Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patterns and causes of gender differences in smoking

Open access
Waldron, Ingrid·1991·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

In the early twentieth century in the United States and other Western countries, women were much less likely than men to smoke cigarettes, due in part to widespread social disapproval of women's smoking. During the mid-twentieth century, growing social acceptance of women's smoking contributed to increased smoking adoption by women. Increased social acceptance of women's smoking was part of a general liberalization of norms concerning women's behavior, reflecting increasing equality between the sexes. These historical trends were due in part to increases in women's employment. However, in the contemporary period employment appears to have little or no effect on women's smoking. Sex role norms and general expectations concerning gender-appropriate behavior have had a variety of effects on gender differences in smoking. First, general characteristics of traditional sex roles, including men's greater social power and generally greater restrictions on women's behavior, contributed to widespread social pressures against women's smoking. Second, traditional sex role norms and expectations have fostered gender differences in personal characteristics and experiences which influence smoking adoption. For example, rebelliousness has been more expected and accepted for males, and greater rebelliousness among adolescent males has contributed to greater smoking adoption by males. Finally, certain aspects of sex roles have contributed to gender differences in appraisal of the costs and benefits of smoking. For example, physical attractiveness is emphasized more for females and the contemporary beauty ideal is very slender, so females are more likely to view weight control as a benefit of smoking. Several other hypotheses concerning the causes of gender differences in smoking are not supported by the available evidence. For example, it appears that women's generally greater concern with health has not contributed significantly to gender differences in the prevalence of smoking. Similarly, it appears that sex differences in physiological responses to smoking have made only minor contributions to gender differences in smoking adoption or cessation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90157-8

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 87 references

Cited by

See all 344

Metadata

Authors
Waldron, I.
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1991
Volume
32
Issue
9
Pages
989-1005
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2067581899
Cited by
344
References
87
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patterns and causes of gender differences in smoking. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0277-9536(91)90157-8
The paper
Waldron, I. (1991). Patterns and causes of gender differences in smoking. Social Science & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(91)90157-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.