Cited by 2,390Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesComplex Network Analysis Techniques

The collective dynamics of smoking in a large social network

Open access
Christakis, Nicholas A., Fowler, James H.·2008·New England Journal of Medicine

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.

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 · 10.1056/nejmsa0706154

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Faststats A to Z. Hyattsville, MD: Na- tional Center for Health Statistics. (Ac- cessed April 22, 2008, at http://www.cdc. gov/nchs/fastats/Default.htm#S.) Chen PH, White HR, Pandina RJ. Pre- dictors of smoking cessation from adoles- cence into young adulthood. Addict Behav 2001;26:517-29.
  2. Feinleib M, Kannel WB, Garrison RJ, McNamara PM, Castelli WP. The Fram- ingham Offspring Study: design and pre- liminary data. Prev Med 1975;4:518-25.
  3. Moody J, McFarland DA, Bender-deMoll S. Visualizing network dynamics. Am J Sociol 2005;110:1206-41.
  4. Bonacich P. Factoring and weighing approaches to clique identification. J Math Sociol 1972;2:113-20. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.
  5. Beck N. Time-series-cross-section data: what have we learned in the past few years? Annu Rev Polit Sci 2001;4:271-93.
  6. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press, 1995.
  7. promise: the STD consequences of ado- lescent virginity pledges. J Adolesc Health 2005;36:271-8.
  8. Cutler DM, Glaeser EL. Social interac- tions and smoking: NBER working paper no. W13477. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, October 2007.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2008-05-22
Volume
358
Issue
21
Pages
2249-2258
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2111896942
Cited by
2,390
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 65 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 78 · 2023: 90 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 174 · 2020: 162 · 2019: 129 · 2018: 128 · 2017: 198 · 2016: 148 · 2015: 143 · 2014: 169 · 2013: 185 · 2012: 173
FWCI
84.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Issue Lab (Candid) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01hc25195-41-0-1)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG24448, P01AG031093, R01AG024448)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (N01‐HC25195, N01-HC-025195)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
Keywords
smoking behavior, smoking cessation, social networks, social contagion, social ties, spousal influence, sibling influence, coworker influence, friendship, educational attainment, social marginalization, smoking prevalence decline, Framingham Heart Study
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Smoking, Social Behavior, Social Support, Sociology, Medical, Logistic Models, Smoking Cessation

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