Boys and girls have different reasons for why they smoke, and there are differences in the amount of smokers belonging to each gender. 48.2% of student smoker’s are male, and 36% are female. Girls begin to smoke a little bit later than guys do (SHF, 2003). Moe (2000) summarizes reasons why each gender smokes. These findings prove that the gender stereotypes in tobacco advertisements (discussed above) have been successful in creating associations between cigarettes and these popular themes. Moe (2000) claims that girls in grades 7-10, as found by a University of Minnesota study, smoke because they are worried about their weight. They even have a harder time giving up tobacco than boys do because they fear that they will gain weight if they do. In addition, smoking made the girls feel older and more mature. Moe (2000) further states that boys did not smoke because of weight concerns. They smoked because they enjoyed being “rebellious” and they felt that it made them look “cool” and more “manly.”

Young people with a lot of exposure to cigarette ads are far more likely to become smokers than those with less exposure to these ads (Liu, 2002). Guy Smith, a Philip Morris tobacco executive, claims that their research shows that advertising is the top reason young people start smoking (Bailey, 1996). This may be difficult for most of us to believe because most people don’t like to admit that advertising influences them. Despite these claims, a study done by Richard Pollay found that when a company’s advertising budget increased, its market share increased only 3% for adults, but over 9% for children (Bailey, 1996). In addition, the most heavily advertised brands were purchased the most.

It has also been found that tobacco control reduces smoking rates. This trend has been noticed in many countries. The World Health Organization (WHO, 2002), for example, found that from the 1990’s until now, Thailand’s smoking rates were cut from 60% to 40% due to tobacco control. WHO (2002) further discusses that a review of bans in 100 countries showed that comprehensive bans (complete advertising and sponsorship bans) cut cigarette consumption by 8% per capita. Cordry (2001) concurs by emphasizing that comprehensive bans are powerful, but partial bans have little effect since tobacco companies often find ways to bypass them by using many indirect tactics.

After conducting this investigation, I have concluded that the major psychological effect of tobacco advertising is that it causes a change in children’s belief systems. It causes them to form positive attitudes towards smoking cigarettes. Then, once they feel that smoking is “cool” and will help them to become associated with the “in” crowd, they try a cigarette or two. They are not capable of understanding how addicting nicotine truly is. The tobacco industry manipulates young people by convincing them that smoking is fun, and it can be sexy, romantic and glamorous. Smoking is constantly shown this way in advertisements and movies. In sponsored sports events, smokers are also portrayed as being athletic. Children psychologically make these connections with tobacco products because of what they constantly see in tobacco ads. These connections that they make are false because smoking actually hinders athletic ability, and it isn’t all that glamorous if you end up with a deadly disease or have a hole cut in your throat, as Wade Hamilton did.

Evidence that I found supported the notion that decreases in tobacco consumption are associated with tobacco promotion bans. In addition, I found that when advertising increases, tobacco consumption increases. These findings have led me to believe that there is a definite causal relationship between tobacco ads and increases in smoking amongst children. Cumulative evidence that I gathered from answering these research questions strongly supports the conclusion that marketing plays a significant role in youth smoking behavior in terms of initial experimentation and brand preference.