoking norms and attitudes on quitting intentions in Malaysia, Thailand, and four Western nations: a cross-cultural comparison. Psychol Health. 2009;24(1):95–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Swaddiwudhipong W, Chaovakiratipong C, Nguntra P, Khumklam P, Silarug N. A Thai monk: an agent for smoking reduction in a rural population. Int J Epidemiol. 1993;22:660–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    World Health Organization. International workshop on Buddhism and tobacco control.2002 07/02/11. Available from: http://www.who.int/tobacco/national_capacity/religion/en.
  17. 17.
    Yong H, Hamann S, Borland R, Fong G, Awang R, Omar M, et al. Adult smokers’ perception of the role of religion and religious leadership on smoking and association with quitting: a comparison between Thai Buddhists and Malaysian Muslims. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69:1025–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bock E, Beeghley L, Mixon A. Religion, socioeconomic status, and sexual morality: an application of reference group theory. Sociol Quart. 1983;24:545–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Merton R, Rossi A. In: Merton R, editor. Contributions to the theory of reference group behaviour. New York: Free Press; 1968.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Terry D, Hogg M. Group norms and the attitude-behaviour relationship: a role for group identification. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1996;8:776–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thompson M, Fong G, Hammond D, Boudreau C, Driezen P, Hyland A. Methods of the international tobacco control four-country survey. Tob Control. 2006;15 Suppl 3:iii12–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ranney L, Melvin C, Lux L, McClain E, Lohr K. Systematic review: smoking cessation intervention strategies for adults and adults in special populations. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:845–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Behavioral Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hua-Hie Yong
    • 1
  • Steven Savvas
    • 2
  • Ron Borland
    • 1
  • James Thrasher
    • 3
  • Buppha Sirirassamee
    • 4
  • Maizurah Omar
    • 5
  1. 1.The Cancer Council VictoriaCarltonAustralia
  2. 2.National Ageing Research InstituteParkvilleAustralia
  3. 3.University of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  4. 4.Institute for Population and Social ResearchMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  5. 5.National Poison CentreUniversiti Sains MalaysiaPenangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations