IntroductionRecent research has found that the Hip Hop peer crowd has a strong link to risky health behaviors, including tobacco use. The current study expands on previous research on the Hip Hop peer crowd by investigating the nuances of the effects on cigarette risk that Hip Hop identification has in combination with other peer crowds.MethodsTargeted social media advertisements were used to recruit youth to complete an online survey. Participants (n?=?4681) self-reported peer crowd identification via the I-Base Survey?, and cigarette smoking status. Smoking status was compared between peer crowd groups consisting of participants who had identification with only one peer crowd, and those who had identification with the Hip Hop peer crowd and one other crowd (i.e., Hip Hop dual peer crowd identification).ResultsSignificant differences in cigarette status were observed among the dual and single peer crowd groups. Specifically, differences in cigarette Non-susceptible Non-triers and Experimenters demonstrated that youth who identified as Mainstream Only were at lowest risk while youth who identified as Hip Hop/Alternative had the highest rates of cigarette experimentation. There were no differences between peer crowd groups on proportions of Susceptible Non-triers.ConclusionsExamining dual peer crowd identifications provides a nuanced understanding of risk. Dual identification with Hip Hop seems to have differential effects compared to solo identification with other crowds, whereby Hip Hop identification may increase cigarette experimentation when combined with another peer crowd. Findings demonstrate the potential of considering multiple peer crowd identification to inform public education campaign development.
展开▼
机译：引入研究发现，Hip Hop Peer Crowd具有危险的健康行为的强大联系，包括烟草使用。目前的研究通过调查影响的细微差别，对卷烟的风险，嘻哈鉴定具有与其它同行crowds.MethodsTargeted社交媒体广告被用来招募青年完成了一项在线调查上的嘻哈等人群以往的研究扩展。参与者（N？= 4681）通过I-Base调查的自我报告的同伴人群识别？和吸烟状态。在观察者组成的参与者之间比较吸烟状态，这些参与者与只有一个同行人群的识别，以及与嘻哈同伴人群和另一个人群（即嘻哈双重同行人群识别）的人进行识别的人。卷烟的差异在双重和单个同行人群组中观察到状态。具体而言，在香烟不敏感的非triers和实验者的差异表明，青春谁认定为主流，只有在了最低的风险，而谁认定为嘻哈青年/另类了香烟试验最高速度。对等人群组织对易感非敏感的非敏感的非敏感性的比例没有差异.ClusionSexamining的双重同行人群识别提供了对风险的细致细微了解。与其他人群的独奏识别相比，嘻哈跳跃的双重鉴定似乎具有差异效果，从而在与另一个同行人群结合时，嘻哈识别可能会增加卷烟实验。调查结果表明，考虑多个同行人群识别以通知公共教育竞选发展的潜力。
展开▼
