Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
This study determined evidence for digit preference in self-reports of smoking in the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). Subjects were 4275 adult smokers. Self-reports of smoking showed a marked degree of digit preference, with the vast majority of smokers reporting...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical epidemiology 1995-10, Vol.48 (10), p.1225-1233 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1233 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 1225 |
| container_title | Journal of clinical epidemiology |
| container_volume | 48 |
| creator | Klesges, Robert C. Debon, Margaret Ray, Joanne White |
| description | This study determined evidence for digit preference in self-reports of smoking in the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). Subjects were 4275 adult smokers. Self-reports of smoking showed a marked degree of digit preference, with the vast majority of smokers reporting in multiples of 10 cigarettes per day. When number per day was compared to an objective measure of smoking exposure (carboxyhemoglobin;
n = 2070) the distribution was found to be significantly assymetrical. Analysis of the distribution of COHb and various levels of number per day indicates that the differences in distribution are not due to variability in COHb. Heavier smokers, Caucasians, and those with less education were more likely to report a digit preference than lighter smokers, African-Americans, and those with more education. Results suggest that self-reports of number of cigarettes per day may be biased towards round numbers (particularly 20 cigarettes per day). Implications for assessment of smoking behavior are discussed. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/0895-4356(95)00020-5 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_77533000</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>0895435695000205</els_id><sourcerecordid>77533000</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-5679f397b2c9649c64c32ef98b6d5220de1d28cbd920c5fc28abca6a04363ca33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1v1DAQhi0EapfCP2glHxCCQ8AfsRNfQFW1UKQKDm3PlmOPW7dJvLWdFf33JN3VHjmNNO8zr0YPQqeUfKGEyq-kVaKquZCflPhMCGGkEq_QirZNWwnF6Gu0OiDH6G3OD4TQhjTiCB01QlLV1iuUzhPgDL2vEmxiKhlHj_MQH8N4h5MpgLtgMrjveL0NDkYL2Kc44HIP-BpsHB3-bUqIo-nxJZi-3GOz7KaSwrLG679mCOMLgq-ntIXnd-iNN32G9_t5gm5_rG8uLqurPz9_XZxfVbYWrFRCNspz1XTMKlkrK2vLGXjVdtIJxogD6lhrO6cYscJb1prOGmlIzSW3hvMT9HHXu0nxaYJc9BCyhb43I8Qp66YRnM_eZrDegTbFnBN4vUlhMOlZU6IX1XrxqBePep4vqrWYz872_VM3gDsc7d3O-Yd9brI1vU9mtCEfMC6FqJWasW87DGYX2wBJZxsW0S4ksEW7GP7_xz_plZsS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>77533000</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Klesges, Robert C. ; Debon, Margaret ; Ray, Joanne White</creator><creatorcontrib>Klesges, Robert C. ; Debon, Margaret ; Ray, Joanne White</creatorcontrib><description>This study determined evidence for digit preference in self-reports of smoking in the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). Subjects were 4275 adult smokers. Self-reports of smoking showed a marked degree of digit preference, with the vast majority of smokers reporting in multiples of 10 cigarettes per day. When number per day was compared to an objective measure of smoking exposure (carboxyhemoglobin;
n = 2070) the distribution was found to be significantly assymetrical. Analysis of the distribution of COHb and various levels of number per day indicates that the differences in distribution are not due to variability in COHb. Heavier smokers, Caucasians, and those with less education were more likely to report a digit preference than lighter smokers, African-Americans, and those with more education. Results suggest that self-reports of number of cigarettes per day may be biased towards round numbers (particularly 20 cigarettes per day). Implications for assessment of smoking behavior are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0895-4356</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-5921</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(95)00020-5</identifier><identifier>PMID: 7561984</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Bias ; Biological and medical sciences ; Carboxyhemoglobin - analysis ; Confidence Intervals ; Digit bias ; Epidemiology ; Female ; General aspects ; Health Surveys ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Methodology ; Middle Aged ; Odds Ratio ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Reproducibility of Results ; Self-reports ; Smoking ; Smoking - blood ; Smoking - epidemiology ; Smoking - psychology ; Surveys and Questionnaires - standards ; United States - epidemiology</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical epidemiology, 1995-10, Vol.48 (10), p.1225-1233</ispartof><rights>1995</rights><rights>1995 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-5679f397b2c9649c64c32ef98b6d5220de1d28cbd920c5fc28abca6a04363ca33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-5679f397b2c9649c64c32ef98b6d5220de1d28cbd920c5fc28abca6a04363ca33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(95)00020-5$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3655499$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7561984$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Klesges, Robert C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Debon, Margaret</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ray, Joanne White</creatorcontrib><title>Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey</title><title>Journal of clinical epidemiology</title><addtitle>J Clin Epidemiol</addtitle><description>This study determined evidence for digit preference in self-reports of smoking in the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). Subjects were 4275 adult smokers. Self-reports of smoking showed a marked degree of digit preference, with the vast majority of smokers reporting in multiples of 10 cigarettes per day. When number per day was compared to an objective measure of smoking exposure (carboxyhemoglobin;
n = 2070) the distribution was found to be significantly assymetrical. Analysis of the distribution of COHb and various levels of number per day indicates that the differences in distribution are not due to variability in COHb. Heavier smokers, Caucasians, and those with less education were more likely to report a digit preference than lighter smokers, African-Americans, and those with more education. Results suggest that self-reports of number of cigarettes per day may be biased towards round numbers (particularly 20 cigarettes per day). Implications for assessment of smoking behavior are discussed.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Carboxyhemoglobin - analysis</subject><subject>Confidence Intervals</subject><subject>Digit bias</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Health Surveys</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Odds Ratio</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Self-reports</subject><subject>Smoking</subject><subject>Smoking - blood</subject><subject>Smoking - epidemiology</subject><subject>Smoking - psychology</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires - standards</subject><subject>United States - epidemiology</subject><issn>0895-4356</issn><issn>1878-5921</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1995</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1v1DAQhi0EapfCP2glHxCCQ8AfsRNfQFW1UKQKDm3PlmOPW7dJvLWdFf33JN3VHjmNNO8zr0YPQqeUfKGEyq-kVaKquZCflPhMCGGkEq_QirZNWwnF6Gu0OiDH6G3OD4TQhjTiCB01QlLV1iuUzhPgDL2vEmxiKhlHj_MQH8N4h5MpgLtgMrjveL0NDkYL2Kc44HIP-BpsHB3-bUqIo-nxJZi-3GOz7KaSwrLG679mCOMLgq-ntIXnd-iNN32G9_t5gm5_rG8uLqurPz9_XZxfVbYWrFRCNspz1XTMKlkrK2vLGXjVdtIJxogD6lhrO6cYscJb1prOGmlIzSW3hvMT9HHXu0nxaYJc9BCyhb43I8Qp66YRnM_eZrDegTbFnBN4vUlhMOlZU6IX1XrxqBePep4vqrWYz872_VM3gDsc7d3O-Yd9brI1vU9mtCEfMC6FqJWasW87DGYX2wBJZxsW0S4ksEW7GP7_xz_plZsS</recordid><startdate>19951001</startdate><enddate>19951001</enddate><creator>Klesges, Robert C.</creator><creator>Debon, Margaret</creator><creator>Ray, Joanne White</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19951001</creationdate><title>Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey</title><author>Klesges, Robert C. ; Debon, Margaret ; Ray, Joanne White</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-5679f397b2c9649c64c32ef98b6d5220de1d28cbd920c5fc28abca6a04363ca33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1995</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Carboxyhemoglobin - analysis</topic><topic>Confidence Intervals</topic><topic>Digit bias</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Health Surveys</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Odds Ratio</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Self-reports</topic><topic>Smoking</topic><topic>Smoking - blood</topic><topic>Smoking - epidemiology</topic><topic>Smoking - psychology</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires - standards</topic><topic>United States - epidemiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Klesges, Robert C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Debon, Margaret</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ray, Joanne White</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical epidemiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Klesges, Robert C.</au><au>Debon, Margaret</au><au>Ray, Joanne White</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical epidemiology</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Epidemiol</addtitle><date>1995-10-01</date><risdate>1995</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1225</spage><epage>1233</epage><pages>1225-1233</pages><issn>0895-4356</issn><eissn>1878-5921</eissn><abstract>This study determined evidence for digit preference in self-reports of smoking in the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). Subjects were 4275 adult smokers. Self-reports of smoking showed a marked degree of digit preference, with the vast majority of smokers reporting in multiples of 10 cigarettes per day. When number per day was compared to an objective measure of smoking exposure (carboxyhemoglobin;
n = 2070) the distribution was found to be significantly assymetrical. Analysis of the distribution of COHb and various levels of number per day indicates that the differences in distribution are not due to variability in COHb. Heavier smokers, Caucasians, and those with less education were more likely to report a digit preference than lighter smokers, African-Americans, and those with more education. Results suggest that self-reports of number of cigarettes per day may be biased towards round numbers (particularly 20 cigarettes per day). Implications for assessment of smoking behavior are discussed.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>7561984</pmid><doi>10.1016/0895-4356(95)00020-5</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0895-4356 |
| ispartof | Journal of clinical epidemiology, 1995-10, Vol.48 (10), p.1225-1233 |
| issn | 0895-4356 1878-5921 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_77533000 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Bias Biological and medical sciences Carboxyhemoglobin - analysis Confidence Intervals Digit bias Epidemiology Female General aspects Health Surveys Humans Logistic Models Male Medical sciences Methodology Middle Aged Odds Ratio Public health. Hygiene Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Reproducibility of Results Self-reports Smoking Smoking - blood Smoking - epidemiology Smoking - psychology Surveys and Questionnaires - standards United States - epidemiology |
| title | Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T05%3A24%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20self-reports%20of%20smoking%20rate%20biased?%20Evidence%20from%20the%20Second%20National%20Health%20and%20Nutrition%20Examination%20Survey&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20epidemiology&rft.au=Klesges,%20Robert%20C.&rft.date=1995-10-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1225&rft.epage=1233&rft.pages=1225-1233&rft.issn=0895-4356&rft.eissn=1878-5921&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0895-4356(95)00020-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E77533000%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=77533000&rft_id=info:pmid/7561984&rft_els_id=0895435695000205&rfr_iscdi=true |