This study compared the effectiveness of a multicomponent smoking cessation/reduction program (”M\") at one worksite (N = 81), with the same program plus incentives and team competition (\"I\") at a second worksite (N = 68). Incentives were discontinued at six months. A third worksite (N = 36) received a traditional smoking cessation program (\"T').
The \"I\" program attracted a higher percentage of hourly (blue-collar) smokers (18.5%) compared to the \"M\" program (9.3%), or the \"T\" program (7.9%). Incentives with competition were also effective for improving abstinence for as long as 6 months (41%) compared to the \"M\" program (23%), and for 12 months compared with the \"T\" program (11%). Incentives with competition, however, did not enhance quit rates at the 12-month period (37%) compared with the \"M\" program (30%). A smoking census also showed abstinence rates among smokers not joining either program (14%) were not significantly different from those in the \"T' program at 12 months.
Results indicate a multicomponent program involving telephone counseling at the worksite may be just as effective for long-term smoking cessation as one with incentives added, and more effective than a traditional program. An incentive/competition program, however, may attract more blue-collar workers.
","abstract_html":"<p>This study compared the effectiveness of a multicomponent smoking cessation/reduction program (”M") at one worksite (N = 81), with the same program plus incentives and team competition ("I") at a second worksite (N = 68). Incentives were discontinued at six months. A third worksite (N = 36) received a traditional smoking cessation program ("T').</p> <p>The "I" program attracted a higher percentage of hourly (blue-collar) smokers (18.5%) compared to the "M" program (9.3%), or the "T" program (7.9%). Incentives with competition were also effective for improving abstinence for as long as 6 months (41%) compared to the "M" program (23%), and for 12 months compared with the "T" program (11%). Incentives with competition, however, did not enhance quit rates at the 12-month period (37%) compared with the "M" program (30%). A smoking census also showed abstinence rates among smokers not joining either program (14%) were not significantly different from those in the "T' program at 12 months.</p> <p>Results indicate a multicomponent program involving telephone counseling at the worksite may be just as effective for long-term smoking cessation as one with incentives added, and more effective than a traditional program. An incentive/competition program, however, may attract more blue-collar workers.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Matson, Dyann M."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Public Health (DrPH)","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Jerry W. Lee","Joyce W. Hopp","Wesley S. Youngberg"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1992,"date_issued":"1992-06-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"1992-06-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:54:10Z","subjects":["Public Health Education and Promotion","Substance Abuse and Addiction","Smoking Cessation; Motivation; Health Education"],"languages":["English"],"rights":["This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has granted Loma Linda University a limited, non-exclusive right to make this publication available to the public. The author retains all other copyrights."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/etd/1101","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Jerry W. Lee","Joyce W. Hopp","Wesley S. Youngberg"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Matson, Dyann M."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Public Health (DrPH)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Public Health Education and Promotion","Substance Abuse and Addiction","Smoking Cessation; Motivation; Health Education"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has granted Loma Linda University a limited, non-exclusive right to make this publication available to the public. The author retains all other copyrights."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/etd/1101"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study compared the effectiveness of a multicomponent smoking cessation/reduction program (”M\") at one worksite (N = 81), with the same program plus incentives and team competition (\"I\") at a second worksite (N = 68). Incentives were discontinued at six months. A third worksite (N = 36) received a traditional smoking cessation program (\"T').
The \"I\" program attracted a higher percentage of hourly (blue-collar) smokers (18.5%) compared to the \"M\" program (9.3%), or the \"T\" program (7.9%). Incentives with competition were also effective for improving abstinence for as long as 6 months (41%) compared to the \"M\" program (23%), and for 12 months compared with the \"T\" program (11%). Incentives with competition, however, did not enhance quit rates at the 12-month period (37%) compared with the \"M\" program (30%). A smoking census also showed abstinence rates among smokers not joining either program (14%) were not significantly different from those in the \"T' program at 12 months.
Results indicate a multicomponent program involving telephone counseling at the worksite may be just as effective for long-term smoking cessation as one with incentives added, and more effective than a traditional program. An incentive/competition program, however, may attract more blue-collar workers.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Impact of an Incentive/Competition Program on Participation and Smoking Cessation Among High Risk Smokers at the Worksite"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Jerry W. Lee","Joyce W. Hopp","Wesley S. Youngberg"],"dc:creator":["Matson, Dyann M."],"dc:description.abstract":["This study compared the effectiveness of a multicomponent smoking cessation/reduction program (”M\") at one worksite (N = 81), with the same program plus incentives and team competition (\"I\") at a second worksite (N = 68). Incentives were discontinued at six months. A third worksite (N = 36) received a traditional smoking cessation program (\"T').
The \"I\" program attracted a higher percentage of hourly (blue-collar) smokers (18.5%) compared to the \"M\" program (9.3%), or the \"T\" program (7.9%). Incentives with competition were also effective for improving abstinence for as long as 6 months (41%) compared to the \"M\" program (23%), and for 12 months compared with the \"T\" program (11%). Incentives with competition, however, did not enhance quit rates at the 12-month period (37%) compared with the \"M\" program (30%). A smoking census also showed abstinence rates among smokers not joining either program (14%) were not significantly different from those in the \"T' program at 12 months.
Results indicate a multicomponent program involving telephone counseling at the worksite may be just as effective for long-term smoking cessation as one with incentives added, and more effective than a traditional program. An incentive/competition program, however, may attract more blue-collar workers.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/etd/1101"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:rights":["This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has granted Loma Linda University a limited, non-exclusive right to make this publication available to the public. The author retains all other copyrights."],"dc:subject":["Public Health Education and Promotion","Substance Abuse and Addiction","Smoking Cessation; Motivation; Health Education"],"dc:title":["The Impact of an Incentive/Competition Program on Participation and Smoking Cessation Among High Risk Smokers at the Worksite"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Public Health (DrPH)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:54:10Z"}