ehind this study was to observe behavioral events as they occur to explore the naturally occurring social context of adolescent tobacco use including whether or not smoking occurred in a group context. Furthermore, Sussman et al, observed whether or not offers were made of tobacco products to others in the group. Forty-one students were observed using tobacco in fifteen different grade levels and school settings (rural, urban, hang out spots, etc...). The observers used a single-sheet checklist to minimize visibility and to maximize speed of data collecting. Each student was assigned a letter and then the group was diagramed on the sheet. Various information was also recorded about the persons: approximate age, gender, sex, ethnic group, offers to smoke, refusals of offers, and clothing style, to name a few. Each observation lasted for 30 minutes or until the group dispersed.The results were analyzed and some were found to coincide with other studies. Many smoking groups were smaller than nonsmoking groups. Cigarette sharing and offers to smoke within the groups were made. Sussman, Hahn, Dent, Stacy, Burton, and Flay (1993) identified that the offers to smoke were minimal and that the groups did contain both smokers and nonsmokers. Of six group observations made, only two groups exhibited offers to smoke to fellow smokers. No refusals were observed. One of these two groups where cigarettes were being offered included five students who were not smoking and who were not offered cigarettes. The remaining groups in which no offers were made contained nonsmokers. Sussman et al, found that the predominant effect of these groups was positive. Thus, Sussman et al, concluded, “If future research obtains the same results, perhaps less emphasis should be placed on assertion refusal training in prevention programming and more emphasis should be placed on informational sources of social influence to use tobacco” (p. 807). ...
