Outcome expectations and use of smokeless tobacco (snus): A cross‐sectional study among young Norwegian snus users

Wiium, N. & Aarø, L.E. (2011). Outcome expectations and use of smokeless tobacco (snus): A cross‐sectional study among young Norwegian snus users. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 52, 64–70. In this study, measures of outcome expectancies related to use of snus (wet snuff) were used to predict reported frequency of snus use. Data stem from a nation‐wide survey in Norway among 16‐ to 20‐year‐olds. Only users of snus were included in the statistical analyses (n = 589). The main outcome measure, frequency of snus use, was measured as a categorical variable – occasional, weekly and daily use. Four dimensions of outcome expectancies (mood regulation, smoking control, weight control and negative health outcomes) were measured and confirmed in a confirmatory factor analysis. Informants tended to believe that snus use is harmful to health, but still they supported the idea of snus as a way to control own cigarette smoking. In a SEM model, two of the four dimensions of outcome expectancies turned out to be particularly significant predictors of frequency of snus use – mood regulation and smoking control. No significant interactions with gender were found. Males scored higher than females on “mood regulation”, and “smoking control”, while females scored higher than males on “negative health outcomes”. If more smokers were convinced that snus use is a less harmful alternative, more of them might start using snus, not only because there is some association between health outcome expectancies and snus use, but also because snus use by many is perceived as a remedy to stop smoking and as a way to gain some of the mood regulation benefits which are usually associated with smoking.     

Attendance pressure during organizational change

The present study examines the relationships between aspects of the concept attendance pressure and sickness absenteeism. The study was carried out in a large public company in Norway during a major reorganization. It was hypothesized that employees with sickness absenteeism during this period would experience a high degree of attendance pressure in the form of reactions from managers, fellow workers, and job insecurity. Two surveys were carried out with the same sample (N=401). Attendance pressure in the form of censure pressure explained significant parts of the variance in sickness absenteeism. Employees with sickness absenteeism during the reorganization were a vulnerable group with low job satisfaction, significant health problems and low personal work ethics. Implications for preventive work on organizational level are discussed.Financed by the Research Council of Norway.     

Job Stress and Organizational Learning Climate

Job stress may depend on the organizational learning climate, the organizational factors that affect learning how to cope with the rapid external and internal changes in working life. The relationship between individual job stress and the individual perception of learning climate was studied among 383 employees in the Norwegian Postal Service and in various community health care institutions. Mismatch between individual perceptions of learning climate and the averaged evaluation of learning climate in the rest of the working group, was found to be an important source of stress. Individuals who perceived the learning climate as good and who were working in a group that agreed with this position, had a low job-stress level. This may be ascribed to their feeling of control over the work situation and reduced demands due to the social support from the group, producing a low job stress level.     

Pogge on Poverty: Contribution or Exploitation?

Thomas Pogge argues that affluent people in the developing world have contribution‐based duties to help protect the poor. And it follows from Pogge's most general thesis that affluent people are contributing to most, if not all, instances of global poverty. In this article I explore two problems with Pogge's general thesis. First, I investigate a typical way in which affluent people would be contributing to global poverty according to Pogge: that affluent countries use their superior bargaining power to get poor countries to accept trading schemes that are unduly favourable to the affluent. I suggest that this type of relation is best understood as exploitation, and that Pogge's general thesis is better understood as a thesis about how affluent people exploit poor people rather than about how they contribute to poverty. Second, I argue that the exploitation does not have the normative content of doing harm. Although exploiting people is often morally wrong, it is not at all clear how demanding exploitation‐based duties are.