IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v14y2017i8p938-d108987.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experiment Assessing Punitive versus Wellness Framing of a Tobacco-Free Campus Policy on Students’ Perceived Level of University Support

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph G. L. Lee

    (Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Mail Stop 529, 1000 E. 5th St., Greenville, NC 27858, USA)

  • Christopher J. Purcell

    (Department of Leadership, Policy, and Organizations, Peabody School of Education, Vanderbilt University, PMB #414, 230 Appleton Place, Nashville, TN 37203, USA)

  • Beth H. Chaney

    (Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Mail Stop 529, 1000 E. 5th St., Greenville, NC 27858, USA)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine how different ways of describing a hypothetical tobacco-free campus policy would impact college students’ perceived level of support from the college. In the spring of 2016, we randomized 1885 undergraduate students in a required course to three message conditions in an online survey: control (no message), wellness (emphasizing promoting health and quitting support), and punitive (emphasizing consequences for violating the policy). The dependent variable was perceived organizational support. We selected items previously shown to be relevant for college students (alpha = 0.92 in our data). Given significant non-normality, we used non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests with pairwise comparisons to examine differences in perceived organizational support across the three conditions. We examined results by smoking status and if the participant correctly reported the message they received. We found no significant difference in perceived organizational support among students exposed to different tobacco-free campus policy announcements ( p = 0.75). We also found no significant difference among smokers ( p = 0.66). However, among smokers who correctly reported the message they received, we found significantly lower perceived university support ( p = 0.01). Messages about tobacco-free campus policies should focus on the role of policy in supporting a healthy environment instead of punitive enforcement. Campus administrators should use caution when using message frames focusing on consequences of violating newly adopted policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph G. L. Lee & Christopher J. Purcell & Beth H. Chaney, 2017. "An Experiment Assessing Punitive versus Wellness Framing of a Tobacco-Free Campus Policy on Students’ Perceived Level of University Support," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-8, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:8:p:938-:d:108987
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/8/938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/8/938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Riggle, Robert J. & Edmondson, Diane R. & Hansen, John D., 2009. "A meta-analysis of the relationship between perceived organizational support and job outcomes: 20 years of research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 1027-1030, October.
    2. Kristen A. Renn & Karen D. Arnold, 2003. "Reconceptualizing Research on College Student Peer Culture," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(3), pages 261-291, May.
    3. Fallin, A. & Roditis, M. & Glantz, S.A., 2015. "Association of campus tobacco policies with secondhand smoke exposure, intention to smoke on campus, and attitudes about outdoor smoking restrictions," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(6), pages 1098-1100.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li Sun, 2019. "Perceived Organizational Support: A Literature Review," International Journal of Human Resource Studies, Macrothink Institute, vol. 9(3), pages 155-175, December.
    2. Hope, Ole-Kristian & Su, Xijiang, 2021. "Peer-level analyst transitions," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    3. Nick Drydakis, 2019. "School‐Age Bullying, Workplace Bullying and Job Satisfaction: Experiences of LGB People in Britain," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 87(4), pages 455-488, July.
    4. Azman Ismail & Fara Farihana Suhaim & Rizal Abu Bakar & Mohamad Azhari Abu Bakar, 2013. "The Role of Organizational Humanistic Social Support in Decreasing the Interference of Work Problems on Employees’ Family Conflict," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 9(1), pages 5-20, February.
    5. Arieana Thompson & Valentina Bruk-Lee, 2021. "Employee Happiness: Why We Should Care," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(4), pages 1419-1437, August.
    6. Tekleab, Amanuel G. & Chiaburu, Dan S., 2011. "Social exchange: Empirical examination of form and focus," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(5), pages 460-466, May.
    7. Hamori, Monika, 2023. "Self-directed learning in massive open online courses and its application at the workplace: Does employer support matter?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    8. Adnan ul Haque & Fred Yamoah, 2014. "Gender Employment Longevity: I.T Staff Response to Organizational Support in Pakistan," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 4(12), pages 324-347, December.
    9. Shen, Yimo & Jackson, Todd & Ding, Cody & Yuan, Denghua & Zhao, Lei & Dou, Yunlai & Zhang, Qinglin, 2014. "Linking perceived organizational support with employee work outcomes in a Chinese context: Organizational identification as a mediator," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 406-412.
    10. Kaytlynn Clemons & David B. Johnson & Amy Kiger & Janice Putnam, 2018. "Decreasing Campus Smoking With Punishments And Social Pressures," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(4), pages 629-643, October.
    11. Lilian DE MENEZES, 2010. "Can a Gift-Exchange Model Explain a Link Between Flexible Working Arrangements and Organizational Performance?," EcoMod2010 259600043, EcoMod.
    12. Javier Turienzo & Pablo Cabanelas & Jesús F. Lampón, 2022. "The Mobility Industry Trends Through the Lens of the Social Analysis: A Multi-Level Perspective Approach," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440211, January.
    13. Bradley E. Cox & Robert D. Reason & Samantha Nix & Megan Gillman, 2016. "Life Happens (Outside of College): Non-College Life-Events and Students’ Likelihood of Graduation," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 57(7), pages 823-844, November.
    14. Priyanko Guchait & Ki-Joon Back, 2016. "Three country study: impact of support on employee attitudes," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(7-8), pages 299-318, June.
    15. Leonel Prieto & Muhammad Ruhul Amin & Arman Canatay, 2022. "Examining Social Sustainability in Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-43, September.
    16. Gail Pacheco & De Wet van der Westhuizen & Don J. Webber, 2012. "The changing influence of culture on job satisfaction across Europe: 1981-2008," Working Papers 2012-06, Auckland University of Technology, Department of Economics.
    17. Tahir Farid & Sadaf Iqbal & Jianhong Ma & Sandra Castro-González & Amira Khattak & Muhammad Khalil Khan, 2019. "Employees’ Perceptions of CSR, Work Engagement, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Effects of Organizational Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-16, May.
    18. Zagenczyk, Thomas J. & Scott, Kristin D. & Gibney, Ray & Murrell, Audrey J. & Thatcher, Jason Bennett, 2010. "Social influence and perceived organizational support: A social networks analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 127-138, March.
    19. Alexander P. Schudey & Ove Jensen & Nils D. Kraiczy, 2013. "Expatriates-Training = Expatriates-Einsatzerfolg? Eine Metaanalyse," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 65(6), pages 518-552, November.
    20. Sean A. Way & Tony Simons & Hannes Leroy & Elizabeth A. Tuleja, 2018. "What is in it for Me? Middle Manager Behavioral Integrity and Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 765-777, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:8:p:938-:d:108987. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.