Special Article
The Collective Dynamics of Smoking in a Large Social Network
N Engl J Med 2008; 358:2249-2258May 22, 2008
- Abstract
Background
The prevalence of smoking has decreased substantially in the United States over the past 30 years. We examined the extent of the person-to-person spread of smoking behavior and the extent to which groups of widely connected people quit together.
Methods
We studied a densely interconnected social network of 12,067 people assessed repeatedly from 1971 to 2003 as part of the Framingham Heart Study. We used network analytic methods and longitudinal statistical models.
Results
Discernible clusters of smokers and nonsmokers were present in the network, and the clusters extended to three degrees of separation. Despite the decrease in smoking in the overall population, the size of the clusters of smokers remained the same across time, suggesting that whole groups of people were quitting in concert. Smokers were also progressively found in the periphery of the social network. Smoking cessation by a spouse decreased a person's chances of smoking by 67% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59 to 73). Smoking cessation by a sibling decreased the chances by 25% (95% CI, 14 to 35). Smoking cessation by a friend decreased the chances by 36% (95% CI, 12 to 55 ). Among persons working in small firms, smoking cessation by a coworker decreased the chances by 34% (95% CI, 5 to 56). Friends with more education influenced one another more than those with less education. These effects were not seen among neighbors in the immediate geographic area.
Conclusions
Network phenomena appear to be relevant to smoking cessation. Smoking behavior spreads through close and distant social ties, groups of interconnected people stop smoking in concert, and smokers are increasingly marginalized socially. These findings have implications for clinical and public health interventions to reduce and prevent smoking.
Media in This Article
Animation
Smoking Cessation in a Large Social Network over 32 Years.
Figure 1
Part of the Social Network from the Framingham Heart Study, with Information about Smoking in 1971 and 2000.Article Activity
- Article
Animation
Smoking Cessation in a Large Social Network over 32 Years.
Roughly 44.5 million adults were smokers in the United States in 2004,1 and smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death,2 with 440,000 deaths annually.3 Nevertheless, the prevalence of smoking has declined from 45% to 21% over the past four decades.4
Past studies have documented the impact of dyadic social ties on the initiation and cessation of smoking, primarily in young people.5,6 However, the extent to which smoking depends on how people are embedded in a social network and the extent to which smoking behavior transcends direct dyadic ties are not known. Since diverse phenomena can spread within social networks,7-11 we conducted a study to determine whether smoking cessation also spreads more than from one person to another.
We evaluated a network of 12,067 people who underwent repeated assessments of their smoking behavior and social-network ties over a period of 32 years. We examined six issues: the existence of clusters of smokers and nonsmokers within the network, the association between one person's smoking behavior and smoking behavior in his or her social contacts, the dependence of this association on the nature of the social ties (i.e., ties between siblings, spouses, friends, coworkers, and neighbors), the influence of education and smoking intensity on the spread of smoking, the extent to which smoking cessation occurs in large subnetworks of people at one time, and the extent to which smokers move to the periphery of the social network across time.
Methods
Source Data
The Framingham Heart Study was initiated in 1948, when 5209 people were enrolled in the original cohort.12 In 1971, a total of 5124 children of the original cohort and their spouses were enrolled in the offspring cohort.13 In 1994, a minority oversample of 508 people known as the “OMNI cohort” was initiated, and in 2002, the third-generation cohort, consisting of 4095 children of the offspring cohort and their spouses, was initiated. We analyzed data obtained from physical examinations and questionnaires performed during 3-year periods centered in 1973, 1981, 1985, 1989, 1992, 1997, and 1999 (see the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at www.nejm.org). Validated measures of cigarette consumption were collected at each time point.14,15
Network Ascertainment
For our study, we used the offspring cohort as the source of 5124 subjects (known as “egos” in the field of network science). Any persons to whom these subjects are linked — in any of the Framingham Heart Study cohorts — can, however, serve as social contacts (known as “alters”). A total of 12,067 subjects and contacts were connected at some point during the study period (1971 to 2003) (see the Supplementary Appendix), and connections were identified longitudinally.11 As a person's family changed because of birth, death, marriage, or divorce, and as their contacts changed because of residential moves, new employment, or new friendships, this information was recorded.
Overall, there were 53,228 observed family and social ties to the 5124 subjects, yielding an average of 10.4 ties per subject within the network (not including ties to neighbors). For example, 83% of the spouses of subjects were in the network and 87% of subjects with siblings had at least one sibling in the network.
A total of 45% of the 5124 subjects were connected through friendship to another person in the network at some point. There were 3542 unique friendships, for an average of 0.7 friendship tie per subject. Because friendship identifications are directional, we studied three kinds of friendships: a “subject-perceived friendship,” in which a subject identifies a contact; a “contact-perceived friendship,” in which a contact identifies a subject; and a “mutual friendship,” in which the identification is reciprocal. We hypothesized that the strongest interpersonal influence on subjects would occur in mutual friendships, followed by subject-perceived friendships, followed by contact-perceived friendships.
For 39% of the subjects, at least one coworker was captured in the network at some point. For 10% of the subjects, an immediate (nonrelative) neighbor was also present (more expansive definitions, such as living within 100 m of a subject, resulted in more neighbor ties but yielded similar results).
We included in the study only persons 21 years of age or older. At the inception of the study, 53% of the subjects were women. The mean age of the subjects was 38 years (range, 21 to 70), and their mean educational level was 1.6 years of college (range, no education to ≥17 years of education). Measures of occupational prestige of the subjects at each examination were available (see the Supplementary Appendix).16 Smoking among subjects in the Framingham Heart Study mirrored national trends; for example, among persons 40 to 49 years of age at each examination, the prevalence of smoking declined from 65.9% to 22.3% over the study period (see the Supplementary Appendix).
The study was approved by the institutional review board of Harvard Medical School and the board of the Framingham Heart Study. All subjects provided written informed consent.
Statistical Analysis
We treated smoking as a continuous variable in some analyses (e.g., number of cigarettes smoked per day), but we mainly used a dichotomous cut point of no cigarettes versus ≥1 cigarette per day.
We graphed the network using the Kamada–Kawai17 algorithm and created a video of the network by means of the Social Network Image Animator (known as SoNIA)18 (see the animation). The Kamada–Kawai algorithm positions nodes so that the nodes and the ties connecting them overlap as little as possible, thus producing interpretable images.
We measured the centrality of the subjects to assess whether they are near the center of the network. One measure of centrality is simply the number of a subject's ties; people who have more contacts tend to be more central. Eigenvector centrality, which was used in this study, takes this measurement a step further by weighting the contacts on the basis of how many other contacts each has. People who have “popular” contacts have higher centrality as compared with people who have less popular contacts (see the Supplementary Appendix).19
To study the clustering of smoking behavior, we compared the whole observed network at each examination to simulated networks with the same network topology and the same overall prevalence of smoking, but with the incidence of smoking randomly distributed across the nodes (“random smoking networks”).20 If clustering is occurring, then the probability that a contact is a smoker, given that a subject is a smoker, should be higher in the observed network than in the random networks. What we defined as the “reach” of the clusters is noted by identifying the point, in terms of a contact's degree of separation from any given subject, at which the probability that a contact is a smoker is no longer related to whether the subject is a smoker.
There are three explanations for clustering. First, subjects might choose to associate with contacts with similar smoking behavior (homophily).21 Second, subjects and their contacts might have common unobserved contemporaneous exposures that cause their smoking behavior to covary (confounding). Third, contacts might influence subjects (induction). Distinguishing induction from homophily is easier when longitudinal information about people's ties and attributes (i.e., smoking behavior) is simultaneously available.22
Hence, we specified longitudinal logistic-regression models wherein the subject's smoking status (no cigarettes vs. ≥1 cigarette per day) at a given time point (t+1) was a function of attributes such as the subject's age, sex, education level, smoking status at the previous time point (t), and, most pertinent, the smoking status of his or her contacts at times t and t+1.22 We used generalized estimating equations to account for multiple observations of the same subject across examinations and across subject–contact pairs.23 We assumed an independent working correlation structure for the clustered errors.23,24
The use of a time-lagged dependent variable (lagged to the previous examination) eliminated serial correlation in the errors (evaluated with a Lagrange multiplier test25) and also helped to control for a subject's genetic endowment and any intrinsic, stable predilection to smoke. The use of a lagged independent variable for a contact's smoking status helped to account for homophily.22 The key variable of interest was a contact's smoking behavior at time t+1. We found no statistically meaningful difference between the processes of smoking cessation and initiation in subjects depending on smoking cessation or initiation among their contacts; our models, therefore, evaluated concordance in change in smoking behavior (i.e., a contact starts smoking and the subject starts, or a contact stops smoking and the subject stops). Since cessation predominated in our time period, however, we phrase our results in terms of cessation.
We estimated these models in various subject–contact pair types. We evaluated the possibility that unobserved exposures explained the associations by examining how the type or direction of the relationship between the subject and contact affected the association between the smoking behavior of the subject and contact and by analyzing the role of geographic distance between subjects and their contacts.
We calculated 95% confidence intervals by simulating the first difference in the contact's contemporaneous smoking (changing from 0 to 1) and by using 1000 randomly drawn sets of estimates from the coefficient covariance matrix and assuming mean values for all other variables.26 All tests were two-tailed.
Results
Network Analysis
Figure 1Figure 1
Part of the Social Network from the Framingham Heart Study, with Information about Smoking in 1971 and 2000. depicts part of the network in 1971 and in 2000. There was a substantial change in the prevalence of smoking and in the social life of smokers during the period from 1971 to 2000. In 1971, there were many more smokers as compared with 2000, and the smokers occupied the center of their circles of friends and family to the same extent that nonsmokers did. However, by 2000, most people had stopped smoking, and those who still smoked were more likely to be at the periphery of the network. Moreover, there was an increased tendency for smokers to be connected primarily to other smokers and for there to be relatively separate clusters of smokers and nonsmokers. Additional quantitative evidence is available in the Supplementary Appendix.Figure 2AFigure 2
Effect of Social and Geographic Distance from Social Contacts Who Smoke on the Probability That a Subject Is a Smoker in the Social Network of the Framingham Heart Study. characterizes the clusters within the entire network more formally, and Figure 2B characterizes the effect of geographic distance between subjects and contacts (see below). Across all of the examinations, the average risk of smoking among contacts who were connected to a subject who is a smoker (at one degree of separation) was 61% higher in the observed network than in a random network. The risk of being a smoker was also 29% higher for contacts' contacts (at two degrees of separation) and 11% higher for contacts' contacts' contacts (at three degrees of separation). By the fourth degree of separation, there is no excess relationship between a subject's smoking behavior and the contact's smoking behavior. Hence, on average, the reach of the smoking clusters was three degrees. Socioeconomic factors do not appear to explain this clustering (see the Supplementary Appendix).Figure 3AFigure 3
Cluster Size and the Centrality of Smokers across Time. shows how the average size of a fully connected cluster of smokers has changed over time. It also shows the average size of these clusters that would have been observed if we kept the network topology and smoking prevalence the same and then randomly reassigned subjects to be smokers or nonsmokers. The observed cluster sizes were much larger than those expected because of chance, and they remained relatively stable as compared with the random networks, which declined sharply in size when prevalence decreased. These data provide evidence that suggests that people are not gradually stopping smoking at the fringes of clusters of smokers. Instead, it appears that whole clusters of connected smokers become nonsmokers together, causing the average cluster size to remain high even while overall prevalence declines (see also the animation).Moreover, Figure 3B indicates that the observed centrality of smokers decreased over the 32-year period: smokers were increasingly more peripheral within the network, and nonsmokers were progressively more central. To assess whether this change might be caused by a higher mortality rate among smokers resulting in the severing of links between people who smoke, we restricted the analysis to persons who survived throughout the course of the study; the results were nearly identical (see the Supplementary Appendix). Additional analyses indicated that differences in education levels between smokers and nonsmokers did not cause these results (see the Supplementary Appendix). Moreover, we found that smoking tends to decrease a person's subsequent centrality, but centrality does not tend to decrease smoking (see the Supplementary Appendix).
Interpersonal Models
We evaluated the extent of interpersonal association in smoking behavior with the use of regression analysis. Figure 4Figure 4
Probability That a Subject Will Quit Smoking According to the Type of Relationship with a Contact Who Quits Smoking, in the Social Network of the Framingham Heart Study. summarizes these associations.If a subject stated that a contact was his or her friend, the chance that the subject would be a smoker decreased by 36% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12 to 55) if the contact stopped smoking. Between mutual friends, the subject's risk of smoking decreased by 43% (95% CI, 1 to 69). There was no significant effect of smoking cessation when the friendship was perceived by the contact but not by the subject (15%; 95% CI, −35 to 50).
Educational status appeared to be important among friends. When a subject had at least 1 year of college, the risk of the subject smoking decreased by 57% (95% CI, 29 to 75) if the contact stopped smoking. When a contact had at least 1 year of college, the effect was similarly strong at 55% (95% CI, 26 to 74). Hence, persons with more education were both more influential and more able to be influenced. Among friends who both had at least 1 year of college, the chance that one person smoked decreased by 61% (95% CI, 28 to 81) when the other stopped smoking. Conversely, the association was not significant among pairs of friends in which at least one person had finished high school or had less than a high-school education. A model with an interaction term denoting pairs of friends with a high level of education showed that the association was significantly stronger (P=0.05) than the association in other kinds of friend pairs (see the Supplementary Appendix). Thus, the spread of smoking cessation among friends appears to be stronger through networks of persons who are highly educated. Educational status also appears to play an important role in peripheralization. Over the 32-year period, the gap in centrality between smokers and nonsmokers widened more for persons with a high level of education than for persons with a low level of education (see the Supplementary Appendix). These data provide evidence that suggests that educated persons experience greater social marginalization due to smoking than less-educated persons.
Among pairs of coworkers, the effect of smoking cessation by one person was not generally a significant factor in smoking cessation by another person. However, most of our observations were based on coworkers at large firms who may not have known one another. When we restricted the analyses to smaller firms (those with up to six employees who participated in the Framingham Heart Study) we found that smoking cessation by a coworker increased the likelihood of smoking cessation by a subject by 34% (95% CI, 5 to 56). Moreover, the effect became stronger as the firm size decreased, as one might expect, since it is more likely that the subjects knew one another.
Among married couples, when one spouse stopped smoking, the other spouse was 67% (95% CI, 59 to 73) less likely to smoke; husbands and wives affected each other similarly. Among siblings, smoking cessation by one sibling increased the chance of smoking cessation by the other by 25% (95% CI, 14 to 35). The smoking behavior of immediate neighbors did not have an effect on the smoking behavior of subjects.
We investigated the possible relevance of a number of other factors in additional models, including the size of groups of family members and friends, the prevalence of smoking in the subject's workplace, and the occupational prestige of the subjects. The association between the smoking behavior of contacts and subjects remained similar to the foregoing results (see the Supplementary Appendix).
We also examined the effect of geographic distance between subjects and contacts on the foregoing associations and found that distance did not modify the intensity of the effect of the contact's smoking behavior on the behavior of the subject. That is, smoking behavior was related between subjects and their contacts, regardless of how far apart they were geographically (Figure 2B).
Finally, we examined the spread of different levels or intensities of smoking, changing the categorization of “smoker” in our models from persons who smoked at least 1 cigarette per day (casual smoking) to those who smoked at least 5 cigarettes (moderate smoking) or 20 cigarettes (heavy smoking). The association in smoking behavior between siblings and spouses remained strongly significant at all intensity levels. However, the association ceased to be significant between friends at heavy smoking intensities, and it also ceased to be significant between coworkers at both moderate and heavy intensities (see the Supplementary Appendix). Thus, it appeared that neither friends nor coworkers influenced heavy smoking as much as they did casual smoking.
Discussion
The person-to-person spread of smoking cessation appears to have been a factor in the population-level decline in smoking seen in recent decades. Moreover, there appear to have been local smoking-cessation cascades, since whole connected clusters within the social network stopped smoking roughly in concert. This finding suggests that decisions to quit smoking are not made solely by isolated persons, but rather they reflect choices made by groups of people connected to each other both directly and indirectly at up to three degrees of separation. People appeared to act under collective pressures within niches in the network. As a further reflection of this phenomenon, persons who remained smokers were observed to move to the periphery of the network,27 and the network became progressively more polarized with respect to smokers and nonsmokers over the period from 1971 to 2003, with relatively fewer social ties between these groups.
We also found that the educational background of connected people mattered. The higher their education level, the more likely friends were to emulate each other with respect to smoking. In this regard, the diffusion of smoking cessation is consistent with the findings of previous studies of diverse innovations.28,29 This finding is also consistent with the idea that local social niches may arise within the network, and this emergence of niches may in turn contribute to the well-known socioeconomic gradient in smoking. That is, self-reinforcing norms may develop in groups of people, and these norms may augment individual decisions to quit. This process may lead to macrosocioeconomic patterns, similar to the adoption and spread of fashions first among high-status persons in society.28
Although connected persons might share an exposure to common environmental factors (e.g., cigarette taxes), the experience of simultaneous events (e.g., smoking-cessation campaigns in the workplace), or other common features (e.g., genes or sociodemographic attributes) that cause them to start or quit smoking simultaneously, our observations suggest a process involving group dynamics and person-to-person spread. The group-level cessation of smoking was not solely due to people in the same household or workplace quitting together, since even contacts who were geographically separated evinced interpersonal effects and workplace effects seemed to depend on workplace size in a way that suggests that actual interpersonal contact is important. Moreover, the fact that immediate neighbors did not affect subjects helps to exclude joint exposure to local environmental factors (e.g., tobacco marketing, local taxes, or cigarette availability) as an explanation for our observations. Our models also controlled for a subject's previous smoking status; this helps to account for sources of confounding that are stable over time (e.g., childhood experiences, personality, or genetic endowment). Finally, our models controlled for the previous smoking status of contacts, thus helping to account for a possible tendency of smokers to form ties among themselves.
On the basis of both social theory and our previous studies on obesity,11 we expected that people would be more likely to emulate the behavior of friends they nominated rather than people who nominated them, and our results are consistent with this. Moreover, this pattern provides some evidence against the role of confounding, since any confounding factor would not respect such directionality in social ties.
Smoking behavior in contacts might influence smoking behavior in subjects by diverse biopsychosocial means, including changing the subject's norms about the acceptability of smoking, more directly influencing the subject's behaviors (e.g., a contact asking the subject not to smoke, or, conversely, a contact sharing cigarettes), or even fostering dependence through the inhalation of secondhand smoke. These mechanisms could not be distinguished on the basis of our data. We observed that geographic distance from a contact does not modify the effect of a contact's smoking behavior on a subject. This observation does suggest that social norms may be an important factor, since such norms may spread more easily over geographic distance than behavioral effects.
A change in the smoking behavior of more than one contact may be required for a subject to quit, and there may be additive or even threshold effects whereby a subject's probability of smoking cessation depends on smoking cessation by not one contact, but by two or more.30 This phenomenon may be especially likely in the case of smoking, since smoking is often deemed an explicitly social — and hence shared — behavior. Consequently, when a smoker runs out of easily available contacts with whom he or she can smoke, he or she may be more likely to quit. This possibility is also consistent with the group-level smoking cessation that we observed.
Network phenomena might be exploited to spread positive health behaviors.31-34 Indeed, cessation programs for smoking and for alcohol use that provide peer support — that is, that modify the person's social network — are more successful than those that do not.32,34 People are connected, and so their health is connected.35,36 Collective interventions may thus be more effective than individual interventions. Moreover, medical and public health interventions to encourage people to quit smoking might be more cost-effective than initially supposed, since health improvements in one person might spread to others.35,37,38 Finally, the isolation of smokers within social networks suggests that blanket policy approaches (e.g., advertising and taxation) may be usefully supplemented by interventions targeting small groups. In the case of smoking cessation in the past three decades, there is evidence of a cascade of salubrious behavior, and cessation of smoking in one person appears to be highly relevant to the smoking behavior of others nearby in the social network.
Supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH R-01 AG24448 and P-01 AG031093), by a Pioneer Grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and by a contract from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (N01-HC-25195) to the Framingham Heart Study.
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
We thank Rebecca Joyce, Laurie Meneades, Molly Collins, Marian Bellwood, and Karen Mutalik for the expert assistance required to build the data set; and Joanne Murabito, M.D., and Emelia Benjamin, M.D., for advice.
Source Information
From the Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston (N.A.C.); the Department of Medicine, Mt. Auburn Hospital, and the Department of Sociology, Harvard University — both in Cambridge, MA (N.A.C.); and the Department of Political Science, University of California, San Diego, San Diego (J.H.F.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Christakis at the Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Ave., Boston, MA 02115, or at christakis@hcp.med.harvard.edu.
- References
References
1
Cigarette smoking among adults -- United States, 2004. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2005;55:1121-1124
2
Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing the health consequences of smoking — 25 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1989. (DHHS publication no. (CDC) 89-8411.)
3
Health United States 2003, with chartbook on trends in the health of Americans. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2003.
4
Faststats A to Z. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. (Accessed April 22, 2008, at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/Default.htm#S.)
5
Chen PH ,White HR ,Pandina RJ . Predictors of smoking cessation from adolescence into young adulthood. Addict Behav 2001;26:517-529
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline6
Powell LM ,Tauras JA ,Ross H . The importance of peer effects, cigarette prices and tobacco control policies for youth smoking behavior. J Health Econ 2005;24:950-968
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
Newman MEJ . The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Rev 2003;45:167-256
CrossRef | Web of Science8
Bearman PS ,Moody J ,Stovel K . Chains of affection: the structure of adolescent romantic and sexual networks. Am J Sociol 2004;110:44-91
CrossRef | Web of Science9
Fowler JH. Turnout in a small world. In: Zuckerman A, ed. The social logic of politics: family, friends, neighbors, and workmates as contexts for political behavior. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2005:269-87.
10
Crane D . Diffusion models and fashion: a reassessment. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 1999;566:13-24
CrossRef | Web of Science11
Christakis NA ,Fowler JH . The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. N Engl J Med 2007;357:370-379
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline12
Dawber TR. The Framingham Study: the epidemiology of atherosclerotic disease. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.
13
Feinleib M ,Kannel WB ,Garrison RJ ,McNamara PM ,Castelli WP . The Framingham Offspring Study: design and preliminary data. Prev Med 1975;4:518-525
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline14
Patrick DL ,Cheadle A ,Thompson DC ,Diehr P ,Koepsell T ,Kinne S . The validity of self-reported smoking: a review and meta-analysis. Am J Public Health 1994;84:1086-1093
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline15
Vartiainen E ,Seppala T ,Lillsinde P ,Puska P . Validation of self reported smoking by serum cotinine measurement in a community-based study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:167-170
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline16
Treiman DJ. Occupational prestige in comparative perspective. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
17
Kamada T ,Kawai S . An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Inf Process Lett 1989;31:7-15
CrossRef | Web of Science18
Moody J ,McFarland DA ,Bender-deMoll S . Visualizing network dynamics. Am J Sociol 2005;110:1206-1241
CrossRef | Web of Science19
Bonacich P . Factoring and weighing approaches to clique identification. J Math Sociol 1972;2:113-120
CrossRef | Web of Science20
Szabo G, Barabasi A-L. Network effects in service usage. (Accessed April 22, 2008, at http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0611177.)
21
McPherson M ,Smith-Lovin L ,Cook JM . Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu Rev Sociol 2001;27:415-444
CrossRef | Web of Science22
Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S. Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
23
Liang K-Y ,Zeger S . Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 1986;73:13-22
CrossRef | Web of Science24
Schildcrout JS ,Heagerty PJ . Regression analysis of longitudinal binary data with time-dependent environmental covariates: bias and efficiency. Biostatistics 2005;6:633-652
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline25
Beck N . Time-series-cross-section data: what have we learned in the past few years? Annu Rev Polit Sci 2001;4:271-293
CrossRef | Web of Science26
King G ,Tomz M ,Wittenberg J . Making the most of statistical analyses: improving interpretation and presentation. Am J Polit Sci 2000;44:341-355
CrossRef | Web of Science27
Strauss RS ,Pollack HA . Social marginalization of overweight children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003;157:746-752
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline28
Pampel FC . Diffusion, cohort change, and social patterns of smoking. Soc Sci Res 2005;34:117-139
CrossRef | Web of Science29
Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press, 1995.
30
Centola D ,Eguiluz V ,Macy M . Cascade dynamics of complex propagation. Physica A 2007;374:449-456
CrossRef | Web of Science31
Wing RR ,Jeffery RW . Benefits of recruiting participants with friends and increasing social support for weight loss and maintenance. J Consult Clin Psychol 1999;67:132-138
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline32
Malchodi CS ,Oncken C ,Dornelas EA ,Caramanica L ,Gregonis E ,Curry SL . The effects of peer counseling on smoking cessation and reduction. Obstet Gynecol 2003;101:504-510
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline33
Bruckner H ,Bearman P . After the promise: the STD consequences of adolescent virginity pledges. J Adolesc Health 2005;36:271-278
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline34
McKnight AJ ,McPherson K . Evaluation of peer intervention training for high school alcohol safety education. Accid Anal Prev 1986;18:339-347
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline35
Christakis NA . Social networks and collateral health effects. BMJ 2004;329:184-185
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline36
Christakis NA ,Allison PD . Mortality after the hospitalization of a spouse. N Engl J Med 2006;354:719-730
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline37
Rosen M . On randomized controlled trials and lifestyle interventions. Int J Epidemiol 1989;18:993-994
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline38
Cutler DM, Glaeser EL. Social interactions and smoking: NBER working paper no. W13477. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, October 2007.
- Citing Articles (152)
Citing Articles
1
Janie Heath, Sandra Inglett, Sara Young, Thomas V. Joshua, Nita Sakievich, James Hawkins, Jeannette O. Andrews, Martha S. Tingen. (2012) The Impact of the Georgia Health Sciences University Nursing Faculty Practice on Tobacco Cessation Rates. Nursing Clinics of North America 47:1, 1-12
CrossRef2
John F. Kelly, Bettina Hoeppner, Robert L. Stout, Maria Pagano. (2012) Determining the relative importance of the mechanisms of behavior change within Alcoholics Anonymous: a multiple mediator analysis. Addiction 107:2, 289-299
CrossRef3
Craig Evan Pollack, Gary Weissman, Justin Bekelman, Kaijun Liao, Katrina Armstrong. (2012) Physician Social Networks and Variation in Prostate Cancer Treatment in Three Cities. Health Services Research 47:1pt2, 380-403
CrossRef4
Deborah Karasek, Jennifer Ahern, Sandro Galea. (2012) Social Norms, Collective Efficacy, and Smoking Cessation in Urban Neighborhoods. American Journal of Public Health 102:2, 343-351
CrossRef5
Grace C. Huang, Janet Okamoto, Thomas W. Valente, Ping Sun, Yonglan Wei, C. Anderson Johnson, Jennifer B. Unger. (2012) Effects of Media and Social Standing on Smoking Behaviors among Adolescents in China. Journal of Children and Media 6:1, 100-118
CrossRef6
M. Martin-Matillas, F. B. Ortega, J. R. Ruiz, D. Martinez-Gomez, A. Marcos, D. Moliner-Urdiales, A. Polito, R. Pedrero-Chamizo, L. Beghin, D. Molnar, A. Kafatos, L. A. Moreno, I. De Bourdeaudhuij, M. Sjostrom, . (2011) Adolescent's physical activity levels and relatives' physical activity engagement and encouragement: the HELENA study. The European Journal of Public Health 21:6, 705-712
CrossRef7
Beverley Temple, Joy Johnson. (2011) Provision of Smoke-Free Homes and Vehicles for Kindergarten Children: Associated Factors. Journal of Pediatric Nursing 26:6, e69-e78
CrossRef8
Scott D. Gest, D. Wayne Osgood, Mark E. Feinberg, Karen L. Bierman, James Moody. (2011) Strengthening Prevention Program Theories and Evaluations: Contributions from Social Network Analysis. Prevention Science 12:4, 349-360
CrossRef9
Daniel W. Byrne, Ron Z. Goetzel, Paula W. McGown, Marilyn C. Holmes, Meghan Short Beckowski, Maryam J. Tabrizi, Niranjana Kowlessar, Mary I. Yarbrough. (2011) Seven-Year Trends in Employee Health Habits From a Comprehensive Workplace Health Promotion Program at Vanderbilt University. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 53:12, 1372-1381
CrossRef10
P. Anderson, E. Jane-llopis. (2011) Mental health and global well-being. Health Promotion International 26:suppl 1, i147-i155
CrossRef11
Brian D. Christens. (2011) Toward Relational Empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology
CrossRef12
Darren Lau, Calypse Agborsangaya, Fatima Al Sayah, Xiuyun Wu, Arto Ohinmaa, Jeffrey A. Johnson. (2011) Population-level response shift: novel implications for research. Quality of Life Research
CrossRef13
P Auconi, G Caldarelli, A Scala, G Ierardo, A Polimeni. (2011) A network approach to orthodontic diagnosis. Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research 14:4, 189-197
CrossRef14
Michael P. O'Donnell, Jeffrey M. Bensky. (2011) Integrating Wellness Into Hospital Systems. American Journal of Health Promotion 26:2, TAHP1-TAHP14
CrossRef15
Patricia A. Thomas. (2011) Gender, social engagement, and limitations in late life. Social Science & Medicine 73:9, 1428-1435
CrossRef16
Christine Anderson, AkkeNeel Talsma. (2011) Characterizing the Structure of Operating Room Staffing Using Social Network Analysis. Nursing Research 60:6, 378-385
CrossRef17
Y. Hamdani, A. Jetha, C. Norman. (2011) Systems thinking perspectives applied to healthcare transition for youth with disabilities: a paradigm shift for practice, policy and research. Child: Care, Health and Development 37:6, 806-814
CrossRef18
Stephanie N. Nguyen, Isabelle Von Kohorn, Dena Schulman-Green, Eve R. Colson. (2011) The Importance of Social Networks on Smoking: Perspectives of Women Who Quit Smoking During Pregnancy. Maternal and Child Health Journal
CrossRef19
Trace Kershaw, Anna Arnold, Derrick Gordon, Urania Magriples, Linda Niccolai. (2011) In the Heart or in the Head: Relationship and Cognitive Influences on Sexual Risk Among Young Couples. AIDS and Behavior
CrossRef20
Steven E. Meredith, Michael J. Grabinski, Jesse Dallery. (2011) Internet-based group contingency management to promote abstinence from cigarette smoking: A feasibility study. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 118:1, 23-30
CrossRef21
Elliot M. Berry. (2011) The role of the sociotype in managing chronic disease: Integrating bio-psycho-sociology with systems biology. Medical Hypotheses 77:4, 610-613
CrossRef22
L. Acedo, J.-A. Moraño, R.-J. Villanueva, J. Villanueva-Oller, J. Díez-Domingo. (2011) Using random networks to study the dynamics of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in the Spanish region of Valencia. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 54:7-8, 1650-1654
CrossRef23
Jerry Cullum, Megan A. O’Grady, Howard Tennen. (2011) Affiliation Goals and Health Behaviors. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 5:10, 694-705
CrossRef24
Lila J. Finney Rutten, Kelly Blake, Bradford W. Hesse, Leland K. Ackerson. (2011) Isolated and Skeptical: Social Engagement and Trust in Information Sources Among Smokers. Journal of Cancer Education 26:3, 465-473
CrossRef25
Brion S. Maher, Vladimir I. Vladimirov, Shawn J. Latendresse, Dawn L. Thiselton, Rebecca McNamee, Moonsu Kang, Tim B. Bigdeli, Xiangning Chen, Brien P. Riley, John M. Hettema, Howard Chilcoat, Christian Heidbreder, Pierandrea Muglia, E. Lenn Murrelle, Danielle M. Dick, Fazil Aliev, Arpana Agrawal, Howard J. Edenberg, John Kramer, John Nurnberger, Jay A. Tischfield, Bernie Devlin, Robert E. Ferrell, Galina P. Kirillova, Ralph E. Tarter, Kenneth S. Kendler, Michael M. Vanyukov. (2011) The AVPR1A Gene and Substance Use Disorders: Association, Replication, and Functional Evidence. Biological Psychiatry 70:6, 519-527
CrossRef26
Gavin Nicholson, Geoffrey Kiel, Scott Kiel-Chisholm. (2011) The Contribution of Social Norms to the Global Financial Crisis: A Systemic Actor Focused Model and Proposal for Regulatory Change. Corporate Governance: An International Review 19:5, 471-488
CrossRef27
Marlon P. Mundt. (2011) The Impact of Peer Social Networks on Adolescent Alcohol Use Initiation. Academic Pediatrics 11:5, 414-421
CrossRef28
Predrag Klasnja, Wanda Pratt. (2011) Healthcare in the pocket: Mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions. Journal of Biomedical Informatics
CrossRef29
Oliver Harrison, Cother Hajat, Cary Cooper, Gustavo Averbuj, Peter Anderson. (2011) Communicating Health Through Health Footprints. Journal of Health Communication 16:sup2, 158-174
CrossRef30
Jose M. Martin-Moreno, Franklin Apfel, Jose Luis Alfonso Sanchez, Gauden Galea, Zsuzsanna Jakab. (2011) The Social Nature of Chronic Noncommunicable Diseases and How to Tackle Them Through Communication Technology, Training, and Outreach. Journal of Health Communication 16:sup2, 94-106
CrossRef31
Peter Anderson, Oliver Harrison, Cary Cooper, Eva Jané-Llopis. (2011) Incentives for Health. Journal of Health Communication 16:sup2, 107-133
CrossRef32
Abdulrahman M. El-Sayed, Sandro Galea, Helen Herrman, Marianne Kastrup. 2011. Commentaries. , 75-87.
CrossRef33
Douglas W. Roblin. (2011) The Potential of Cellular Technology to Mediate Social Networks for Support of Chronic Disease Self-Management. Journal of Health Communication 16:sup1, 59-76
CrossRef34
Kyle Macdonald-Wallis, Russell Jago, Angie S. Page, Rowan Brockman, Janice L. Thompson. (2011) School-based friendship networks and children’s physical activity: A spatial analytical approach. Social Science & Medicine 73:1, 6-12
CrossRef35
K. Leibel, J. G. L. Lee, A. O. Goldstein, L. M. Ranney. (2011) Barring Intervention? Lesbian and Gay Bars as an Underutilized Venue for Tobacco Interventions. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 13:7, 507-511
CrossRef36
Nancy L. Keating, A. James O'Malley, Joanne M. Murabito, Kirsten P. Smith, Nicholas A Christakis. (2011) Minimal social network effects evident in cancer screening behavior. Cancer 117:13, 3045-3052
CrossRef37
Hans Noel, Brendan Nyhan. (2011) The “unfriending” problem: The consequences of homophily in friendship retention for causal estimates of social influence. Social Networks 33:3, 211-218
CrossRef38
Francisco Guerrero, Francisco-José Santonja, Rafael-Jacinto Villanueva. (2011) Analysing the Spanish smoke-free legislation of 2006: A new method to quantify its impact using a dynamic model. International Journal of Drug Policy 22:4, 247-251
CrossRef39
Lori A. Bastian, Laura J. Fish, Bercedis L. Peterson, Andrea K. Biddle, Jennifer Garst, Pauline Lyna, Stephanie Molner, Gerold Bepler, Mike Kelley, Francis J. Keefe, Colleen M. McBride. (2011) Proactive recruitment of cancer patients' social networks into a smoking cessation trial. Contemporary Clinical Trials 32:4, 498-504
CrossRef40
Christi A. Patten, Christina M. Smith, Tabetha A. Brockman, Paul A. Decker, Christine A. Hughes, Ashley M. Nadeau, Pamela S. Sinicrope, Kenneth P. Offord, Edward Lichtenstein, Shu-Hong Zhu. (2011) Support-Person Promotion of a Smoking Quitline. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 41:1, 17-23
CrossRef41
David W. Best, Teodora Groshkova, James Sadler, Ed Day, William L. White. (2011) What is Recovery? Functioning and Recovery Stories of Self-Identified People in Recovery in a Services User Group and Their Peer Networks in Birmingham England. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly 29:3, 293-313
CrossRef42
DAVID BEST, JANE GOW, TONY KNOX, AVRIL TAYLOR, TEODORA GROSHKOVA, WILLIAM WHITE. (2011) Mapping the recovery stories of drinkers and drug users in Glasgow: Quality of life and its associations with measures of recovery capital. Drug and Alcohol Reviewno-no
CrossRef43
Tricia M. Leahey, Jessica Gokee LaRose, Joseph L. Fava, Rena R. Wing. (2011) Social Influences Are Associated With BMI and Weight Loss Intentions in Young Adults. Obesity 19:6, 1157-1162
CrossRef44
Tricia M. Leahey, John G. Thomas, Jessica Gokee LaRose, Rena R. Wing. (2011) A Randomized Trial Testing a Contingency-Based Weight Loss Intervention Involving Social Reinforcement. Obesity
CrossRef45
Paul DiMaggio, Filiz Garip. (2011) How Network Externalities Can Exacerbate Intergroup Inequality 1. American Journal of Sociology 116:6, 1887-1933
CrossRef46
Craig M. Rawlings, Daniel A. McFarland. (2011) Influence flows in the academy: Using affiliation networks to assess peer effects among researchers. Social Science Research 40:3, 1001-1017
CrossRef47
Jeremy Hackney, Fabrice Marchal. (2011) A coupled multi-agent microsimulation of social interactions and transportation behavior. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 45:4, 296-309
CrossRef48
D. Helbing, S. Balietti. (2011) From social data mining to forecasting socio-economic crises. The European Physical Journal Special Topics 195:1, 3-68
CrossRef49
A. James O'Malley, Nicholas A. Christakis. (2011) Longitudinal analysis of large social networks: Estimating the effect of health traits on changes in friendship ties. Statistics in Medicine 30:9, 950-964
CrossRef50
Jacqueline A. Bowden, Caroline L. Miller, Janet E. Hiller. (2011) Smoking and mental illness: a population study in South Australia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 45:4, 325-331
CrossRef51
Kendra Eshleman. (2011) Becoming Heretical: Affection and Ideology in Recruitment to Early Christianities. Harvard Theological Review 104:02, 191-216
CrossRef52
Janice Y. Tsoh, Elisa K. Tong, Ginny Gildengorin, Tung T. Nguyen, Mary V. Modayil, Ching Wong, Stephen J. McPhee. (2011) Individual and family factors associated with intention to quit among male Vietnamese American smokers: Implications for intervention development. Addictive Behaviors 36:4, 294-301
CrossRef53
Faith Dickerson, Melanie Bennett, Lisa Dixon, Erin Burke, Crystal Vaughan, Janine Delahanty, Carlo DiClemente. (2011) Smoking Cessation in Persons with Serious Mental Illnesses: The Experience of Successful Quitters. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 34:4, 311-316
CrossRef54
Christine A. Anderson, Ann L. Whall. (2011) A philosophical analysis of agent-based modelling: a new tool for theory development in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing 67:4, 904-914
CrossRef55
Sandra J. Japuntich, Adam M. Leventhal, Megan E. Piper, Daniel M. Bolt, Linda J. Roberts, Michael C. Fiore, Timothy B. Baker. (2011) Smoker Characteristics and Smoking-Cessation Milestones. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 40:3, 286-294
CrossRef56
J N Rosenquist, J H Fowler, N A Christakis. (2011) Social network determinants of depression. Molecular Psychiatry 16:3, 273-281
CrossRef57
Jeremy A. Greene, Niteesh K. Choudhry, Elaine Kilabuk, William H. Shrank. (2011) Online Social Networking by Patients with Diabetes: A Qualitative Evaluation of Communication with Facebook. Journal of General Internal Medicine 26:3, 287-292
CrossRef58
Michael P O'Donnell. (2011) Reflections on the 25th Anniversary of Publishing the American Journal of Health Promotion : People, Scientific Progress, and Missteps. American Journal of Health Promotion 25:4, iv-xi
CrossRef59
Gardy, Jennifer L., Johnston, James C., Sui, Shannan J. Ho, Cook, Victoria J., Shah, Lena, Brodkin, Elizabeth, Rempel, Shirley, Moore, Richard, Zhao, Yongjun, Holt, Robert, Varhol, Richard, Birol, Inanc, Lem, Marcus, Sharma, Meenu K., Elwood, Kevin, Jones, Steven J.M., Brinkman, Fiona S.L., Brunham, Robert C., Tang, Patrick, . (2011) Whole-Genome Sequencing and Social-Network Analysis of a Tuberculosis Outbreak. New England Journal of Medicine 364:8, 730-739
Full Text60
Miguel Martín-Matillas, Francisco B. Ortega, Palma Chillon, Isaac J. Pérez, Jonatan R. Ruiz, Ruth Castillo, Sonia Gómez-Martínez, Luis A. Moreno, Manuel Delgado-Fernández, Pablo Tercedor, On Behalf of the AVENA Study*. (2011) Physical activity among Spanish adolescents: Relationship with their relatives' physical activity – The AVENA Study. Journal of Sports Sciences 29:4, 329-336
CrossRef61
J. H. Fowler, J. E. Settle, N. A. Christakis. (2011) Correlated genotypes in friendship networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:5, 1993-1997
CrossRef62
D. Schnoz, M. Schaub, D. L. Schwappach, C. Salis Gross. (2011) Developing a Smoking Cessation Program for Turkish-Speaking Migrants in Switzerland: Novel Findings and Promising Effects. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 13:2, 127-134
CrossRef63
Mir M. Ali, Debra S. Dwyer. (2011) Estimating peer effects in sexual behavior among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence 34:1, 183-190
CrossRef64
Carter Coberley, Elizabeth Y. Rula, James E. Pope. (2011) Effectiveness of Health and Wellness Initiatives for Seniors. Population Health Management 14:S1, S-45-S-50
CrossRef65
James N Rosenquist. (2011) Lessons from social network analyses for behavioral medicine. Current Opinion in Psychiatry1
CrossRef66
Matthew O. Jackson. 2011. An Overview of Social Networks and Economic Applications. , 511-585.
CrossRef67
Patricia Sobradillo, Francisco Pozo, Álvar Agustí. (2011) Medicina P4: el futuro a la vuelta de la esquina. Archivos de Bronconeumología 47:1, 35-40
CrossRef68
Amanda L Graham, George D Papandonatos, Hakmook Kang, Jose L Moreno, David B Abrams. (2011) Development and Validation of the Online Social Support for Smokers Scale. Journal of Medical Internet Research 13:3,
CrossRef69
R. Craig Lefebvre. (2011) An integrative model for social marketing. Journal of Social Marketing 1:1, 54-72
CrossRef70
Alan D. Smith, Amber A. Smith. (2011) Gender perceptions of smoking and cessation via technology, incentives and virtual communities. International Journal of Electronic Healthcare 6:1, 1
CrossRef71
Astri Medbø, Hasse Melbye, Carl Rudebeck. (2011) "I did not intend to stop. I just could not stand cigarettes any more." A qualitative interview study of smoking cessation among the elderly. BMC Family Practice 12:1, 42
CrossRef72
Irit Nitzan, Barak Libai. (2011) Social Effects on Customer Retention. Journal of Marketing Research24
CrossRef73
A. L. Hill, D. G. Rand, M. A. Nowak, N. A. Christakis. (2010) Emotions as infectious diseases in a large social network: the SISa model. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 277:1701, 3827-3835
CrossRef74
Steven A. Schroeder. (2010) The Kids Will Be All Right (If They Don't Smoke). American Journal of Preventive Medicine 39:6, 609-610
CrossRef75
Fadia T Shaya, Xia Yan, Maryam Farshid, Samer Barakat, Miah Jung, Sara Low, Donald Fedder. (2010) Social networks in cardiovascular disease management. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 10:6, 701-705
CrossRef76
John W. Ayers, C. Richard Hofstetter, Suzanne C. Hughes, Hae-Ryun Park, Hee-Young Paik, Yoon Ju Song, Veronica Irvin, Melbourne F. Hovell. (2010) Gender modifies the relationship between social networks and smoking among adults in Seoul, South Korea. International Journal of Public Health 55:6, 609-617
CrossRef77
Jeannette M. Beasley, Polly A. Newcomb, Amy Trentham-Dietz, John M. Hampton, Rachel M. Ceballos, Linda Titus-Ernstoff, Kathleen M. Egan, Michelle D. Holmes. (2010) Social networks and survival after breast cancer diagnosis. Journal of Cancer Survivorship 4:4, 372-380
CrossRef78
Dolores Albarracin, Melanie B. Tannenbaum, Laura R. Glasman, Alexander J. Rothman. (2010) Modeling Structural, Dyadic, and Individual Factors: The Inclusion and Exclusion Model of HIV Related Behavior. AIDS and Behavior 14:S2, 239-249
CrossRef79
Andrew R. Zinn. (2010) Unconventional Wisdom About the Obesity Epidemic Symbol. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences 340:6, 481-491
CrossRef80
Nicolas Bertholet, Debbie M. Cheng, Tibor P. Palfai, Richard Saitz. (2010) Factors Associated with Favorable Drinking Outcome 12 Months After Hospitalization in a Prospective Cohort Study of Inpatients with Unhealthy Alcohol Use. Journal of General Internal Medicine 25:10, 1024-1029
CrossRef81
Cameron D. Norman, Jill Charnaw-Burger, Andrea L. Yip, Sam Saad, Charlotte Lombardo. (2010) Designing health innovation networks using complexity science and systems thinking: the CoNEKTR model. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16:5, 1016-1023
CrossRef82
Yu Shi, Toby N. Weingarten, Carlos B. Mantilla, W. Michael Hooten, David O. Warner. (2010) Smoking and Pain. Anesthesiology 113:4, 977-992
CrossRef83
D. Centola. (2010) The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment. Science 329:5996, 1194-1197
CrossRef84
Clayton D. Peoples. (2010) CONTRIBUTOR INFLUENCE IN CONGRESS: Social Ties and PAC Effects on U.S. House Policymaking. Sociological Quarterly 51:4, 649-677
CrossRef85
Peter Muennig, Kevin Fiscella, Daniel Tancredi, Peter Franks. (2010) The Relative Health Burden of Selected Social and Behavioral Risk Factors in the United States: Implications for Policy. American Journal of Public Health 100:9, 1758-1764
CrossRef86
Pamela Kaufman, Kara Griffin, Joanna Cohen, Nathan Perkins, Roberta Ferrence. (2010) Smoking in urban outdoor public places: Behaviour, experiences, and implications for public health. Health & Place 16:5, 961-968
CrossRef87
K. E. Warner, D. Mendez. (2010) Tobacco control policy in developed countries: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 12:9, 876-887
CrossRef88
Reinhard Schunck, Benedikt G. Rogge. (2010) Unemployment and its association with health-relevant actions: investigating the role of time perspective with German census data. International Journal of Public Health 55:4, 271-278
CrossRef89
Rosanna E. Guadagno, Robert B. Cialdini, Gadi Evron. (2010) Storming the Servers: A Social Psychological Analysis of the First Internet War. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 13:4, 447-453
CrossRef90
G. Ozakinci, M. Wells, B. Williams, A.J. Munro, P. Donnelly. (2010) Cancer diagnosis: An opportune time to help patients and their families stop smoking?. Public Health 124:8, 479-482
CrossRef91
J. L. Westmaas, J. Bontemps-Jones, J. E. Bauer. (2010) Social support in smoking cessation: Reconciling theory and evidence. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 12:7, 695-707
CrossRef92
Gerald M. Oppenheimer. (2010) Framingham Heart Study: The First 20 Years. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 53:1, 55-61
CrossRef93
Nandita Saikia, F. Ram. (2010) DETERMINANTS OF ADULT MORTALITY IN INDIA. Asian Population Studies 6:2, 153-171
CrossRef94
M. Adams, T. Effertz. (2010) Effective Prevention against Risky Underage Drinking -- The Need for Higher Excise Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages in Germany. Alcohol and Alcoholism 45:4, 387-394
CrossRef95
Tricia M. Leahey, Melissa M. Crane, Angela Marinilli Pinto, Brad Weinberg, Rajiv Kumar, Rena R. Wing. (2010) Effect of teammates on changes in physical activity in a statewide campaign. Preventive Medicine 51:1, 45-49
CrossRef96
Nathan K. Cobb, Amanda L. Graham, David B. Abrams. (2010) Social Network Structure of a Large Online Community for Smoking Cessation. American Journal of Public Health 100:7, 1282-1289
CrossRef97
Mary Jane Rotheram-Borus, Fen Rhodes, Katherine Desmond, Robert E. Weiss. (2010) Reducing HIV Risks Among Active Injection Drug and Crack Users: The Safety Counts Program. AIDS and Behavior 14:3, 658-668
CrossRef98
Mark A. Pachucki, Ronald L. Breiger. (2010) Cultural Holes: Beyond Relationality in Social Networks and Culture. Annual Review of Sociology 36:1, 205-224
CrossRef99
Fred C. Pampel, Patrick M. Krueger, Justin T. Denney. (2010) Socioeconomic Disparities in Health Behaviors. Annual Review of Sociology 36:1, 349-370
CrossRef100
E. K. Tong, G. Gildengorin, T. Nguyen, J. Tsoh, M. Modayil, C. Wong, S. J. McPhee. (2010) Smoking prevalence and factors associated with smoking status among Vietnamese in California. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 12:6, 613-621
CrossRef101
Nicole Redmond, Heather J. Baer, Cheryl R. Clark, Stuart Lipsitz, LeRoi S. Hicks. (2010) Sources of Health Information Related to Preventive Health Behaviors in a National Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 38:6, 620-627.e2
CrossRef102
Charles E. Murdoch, Christopher Thomas Scott. (2010) Stem Cell Tourism and the Power of Hope. The American Journal of Bioethics 10:5, 16-23
CrossRef103
M. Baha, A.-L. Le Faou. (2010) Smokers’ reasons for quitting in an anti-smoking social context. Public Health 124:4, 225-231
CrossRef104
J. H. Fowler, N. A. Christakis. (2010) Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107:12, 5334-5338
CrossRef105
K. Ladin, D. W. Hanto. (2010) Understanding Disparities in Transplantation: Do Social Networks Provide the Missing Clue?. American Journal of Transplantation 10:3, 472-476
CrossRef106
Steven A. Schroeder, Chad D. Morris. (2010) Confronting a Neglected Epidemic: Tobacco Cessation for Persons with Mental Illnesses and Substance Abuse Problems. Annual Review of Public Health 31:1, 297-314
CrossRef107
Colin Depp, Ipsit V. Vahia, Dilip Jeste. (2010) Successful Aging: Focus on Cognitive and Emotional Health. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 6:1, 527-550
CrossRef108
Carlo C. DiClemente, Janine C. Delahanty, Robert M. Fiedler. (2010) The Journey to the End of Smoking. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 38:3, S418-S428
CrossRef109
Myra L. Muramoto, Ken Wassum, Tim Connolly, Eva Matthews, Lysbeth Floden. (2010) Helpers Program. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 38:3, S319-S326
CrossRef110
Patrick Dunleavy. (2010) New Worlds in Political Science. Political Studies 58:2, 239-265
CrossRef111
Colleen M. McBride, Laura M. Koehly, Saskia C. Sanderson, Kimberly A. Kaphingst. (2010) The Behavioral Response to Personalized Genetic Information: Will Genetic Risk Profiles Motivate Individuals and Families to Choose More Healthful Behaviors?. Annual Review of Public Health 31:1, 89-103
CrossRef112
Terry T.-K. Huang, Mary T. Story. (2010) A Journey Just Started: Renewing Efforts to Address Childhood Obesity. Obesity 18:n1s, S1-S3
CrossRef113
Diane T. Finegood, Thomas D.N. Merth, Harry Rutter. (2010) Implications of the Foresight Obesity System Map for Solutions to Childhood Obesity. Obesity 18:n1s, S13-S16
CrossRef114
Frederic W. Hafferty, Brian Castellani. (2010) The Increasing Complexities of Professionalism. Academic Medicine 85:2, 288-301
CrossRef115
Martin Kilduff, Daniel J. Brass. (2010) Organizational Social Network Research: Core Ideas and Key Debates. The Academy of Management Annals 4:1, 317-357
CrossRef116
David Goldberg, Kathleen M. Weber, Jennifer Orsi, Nancy A. Hessol, Gypsyamber D’Souza, D. Heather Watts, Rebecca Schwartz, Chenglong Liu, Marshall Glesby, Pamela Burian, Mardge H. Cohen. (2010) Smoking Cessation Among Women with and at Risk for HIV: Are They Quitting?. Journal of General Internal Medicine 25:1, 39-44
CrossRef117
S. Aral, L. Muchnik, A. Sundararajan. (2009) Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106:51, 21544-21549
CrossRef118
Paul Ormerod, Greg Wiltshire. (2009) ‘Binge’ drinking in the UK: a social network phenomenon. Mind & Society 8:2, 135-152
CrossRef119
Darshan Desai. (2009) Role of Relationship Management and Value Co-Creation in Social Marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly 15:4, 112-125
CrossRef120
Mary E. Cooley, Linda Sarna, Jenny Kotlerman, Jeanne M. Lukanich, Michael Jaklitsch, Sarah B. Green, Raphael Bueno. (2009) Smoking cessation is challenging even for patients recovering from lung cancer surgery with curative intent. Lung Cancer 66:2, 218-225
CrossRef121
M. L. Drum, S. Shiovitz-Ezra, E. Gaumer, S. T. Lindau. (2009) Assessment of Smoking Behaviors and Alcohol Use in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 64B:Supplement 1, i119-i130
CrossRef122
DANIEL S. MCGRATH, SEAN P. BARRETT. (2009) The comorbidity of tobacco smoking and gambling: A review of the literature. Drug and Alcohol Review 28:6, 676-681
CrossRef123
R. J. Mermelstein, P. J. Colvin, S. D. Klingemann. (2009) Dating and changes in adolescent cigarette smoking: Does partner smoking behavior matter?. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 11:10, 1226-1230
CrossRef124
Mir M. Ali, Debra S. Dwyer. (2009) Estimating Peer Effects in Adolescent Smoking Behavior: A Longitudinal Analysis. Journal of Adolescent Health 45:4, 402-408
CrossRef125
Antronette K. Yancey. (2009) The meta-volition model: Organizational leadership is the key ingredient in getting society moving, literally!. Preventive Medicine 49:4, 342-351
CrossRef126
Cameron D. Norman. (2009) Health promotion as a systems science and practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 15:5, 868-872
CrossRef127
Matthew O. Jackson. (2009) Networks and Economic Behavior. Annual Review of Economics 1:1, 489-511
CrossRef128
(2009) The Art of Health Promotion. American Journal of Health Promotion 24:1, TAHP-1-TAHP-12
CrossRef129
Steven A. Schroeder. (2009) Public Smoking Bans Are Good for the Heart
Editorials published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of JACC or the American College of Cardiology.. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 54:14, 1256-1257
CrossRef130
Gerard John Molloy, Emmanuel Stamatakis, Gemma Randall, Mark Hamer. (2009) Marital status, gender and cardiovascular mortality: Behavioural, psychological distress and metabolic explanations. Social Science & Medicine 69:2, 223-228
CrossRef131
Amy S. B. Bohnert, Catherine P. Bradshaw, Carl A. Latkin. (2009) A social network perspective on heroin and cocaine use among adults: evidence of bidirectional influences. Addiction 104:7, 1210-1218
CrossRef132
Emilie M. Hafner-Burton, Miles Kahler, Alexander H. Montgomery. (2009) Network Analysis for International Relations. International Organization 63:03, 559
CrossRef133
Jane Dixon, Cathy Banwell. (2009) Theory driven research designs for explaining behavioural health risk transitions: The case of smoking. Social Science & Medicine 68:12, 2206-2214
CrossRef134
J. A. Stapleton, F. Keaney, G. Sutherland. (2009) Illicit drug use as a predictor of smoking cessation treatment outcome. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 11:6, 685-689
CrossRef135
Leland K. Ackerson, K. Viswanath. (2009) The Social Context of Interpersonal Communication and Health. Journal of Health Communication 14:sup1, 5-17
CrossRef136
K. Michael Cummings, Geoffrey T. Fong, Ron Borland. (2009) Environmental Influences on Tobacco Use: Evidence from Societal and Community Influences on Tobacco Use and Dependence. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 5:1, 433-458
CrossRef137
Q. B. Nguyen, S.-H. Zhu. (2009) Intermittent smokers who used to smoke daily: A preliminary study on smoking situations. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 11:2, 164-170
CrossRef138
NANCY E. ADLER, JUDITH STEWART. (2009) Reducing Obesity: Motivating Action While Not Blaming the Victim. Milbank Quarterly 87:1, 49-70
CrossRef139
J. H. Fowler, C. T. Dawes, N. A. Christakis. (2009) From the Cover: Model of genetic variation in human social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106:6, 1720-1724
CrossRef140
Markus Lüngen, Milly-Anna Schröer-Günther, Anna Marie Passon, Andreas Gerber, Karl W. Lauterbach. (2009) Evidenz der Wirksamkeit internationaler Präventionsmaßnahmen und Auswirkungen auf ein deutsches Präventionsgesetz. Medizinische Klinik 104:2, 101-107
CrossRef141
Patti Anklam. (2009) Ten years of net work. The Learning Organization 16:6, 415-426
CrossRef142
Janet Brigham, Christina N Lessov-Schlaggar, Harold S Javitz, Ruth E Krasnow, Mary McElroy, Gary E Swan. (2009) Test-Retest Reliability of Web-Based Retrospective Self-Report of Tobacco Exposure and Risk. Journal of Medical Internet Research 11:3,
CrossRef143
Yoshimitsu Takahashi, Chiyoko Uchida, Koichi Miyaki, Michi Sakai, Takuro Shimbo, Takeo Nakayama. (2009) Potential Benefits and Harms of a Peer Support Social Network Service on the Internet for People With Depressive Tendencies: Qualitative Content Analysis and Social Network Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research 11:3, e29
CrossRef144
A. James O’Malley, Peter V. Marsden. (2008) The analysis of social networks. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology 8:4, 222-269
CrossRef145
SARAH E. GOLLUST, STEVEN A. SCHROEDER, KENNETH E. WARNER. (2008) Helping Smokers Quit: Understanding the Barriers to Utilization of Smoking Cessation Services. Milbank Quarterly 86:4, 601-627
CrossRef146
Lynne C. Messer, Jay S. Kaufman, Pauline Mendola, Barbara A. Laraia. (2008) Black-White Preterm Birth Disparity: A Marker of Inequality. Annals of Epidemiology 18:11, 851-858
CrossRef147
Kevin Lewis, Jason Kaufman, Marco Gonzalez, Andreas Wimmer, Nicholas Christakis. (2008) Tastes, ties, and time: A new social network dataset using Facebook.com. Social Networks 30:4, 330-342
CrossRef148
J.H. Fowler, N.A. Christakis. (2008) Estimating peer effects on health in social networks: A response to Cohen-Cole and Fletcher; and Trogdon, Nonnemaker, and Pais. Journal of Health Economics 27:5, 1400-1405
CrossRef149
Peter Miller, Louisa Strain, Susan Savva. (2008) News and Notes. Addiction 103:8, 1406-1408
CrossRef150
Lori A. Bastian. (2008) Smoking Cessation for Hospital Patients: An Opportunity to Increase the Reach of Effective Smoking Cessation Programs. Journal of General Internal Medicine 23:8, 1286-1287
CrossRef151
Coco Ballantyne. (2008) Healthy actions reverberate strongly. Nature Medicine 14:7, 701-701
CrossRef152
Schroeder, Steven, . (2008) Stranded in the Periphery — The Increasing Marginalization of Smokers. New England Journal of Medicine 358:21, 2284-2286
Full Text
