Lee Joseph G L, Purcell Christopher J, Chaney Beth H
Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Mail Stop 529, 1000 E. 5th St., Greenville, NC 27858, USA.
Department of Leadership, Policy, and Organizations, Peabody School of Education, Vanderbilt University, PMB #414, 230 Appleton Place, Nashville, TN 37203, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Aug 20;14(8):938. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14080938.
The objective of this study was to examine how different ways of describing a hypothetical tobacco-free campus policy would impact college students' perceived level of support from the college. In the spring of 2016, we randomized 1885 undergraduate students in a required course to three message conditions in an online survey: control (no message), wellness (emphasizing promoting health and quitting support), and punitive (emphasizing consequences for violating the policy). The dependent variable was perceived organizational support. We selected items previously shown to be relevant for college students (alpha = 0.92 in our data). Given significant non-normality, we used non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests with pairwise comparisons to examine differences in perceived organizational support across the three conditions. We examined results by smoking status and if the participant correctly reported the message they received. We found no significant difference in perceived organizational support among students exposed to different tobacco-free campus policy announcements ( = 0.75). We also found no significant difference among smokers ( = 0.66). However, among smokers who correctly reported the message they received, we found significantly lower perceived university support ( = 0.01). Messages about tobacco-free campus policies should focus on the role of policy in supporting a healthy environment instead of punitive enforcement. Campus administrators should use caution when using message frames focusing on consequences of violating newly adopted policies.
本研究的目的是探讨描述一项假设的无烟校园政策的不同方式将如何影响大学生对学校支持程度的感知。2016年春季,我们在一门必修课中将1885名本科生随机分配到在线调查的三种信息条件下:对照组(无信息)、健康组(强调促进健康和戒烟支持)和惩罚组(强调违反政策的后果)。因变量是感知到的组织支持。我们选择了先前显示与大学生相关的项目(在我们的数据中,α = 0.92)。鉴于显著的非正态性,我们使用非参数Kruskal-Wallis检验及两两比较来检验三种条件下感知到的组织支持的差异。我们按吸烟状况以及参与者是否正确报告他们收到的信息来分析结果。我们发现,接触不同无烟校园政策公告的学生在感知到的组织支持方面没有显著差异( = 0.75)。我们还发现吸烟者之间也没有显著差异( = 0.66)。然而,在正确报告所收到信息的吸烟者中,我们发现他们感知到的学校支持显著较低( = 0.01)。关于无烟校园政策的信息应侧重于政策在支持健康环境方面的作用,而不是惩罚性执行。校园管理人员在使用侧重于违反新通过政策后果的信息框架时应谨慎行事。