CIGARETTE SMOKING OF GRADE-10 ST.

ANDREW STUDENTS THAT AGE 15

TO 18 YEAR OLD

Submitted to Sir Januard A. Romana of the Saint Joseph High School of Laligan Inc.

in Fulfilment of the Requirements in English 10: World Literature, Research Analysis

DILAG, KAREN LEAH PACQUIAO

 Acknowledgement

There are number of people without whom this research might not have been

written and to whom we are greatly indebted;

To our Almighty Father, who has given us wisdom, presence of mind, and virtue of

patience in writing this research paper,

To my subject teacher, Sir Januard A. Romana, for his expert sincere and valuable

encouragement extended to us;

To my sister, who is always there to guide me in making this study thank you so

much.

To my ever understanding parents, who never get tired of inspiring and supporting

me in any way or another and the unconditional they have showed me.
 Dedication

It is my deepest gratitude and warmest affection that I dedicate this research to my

loving family who has been a constant source of inspiration and my greatest support

system. To the teacher who taught me the beauty of literature, and to the students

and other people as well who might find this work interesting.
 Abstract

The present research is an effort to investigate the factors of why students smokes.

Also, comparing them to their parents if they have a history of smokers. The scope

of the study focused on the cigarette smokers of Grade-10 students. In which

among the age of 13 to 18.

With regard to the cigarette smoking of students, some studies reveal that the

smoking can affects the focus and concentration of students not just in classes but

in their own doings as well. According to London, if the pre-frontal cortex’s

development is affected, students might have an impeded ability to make rational

judgments, the reason why they can’t stop themselves from smoking. Smoking may

influence the trajectory of brain development and affect the function of the

prefrontal cortex. However, researchers do not know exactly what in cigarettes

causes less activity in the prefrontal cortex.

Furthermore, studies then states that students who smoke daily could experience

causes cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung diseases, diabetes, and chronic

obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which includes emphysema and chronic

bronchitis. In short, it can damage the heart, blood vessels, and blood cells. Also,

this as well could raise blood pressure and heart rate.

The chemicals and tar in cigarettes can increase a person’s risk of atherosclerosis,

which is the buildup of plaque in the blood vessels. Wherein this buildup limits blood

flow and can lead to dangerous blockages.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

No matter how you smoke it, tobacco is dangerous to your health. There are

no safe substances in any tobacco products, from acetone and tar to nicotine and

carbon monoxide. The substances you inhale don’t just affect your lungs. They can

affect your body. Smoking can lead to a variety of ongoing complications in the

body, as well as long-term effects on your body systems.

While smoking can increase your risk of a variety of problems over several

years, some of the bodily effects are immediate. Tobacco smoke is incredibly

harmful to your health. There’s no way to smoke. Replacing your cigarette with

cigar, pipe or hookah won’t help you avoid the health risks.

For cigarettes contain about 600 ingredients, many of which can also be

found in cigars and hookahs. When these ingredients burn, they generate more than

7,000 chemicals, according to the American Lung Association. Many of those

chemicals are poisonous and at least 69 of them are linked to cancer and many

more diseases that I mentioned above. Withal, while the effects of smoking may not

be immediate, the complications and damage can last for years. The good news is

that quitting smoking can reverse many effects.

The present research is an effort to investigate the factors of why students smokes.

Also, comparing them to their parents if they have a history of smokers.

Statement of the Problem

In Grade-10 St. Andrew classroom where almost students smokes is where

the study would happen. However, the study will tackle the following but first I first

need to state the problem of this study.

This study is an effort to investigate the factors of why students smokes. Also,

comparing them to their parents if they have a history of smokers. In addition, why

students smokes and what aspects triggers them to try this.

Hypothesis

The expectation and prediction that might be proven in my research is, this

study will be solve. It will be solved through this research. Through this research my

prediction of the causes why students smokes will be proven at the end of this

study. In which it does not lack. As well as no more lapses will happened.

Specific Objectives

This study seeks to answer the following questions:

1. Why students smokes?

2. What triggers them to smoke?

3. Does their family members or friends influences them to try this?

4. Is this really helpful to relieve stress or problems in life?

Significance of the Study

The present research is an effort to investigate why students smokes. Also, it as

well could help students to gained knowledge about this study. It will solved all the

questions students have in mind about cigarette smoking This research study

moreover will strengthen the view that most individuals have indeed varied

perceptions in life about smoking whereas if affect their daily existence and their

manner of living.

Thus, this study will help students and everyone else who are acquainted in smoking

and by this study they will be aware what are the effects of smoking in their body

and what are the causes of it that triggers why this happens. In addition, what are

the suitable solution for this diseases to unleash and prevent this from spreading

and causes harmful effects in the human body.

Specifically, this study is beneficial because it will help the following group of

individuals:

Students – it can never be denied that by this study students would be aware what

will be the effects of it to them if they tried to smoke. That is why they are one who

are the beneficial of this study.

Parents – they are also the beneficial of this study because they will be enlighten of

why their children smoke and get many diseases at the early age. The reason as
well why they do get low marks at school and became irritated if they can’t smoke

even 1 stick of it.

Scope and Delimitation

The scope of the study focused on the cigarette smokers of Grade- 10 students. In

which it age at 13 to 18 years old.

However, this study delimits only to the causes of why Grade-10 students smoke. As

well as its effects in their life. Yet, other factors aside from socio-economic and

educational background were omitted in the process of conducting the study.

Definition of Terms

In the process of conducting the study, the researcher found words that are

important to elaborate. In which with regards to its denotative and connotative

definition to wholly extrapolate what these words are all about.

Smoking, in this study, it is the act of inhaling and exhaling the fumes of burning

plant material. A variety of plant materials are smoked, including marijuana and

hashish, but the act is most commonly associated with tobacco as smoked in a

cigarette, cigar, or pipe.

Student is a person who goes to school and is learning something. Students can be

children, teenagers, or adults who are going to school, but it may also be other

people who are learning, such as in college or university.

Cigarette is a thin cylinder of finely cut tobacco rolled in paper for smoking. It may

also have other ingredients, including substances to add different flavors. In short, it

is something that is usually inhaled into the lungs.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This is the review of related literature of this study. The purpose of these is to

prevent duplication and give credits to other researchers.

Risk taking behaviours are behaviours in which the results are unknown and from

which there is a possibility of identifiable and possibly fatal, injury. These are

behaviours that can cause physical harm to the participant or others. Risk behavious

include driving at high speed, alcohol use and driving, using illicit drugs, exhibiting

aggressive behaviour towards others and engaging in unprotected sexual activity.

They also include behaviours that are socially unacceptable and could lead to serious

legal consequences such as shoplifting, vandalism, assault, theft and drug dealing.

(Sofronoff 2004, 60-61.)

According to Sarkar & Andreas (2004, 699), adolescent drivers are more dangerous

than other drivers but their perceived risk of being caught engaging in dangerous

driving may not be enough to deter them from such behaviour. Wang et al (2010,

320) found that early adolescents who were male and who did not come from two-

parent families had more risk behaviours than others.

According to Wang et al (2010, 320), although adolescents may pressured into

identifying with peers’ risk behaviours, adolescents who have good emotional

regulation may deal with stress better and be less affected by peers’ risk behaviours.

Giannakopoules et al (2008, 168) found time spent on studying to be strongly

associated with decreased risk of smoking. They found adolescent smokers to spend

more time watching TV and playing videogames, other than sports activities,

playtime or walks. Also they found that sport activities outside school were inversely

associated with smoking. Giannokopoules et al (2008, 168) found that smoking

adolescent smokers were less likely to be involved in health-promoting dietary and

physical activity habits.

According to Sabbah et al (2008, 47), students who were not happy with their

weight were more likely to be involved in risky behaviours such as bullying others at

school, being bullied and smoking nargila, than adolescents who were more satisfied

with their weight. They also found that girls who were dissatisfied with their weight

engaged in more risky behaviours such as fighting or fighting that resulted in an

injury than with girls who were satisfied with their weight.

In the study by Robert & Ryan (2002, 1061), adolescents who had tattoos reported

greater involvement in sexual intercourse, higher levels of substance use by their

peers and by themselves, higher levels of violence perpetration and have more

school problems than their nontattooed counterparts (Robert & Ryan 2002, 1061).
 6

According Ryan & Robert (2002, 1062), tattoo may be permanent, easily noticed

indicator for identifying an adolescent who is at risk for involvement in premature

sexual intercourse, substance use, violence and school problems. Observation of a

tattoo during physical examination of an adolescent should prompt a more intensive

assessment for high risk behaviours and subsequent counselling during clinical office

visits (Ryan & Robert 2002, 1062). Violence is found to a higher extent in male

adolecents males with tattoos and female adolescents with body piercing (Carroll et

al. 2002, 1027).

A study by Felton & Bartoces (2002, 63) found low problem solving skills, fewer

health enhancing behaviours and less education to be risk factors for early sex.

Since adolescent smokers are also more bound to be involved in other risky

behaviours, the observation of tattoos should be a way of identifying adolescent who

may be involved in risk behaviours. (Dearden et al. 2007, 160.)

According to McCay et al (2009, 76-77), smoking costs the smoker in many ways

and the cost of smoking goes beyond purchasing tobacco products. A smoker

spends a considerable amount of money on medical bills, lost wages, higher

insurance costs, and spends a lot of money on cosmetics and clothing. Studies have
found that people in the lower socioeconomic classes smoke more than people in the

upper socioeconomic classes. (McCay et al 2009, 76- 77.)

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Protection motivation Theory (PMT)

-Protection motivation Theory is a theory that provides a cognitive

conceptual framework to investigate tobacco use among adolescents. The cognitive

process plays a key role in the process of decision- making, leading to behavioral

change. PMT consists of two pathways: Threat Appraisal and Coping Appraisal, and

it is the interaction of the two that determines the likelihood whether an adolescent

will smoke or not. Threat Appraisal serve as an evaluation of maladaptive behaviors,

and it includes four constructs in two groups: Perceived Threat (severity and

vulnerability) and Perceived Rewards (intrinsic rewards and extrinsic rewards).

Coping Appraisal serves as an evaluation of a person’s ability to manage and avoid

the threat, and it includes three constructs also in two groups: perceived efficacy

(response efficacy and self-efficacy) and perceived cost (response cost). Those who

perceive greater threat from smoking and have higher coping ability to adapt non-

smoking behaviors are less likely to smoke. Some studies have reported the

successful utilization of PMT in predicting cigarette smoking among adolescents in

China.
In a study, a measurement scale for accessing PMT was reported with adequate

reliability and validity. Therefore, the Threat Appraisal and Coping Appraisal, derived

from the Protection Motivation Theory, were used to predict smoking behavior in this

study.

CHAPTER III

Research Design

This study is a qualitative research. In which with a descriptive design. However,

descriptive research is the one that is used in this study. In order to achieve a

multitude of research objectives. Wherein with the use of scientific method.

Research Environment

The study will be taken at Saint Joseph High School of Laligan. In which the school

have so many students who are smokers that starts with an early age. Such as at

the age of 13 to 18 years old. Without the parents knowing about it or maybe yes

they knew and they might be the one who influences their child as well. That is why

this place is a right place for conducting this research study.

Research Respondents

As said in the research title the respondents of this study is the students. The Grade-

10 students to be exact. The students that at the age of 13 to 18 years of age. In

which who already got their selves engage in cigarette smoking or who already

started smoking.
Research Instruments

I think the best instrument for my research is structure interview. Due to the fact

that I want to set a questions that is posed to each interviewee. Also, to record my

research using a standardized procedure. For my perspective, this research

instrument just contains clear and definite instructions.

CHAPTER IV

Presentation, Analysis and Data Interpretation

Measures

Consent was obtained from parents/guardians of the selected students. The consent

form provided information about the participation of their children in the study, as

well as the study objectives. Participations of students were of voluntary basis and

parents/guardians of the selected respondents were asked to return the consent

form if they did not agree for their son/daughter to participate. Only respondents

who did not return the consent form were allowed to participate in the study. Data

collection was carried out in the designated area allocated by the school

administration. Staff and teachers were not allowed to be around during the

questionnaire answering session to avoid “Hawthorne effect”. This included the

objectives of the study, the anonymity of the answers given, awareness that their

participation was on a voluntarily basis, as well as an explanation of the items in the

questionnaire. Respondents were also requested not to write their names or provide

any information that would reveal their identities, with the exception of their
signatures which indicated their willingness to participate in the study. Respondents

who did not understand certain items in the questionnaire were assisted by the

researcher. All completed questionnaires were sealed in envelopes. The dependent

variable in this questionnaire was “current smoker”, which was evaluated using the

item “In the last 30 days, how often did you smoke?”

Respondents who answered “every day”, “almost every day”, “2–3 times a week”,

“once a week” and “once a month” were classified as “current smoker” whilst those

who answered “I did not smoke” during the last 30 days were categorized as

“nonsmoker”. Those who answered “smoked at least once a month” were required

to answer their age of smoking initiation, quantity of cigarettes smoked per day and

source of cigarettes. Those who smoked less than 11 sticks per day was classified as

light smoker, 11–20 sticks as moderate smoker and more than 20 sticks per day as

heavy smoker. The independent variables included “parents/ guardian who smoked”,

“perception of academic achievement “, family status (whether their parents were

married/ divorced), and education attainment of their parents. A validated Malay

version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale was used to evaluate the level of self-

esteem, whereby those who scored less than 15 were categorized as having “low

self-esteem” and 15–30 as having “high self-esteem”. The protection factor was

evaluated using 6 items (for example “My parents know what I am doing during my

free time”), (“friends always help me in school”). Religiosity was examined using

three items (for example “Do you agree that religion is very important to guide your
life?”). Both these variables were measured using the Likert-type scale. A higher

score indicated a higher protective factor in school and within their families as well

as portrayed the importance of religion in daily life, respectively. The number of

close friend(s) was measured using the item “How many close best friends do you

have?” with the option “None, One, Two”. Questions on how often they felt lonely

was evaluated using the item “In the last one month how often do you feel lonely?”

with the choice of “Always or sometimes”.

10

Presentation and Data Interpretation

Table 1 Prevalence of smoking among Grade-10 students of SJHSLI

Smoking
Variable Chi-square value p value
Yes No

N(%) N(%)
Gender

Male 12 (0.8) 40(2.6) 70 (4.6) 0.001

Female 1(0.6) 43(2.87)

Academic Achievement

Excellence 2(0.13) 39(2) 69(4.6) 0.001

Moderate 4(0.26)

Unsatisfactory 3(0.2)

7(0.47) 0
Marital status of parents

Married 45(3) 68(4.53) 0.79

Split 8(0.53)

4(0.26) 33(2.2)
 Level of self esteem

High 20(1.3) 31(2.06) 51(3.4) 0.0012

Low 31(2.06) 20(1.3)

Loneliness

Always 46(3.06) 7(0.46) 52(3.46) 0.01

Sometimes 7(0.46)

46(3.06)
Number of parents who

smoked

One 36(2.4) 54(3.6) 0.001

None 14(0.93)

Both 2(0.13) 0

5(0.33)

5(0.33)
Number of Best Friends

None 1(0.06) 0 51(3.4) 0.27

One 9(0.6) 0

Two or more 41(2.73)

5(0.33)

Table 2 Smoking initiation age, number, and frequency of smoking and source of cigarettes/s among current

adolescent smoking.

Variable n %
Smoking initiation Age (year)
13-14 15 30

15-16 16 32

17-18 20 40
Quantity of cigarettes daily

Less than 1 11 7.8

1 7 11.6
 2-5 19 15.4

6-9 18 19.6

11-20 1 1

>20 1 2.2

Source of cigarettes

Bought from shop 13 9.3

Asked others to buy 12 9.2

Bought from others 7 1.1

Family member 13 9.3

Others 20 11.8
11-12

Analysis

Data analysis

The data were cleaned before the analysis, whereby outlier values were detected

using frequency analysis and references were made against the original

questionnaire if the investigators had any doubt about the answers given.

Descriptive statistics was used to illustrate the demographic status of the

respondents, age of smoking initiation, number of cigarettes smoked and source of

cigarettes. Chi-square analysis was used to determine the association between

smoking status and social demographic variables whilst independent T-test was used

to determine the mean differences of protection and religiosity scores between

smokers and nonsmokers. All independent variables with p < 0.25 in univariate

analysis (Chi-square and T-test) were included in the Multivariable Logistic

Regression model to determine the effect of each independent variable after

controlling the influence of other independent variables.

 A co-linearity test between religiosity and protection score was carried out by

variant inflation factor and the value of 1.025 indicated no co-linearity between the

two variables. A Hosmer–Lemeshow value of 0.25 indicated the fitness of the model.

All possible two-way interactions between the independent variables in the final

model were also analyzed. No interaction with p < 0.05 were detected, indicating no

significant two-way interactions. All statistical analyses were run at 95% confidence

interval using SPSS software version 16.

13

RESULTS

A total 51 respondents participated in this study which led to an overall response

rate of 21%. Out of 51 participants, 50 of them responded to the question on

smoking module, giving a response rate of 93.4% to this section. The students were

composed almost equally by gender 51.8% (20/51) were females and 51.2%

(17/51) were males The prevalence of smoking was 14 (34/51) (95% CI:13.3–15.9)

and this was higher among male students as compared to females (27.9% vs 2.4%

p < 0.001).

Smoking prevalence was also significantly higher among the students, those who

perceived their academic achievement as poor, who always felt lonely, had parent/s

or guardian/s who smoked and with two best friends (Table 1).

Table 2 highlighted that almost 70% of current smokers bought cigarettes from the

premises (i.e., sundry shops) by themselves and more than one-third of them
smoked daily. Approximately 90% of current smokers were light smokers (smoked

less than 11 sticks per day) and almost two-thirds of them started smoking during

upper primary or lower secondary school (aged 11–14 year old).

14

DISCUSSION

This study also found that most students initiated smoking during upper primary or

lower secondary schooling period. This might be because adolescents at this age feel

that they are constantly at the center of attention and the people surrounding them

are inspecting either their appearance or actions. This belief might drive them into

conducting risk-taking actions, as such initiating smoking. Nevertheless, future

studies are recommended to explore the association or causal effect of students’

emotion/feeling and smoking behavior. The present study demonstrated a dose-

response kinship between adolescent smoking and the smoking status of one or two

parent(s). The likelihood of smoking increased when both parents smoked. These

findings were consistent with those reported elsewhere. According to Bandura’s

concept of “delayed modelling” during childhood, an individual learns or remembers

how to perform behavior from seeing it modelled by their parents. Therefore,

parents who smoked in front of their children would act as a role model for their

children and also indirectly provide an impression that smoking is a normative

behavior among adults. The mentally immature students would adopt the smoking

behavior of their parents to satisfy their desire to be like an adult.

15

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

To sum it up, the cigarette smoking of the Grade-10 St. Andrew students is

affected by their friends and parents most of the time. Also, by gender, socio-

economic background, life experiences and educational attainment.

The researcher sees that study also found that most students initiated smoking

during upper primary or lower secondary schooling period. This might be because

adolescents at this age feel that they are constantly at the center of attention and

the people surrounding them are inspecting either their appearance or actions. This

belief might drive them into conducting risk-taking actions, as such initiating

smoking. Nevertheless, future studies are recommended to explore the association

or causal effect of students’ emotion/feeling and smoking behavior. Furthermore,

parents who smoked were usually more liberal when dealing with smoking issues

and therefore less likely to convey the hazard of smoking to their children, which

would ultimately lead to the thinking that smoking is acceptable and permissible by

their smoking parents. In addition, smoking parents may also think that they do not

have legitimate authority to advice or convince their children not to smoke because

they themselves are smokers. Having more best friends had been demonstrated by

many studies to be a protection factor against smoking since having more friends

would enable the sharing of problems, reducing stress and therefore reduce the

likelihood in involving in risky health behaviors such as smoking.

16

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study provides evidence-based findings for the planning

and implementation of targeted public health policies to combat the relatively high

prevalence of adolescent smoking. Anti-smoking campaigns should concentrate or

emphasize more on male adolescents, those of Filipino descent, with unsatisfactory

academic achievements and had smoking family members and/or peer.

Parents/guardians, particularly those who smoked should also be invited to be

involved in all anti-smoking activities together with their children to serve as a

positive role model to discourage non-smoking adolescents from initiating this habit

and for smoking adolescents to quit smoking. Last but not least, enforcement

activities towards the sale of tobacco products to adolescents and smoking in public
areas should be enhanced to prevent smoking initiation and to deformalize smoking

as a norm in our society.

17

Recommendations

Pedagogical Implication

After the thorough analysis of the data, the researcher would like to suggest

that the following group of individuals should review this research because it would

be beneficial to them.

Students – it can never be denied that by this study students would be aware what

will be the effects of it to them if they tried to smoke. That is why they are one who

are the beneficial of this study.

Parents – they are also the beneficial of this study because they will be enlighten of

why their children smoke and get many diseases at the early age. The reason as
well why they do get low marks at school and became irritated if they can’t smoke

even 1 stick of it.

Teachers- teacher are also the beneficial of this study because it can help them

knew why there students smoke. They can advise their students to stop smoking

because it is not good for their heath. Also, by this study as well they will notice the

behaviors that students create while smoking and many more.

18

References

1. World Health Organization. WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2011.
Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. Accessed 7 Apr 2015.

2. Disease Control Division, Ministry of Health. Clinical practice guidelines on

treatment of tobacco use and dependence. 2003. http://www.acadmed.org.
my/view_file.cfm?fileid=89. Accessed on 26 Dec 2016.

3. Institute of Public Health. Burden of disease and injury in Malaysia. 2012.

4. Al-Junid SM. Health care costs of smoking in Malaysia. 2007.

5. Fleming R, Leventhal H, Glynn K, Ershler J. The role of cigarettes in the initiation

and progression of early substance use. Addic Behav. 1989;14(3):261–72.

6. Jackson C, Sweeting H, Haw S. Clustering of substance use and sexual risk

behaviour in adolescence: analysis of two cohort studies. BMJ Open. 2012;2:
e000661.
7. Busch V, Van Stel HF, Schrijvers AJ, de Leeuw JR. Clustering of health-related
behaviors, health outcomes and demographics in Dutch adolescents: a cross-
sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1118.

8. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of

smoking: a report of the surgeon general. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center
for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health;
2004.

9. Park SH. Smoking behavior and predictors of smoking initiation in childhood and
early adolescence. J Korean Acad Nurs. 2009;39(3):376e85.

10. Millar WJ, Chen J. Age of smoking initiation: implications for quitting. Health
Rep. 1998;9(4):39e46.

11. WHO. Global school-based student health survey, Malaysia. 2012 fact sheet.
2012. http://www.cdc.gov/gshs/countries/seasian/pdf/2012yseh_factsheet. pdf.
Accessed 23 Dec 2015.

12. Lim KH, Sumarni MG, Kee CC, Christopher VM, Noruiza Hana M, Lim KK, Amal
NM. Prevalence and factors associated with smoking among form four students in
Petaling District, Selangor, Malaysia. Trop Biomed. 2010;27(3):394–403.

13. Naing NN, Zulkifli A, Razlan M, et al. Factors related to smoking habits of male
adolescents. Tob Induced Dis. 2004;2:133–40.

19

14. Shamsuddin K, Haris MA. Family influence on current smoking habits among
secondary school children in Kota Bharu, Kelantan. Singapore Med J.
2000;41(4):167–71.

15. Lim KH, Amal NM, Hanjeet K, Mashod MY, Wan Rozita WM, Sumarni MG, Hadzrik
NO. Prevalence and factors related to smoking among secondary school students in
Kota Tinggi District, Johor, Malaysia. Tinggi District, Johor, Malaysia. Tinggi District,
Johor, Malaysia. Trop Biomed. 2006;23(1):75–84.

16. Norbanee TH, Norhayati MN, Norsa’adah B, Naing NN. Prevalence factors
influencing smoking amongst Malay primary school in Tumpat, Kelantan. Southeast
Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2006;37(1):23–8.

17. Nor A, Zulkefli M, Rahmah MA, Lye MS, Md Said S, Fazilah S, Shamsul Azhar S.
smoking behavior among adolescents in rural schools in Malacca, Malaysia - a case-
control study. Pertanika J Sci & Technol. 2015;23(1):13–28.

18. Saari AJ, Kentala J, Matilla KJ. Weaker self-esteem in adolescence predicts
smoking. BioMed Res Int. 2015;2015:1–5. 19. Centers of Disease Control and
Prevention.Global School Health Survey (GSHS). questionnaire.
http://www.who.int/chp/gshs/GSHS_Core_modules_2013_English. pdf. Accessed on
29 Dec 2015.

20. Centers of Disease control and Prevention. Youth Behavior Risk Surveillance.
2013. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/pdf/2017/2017_yrbs_
national_hs_questionnaire.pdf. Accessed on 29 Dec 2015.

21. Jamil MBY. Validity and reliability study of Rosenberg self-esteem scale
inSeremban school children. Malaysian J Psychiatry. 2006;15:35–8.

22. Jeganathan PD, Hairi NN, Al Sadat N, Chinna K. Smoking stage relations to peer,
school and parental factors among secondary school students in Kinta, Perak. Asian
Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(6):3483–9.

23. Page RM, Dennis M, Lindsay GB, Merrill RM. Psychosocial distress and substance
use among adolescents in four countries: Philippines, China, Chile, and Namibia.
Youth Soc. 2011;43:900–30.

24. Rao S, Aslam SK, Zaheer S, Shafique K. Anti-smoking initiatives and current
smoking anti-smoking initiatives and current smoking among 19,643 adolescents in
south asia: findings from the global youth tobacco survey. Harm Reduc J. 2014;11:8.

25. Huisman M, Kunst AE, Mackenbach JP. Inequalities in the prevalence of smoking
in the European Union. Prev Med. 2005;40:756–64.

20