http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1913-6488
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Objective: This convergent mixed methods study examined how information sources influence college students’ beliefs and knowledge about vaping. Participants: College students either completed a survey (n = 522; January–April, 2016) or were interviewed (n = 33; 2015–2016). Methods: College students completed an online survey asking ‘where’ students had heard about e-cigarette and ‘what’ they had heard. Responses were quantified and a chi-square analysis was conducted. Additional college student e-cigarette users were interviewed about the credibility of information sources. Thematic analysis was conducted with the coded interviews. Results: There was a significant relationship between information sources for e-cigarettes (social sources, media, advertising, education/research) and the messages they recalled. Friends who vaped and e-cigarette users were the most credible information sources. Confirmation bias and scientific impotence bias characterized assessment of e-cigarette information. Conclusions: Health education specialists working on college campuses should provide accurate information via communication channels most unitized by college students.
Acknowledgments
Support for Study 1 was provided in part by the Arkansas Biosciences Institute, a partnership of scientists from Arkansas Children’s Hospital, Arkansas State University, the University of Arkansas-Division of Agriculture, the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. The Arkansas Biosciences Institute is the major research component of the Arkansas Tobacco Settlement Proceeds Act of 2000. Study 2 was supported by the University of Oklahoma through funding to the senior author. The authors would like to thank Taylor Franklin Wann, Abbie Luzius, and Black Joseph Sandridge for their assistance.
Conflict of interest disclosure
The authors have no conflicts of interest to report. The authors confirm that the research presented in this article met the ethical guidelines, including adherence to the legal requirements, of the United States and received approval from the Institutional Review Boards of the University of Arkansas and the University of Oklahoma.