Term Paper

Smoking Profile and Emotional Intelligence of
CLSU Student Smokers

Jessie Czar V. Samaniego

ABPsych4

Smoking Profile and Emotional Intelligence of CLSU Smokers Tobacco use is a foremost contributor to deaths from persistent and chronic diseases. There are 10 Filipinos who die every hour due to the health risks caused by cigarette smoking. In spite of the laws prohibiting cigarette advertisements, a number of young smokers have continued to grow. It appears to be disturbing that smokers tend to be getting younger. According to Everett (2002) of the Office on Smoking and Health National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, majority of students aged 16 years and older (60.4%) reported to have smoked a whole cigarette, and 11.1% initiated smoking at the age 10 or younger. Moreover, age of smoking initiation was significantly related to current frequent smoking, daily smoking and whether students had ever smoked daily. A younger age of smoking initiation was associated with smoking more cigarettes per day that was initiating at an older age. Many studies had been already conducted with regards to cigarette smoking. Exposure to cigarette advertising and having a companion who smoked was predictive of current smoking status (G. Botvin, Goldberg, Botvin & Dusenbury, 1993). Adolescents with high exposure to cigarette advertising were significantly to be smokers. Students who live in households with smokers were more likely to smoke, but parental disapproval of smoking was associated with a lower smoking rate (Martini & Sulistyowati, 2004). In addition, according to Da Silva Pinto and Aparecida Ribeiro (2007), the following factors were related with smoking initiation and current smoking: curiosity, presence of smokers as social contacts, not being praised for not smoking, and perceiving oneself as having poor or average scholastic performance. With regards to scholastic performance specifically, the result showed that the students who reported average or below average scholastic performance were more predisposed to the genesis and maintenance of the smoking habit. Moreover, in terms of cognitive state of students, it is found that nicotine intake could increase alertness and cognition. Personality on the other hand also considers a great predictor to use cigarette smoke. These personality dimensions are extraversion (E), agreeableness (A), conscientiousness (C), neuroticism or lack of emotional-stability (N), and openness to Experience (O). Extraversion is characterized as being energetic, talkative, sociable; agreeableness is characterized as being friendly, trusting, generous, and tolerant; conscientiousness is considered as being cautious, orderly, dependable, graceful, and responsible; neuroticism is characterized as being terse, anxious, and emotionally-unstable; openness is considered to be imaginative, and focused on wisdom, art, knowledge, and objectivity (Friedman & Schustack, 2003; Goldberg, 1990; McCrae & John, 1992). From this background, the researcher wants to determine the smoking profile of the respondents and determine the level of emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self motivation, managing emotions and empathy) of CLSU smoker students. It also aims to know the significant relationship between socio-demographic characteristics (age, year level, weekly allowance and number of family members) and smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking (daily), brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number Of friends who smoke and their reasons of smoking) of the CLSU smoker students in terms of their emotional intelligence occur. It also aims to know the significant relationship between difference in gender, academic status and sources of cigarettes of the CLSU smoker students in terms of their emotional intelligence exists.
Review of Related Literature This part of the research contains related literatures about smoking. It includes research findings that show how age and gender are associated with smoking behavior. Also, the factors influencing smoking behavior was discussed. In addition, the later part shows the association between smoking and scholastic performance.
Socio-demographic characteristic and Cigarette smoking Age and Cigarette smoking. Based on the research conducted by Das, Ghosh, Sarkar, Joardar, Chatterjee and Chaterjee (2011); the role of different factors that are related with initiation and continuation of adolescent smoking between the age groups of 14 and 19 years was found to be considerably influenced with having seen best friend, father, sibling or even favorite movie star smoke and also with receiving pocket money. The result has the prevalence of 21.58% of cigarette smoking among early smokers. A new report reveals that 14 percent of 13 to 15-year-old students around the world currently smoke cigarettes. In addition, the report found that nearly 25 percent of students who smoke tried their first cigarette by the age of 10 and that most young smokers want to quit. Meanwhile, on a study with the smoking cessation in young adults: age at initiation of cigarette smoking, results showed that the possibly of cessation was significantly higher in smokers who initiated smoking after age of 13. The risk ratio for quitting associated with smoking initiation at ages 14 to 16. The risk ratio for quitting related with smoking initiation at ages 14 to 16 was 1.6 and with initiation at or after age 17 was 2.0, compared with initiation at or before 13 years of age. Factors that decreased the probability of cessation were nicotine dependence and low education (N. Breslau and E. L. Peterson, 1996). Gender and Cigarette smoking. In most of the world, being male is the greatest predictor than female for tobacco use, with overall prevalence about four times higher among men than women globally (48% versus 12%). The Global Youth Tobacco Survey (2002), however, show that girls are smoking almost as much as young boys and that girls and boys are using non-cigarette tobacco products such as spit tobacco and water pipes at similar rates. Academic Performance/Grades and Cigarette Smoking. Smoking is strongly correlated with academic performance. According to the study conducted by Washington State Healthy Youth Survey (2002), students who earn better grades are less likely to smoke. The survey found that among 8th grade students who received most D or F grades, 23.7% were smokers. Among the C students, 13.9 were smokers. 8.2% of students reporting mostly B grades were smokers and among the A students, 3.9% were smokers. In addition, a 2000 study in Nicotine and Tobacco Research reported that more than 40% of male smokers were suspended or dropped out of school. The IQ was not significantly different in the third grade for those students who became smokers and those who did not. The Harvard College Alcohol Study found that smokers are 27.0% less likely than nonsmokers to have an above B grade average which is smokers have lower grade point average than nonsmokers (Rigotti, 2000). In addition, daily smokers were found to have even lower GPAs than high-risk drinkers (Halperin and Eytan, 2000).
Peer Influences and Smoking Exposing of cigarette smoking of peer, companion or member of a family who engaged on smoking would be big factors that can influence the young smokers (G. J. Botvin, C. J. Goldberg, E. M. Botvin & L Dusenbury, 1993). Peer smoking was most strongly related to individual smoking status (Ogawa, Tominaga and Gellert, 1988). Hinse (1998) discovered that students who smoked only occasionally reported to feel popular and braver when smoking. It also reported that they did not feel socially outcast. Based on the study of Rodrigues and Audrain-McGovern (2003), adolescents with decreasing or erratic participation in smoking were nearly three times more likely than adolescents with high participation to be current smokers in eleventh grade. The result also indicated that nonwhites were at particular risk for decreasing and unpredictable patterns of participation in smoking.
Personality and Cigarette Smoking Studies of smoker's personality have a long and controversial history. Smokers are likely to be more extroverted, tense, and anxious and have more antisocial characteristics than nonsmokers. However, the strength of the relationship between personality and smoking is weak, probably because smokers are not a homogeneous group (Patton D, Barnes GE and Murray RP, 1997).
Traits and Cigarette Smoking Extraversion. Extravert people are considered to be more prone to tobacco use. People who are highly extroverted are particularly inclined to engage in multiple, risky health behaviors such as smoking and drinking (Vollrath, M., & Torgersen, S. (2002). Williams, Siegler, suggested that children who showed signs of extroversion at ages from 5 to 8 were more likely to drink 20 years later. People who were measured early in life and subsequently began smoking were more sensation seeking, and were socially extroverted while in college (Lipkus et al., 1994). Emotional Stability. People who are prone to negative moods, such as sadness and anxiety tend to smoke. Most smokers learn to use cigarettes as a way to deal with stress. Smoking can distract a person from his or her troubles. Because smoking is often a social activity, some people find that lighting a cigarette brings to mind feelings of group support. This can comfort people in times of stress. In addition, an addicted smoker will feel better after smoking because it relieves nicotine withdrawal symptoms (Moffitt, 2000). Curiosity. Curiosity of the smoker may be a critical sign to smoking. Logistic regression showed curiosity and susceptibility to smoke were independently associated with increased future smoking in all never smokers (John P. Pierce, Janet M. Distefan, Robert M. Kaplan, Elizabeth A. Gilpin, 2004).
Summary of Review Related Literature Population of cigarette smokers nowadays is continously growing. Various researches have been made to look for the possible causes. Every individual has his own reason for engaging himself to cigarette smoking. Studies found that the factors influencing college students in cigarette smoking are in the roles of smoking-related beliefs, and parent and peer psychosocial factors as antecedents and consequences of adolescent smoking cessation. And the big factors that can influence the young smokers are by exposing of cigarette smoking of peer, companion or member of a family who engaged on smoking. Furthermore, with regards to cigarette smoking and grades, students who earn better grades are less likely to smoke. In addition, daily smokers were found to have even lower GPAs than high-risk drinkers. Smoking is strongly correlated with academic performance. According to the study conducted by Washington State Healthy Youth Survey (2002), students who earn better grades are less probable to smoke. Regarding to the students’ behavior and academic performance, majority of the study found out that, smoking was significantly related to high absence rates, low achievement test scores, and low grade point averages during elementary school years, prior to the onset of smoking. Findings showed that peer smoking was most strongly related to individual smoking status. In addition, roles of smoking-related beliefs, parents and peer psychosocial factors as antecedents and consequences of young people smoking termination. In addition, result indicated that smokers who later quit smoking were different from those who continued to smoke. Moreover, students who smoked only occasionally, feel that they are popular and braver when they are smoking and did not feel socially outcast. Also, report found that nearly 25 percent of students who smoke tried their first cigarette by the age of 10 and that most young smokers want to quit. Moreover, smokers are likely to be more extroverted, tense, and anxious and have more antisocial characteristics than nonsmokers. However, the strength of the relationship between personality and smoking is weak, probably because smokers are not a homogeneous group (Patton D, Barnes GE and Murray RP, 1997). In terms of the traits that trigger smokers to smoke, according to Pierce, Distefan, Kaplan, Gilpin, (2004) curiosity of the smoker may be a critical sign to smoking. Logistic regression showed curiosity and susceptibility to smoke were independently associated with increased future smoking in all never smokers.
Statement of the Problem This study deals with the smoking profile and emotional intelligence of college students. Particularly, it aimed to answer the following question: 1. What are the smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking, brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number of friends who smoke reasons of smoking and their negative and positive experiences) of CLSU smoker students? 2. What is the level of emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self motivation, managing emotions and empathy) of CLSU smoker students? 3. Is there a significant relationship between socio-demographic characteristics (age, weekly allowance and number of siblings) of CLSU smoker and their emotional intelligence? Is there a significant relationship between their smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, number of siblings smokes, number of friends’ smokes and amount of money spend for cigarette) and their emotional intelligence? 4. Is there a significant difference in gender, father and mother who smoke; source of cigarette and academic status of the CLSU smoker students in terms of their emotional intelligence?

Research Hypothesis
1. The researcher characterizes the smoking profile such as age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking (daily), brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number Of friends who smoke and their reasons of smoking.
2. The researcher assumed that the levels of emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self motivation, managing emotions and empathy) of college students who are engage in cigarette smoking are low.
3. There is a significant relationship between socio-demographic characteristics (age, weekly allowance and number of family members) CLSU smoker students with that of their emotional intelligence. This is also the same with their smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, number of siblings smokes, number of friends’ smokes and amount of money spend for cigarette) and emotional intelligence.
4. There is a significant difference in gender, father and mother who smoke; source of cigarette and academic status of the CLSU smoker students in terms of their emotional intelligence.
Significance of the Study This study aims to determine the level of Emotional Intelligence of the student smokers in Central Luzon State University. Determining the emotional intelligence of college students who are engaged in cigarette smoking is important. The study could serve as a tool for helping individuals on avoiding smoking. Once the level of emotional intelligence clusters that might be related to smoking was determined, it may help others to monitor theirs and can modify it if they think it can somehow lead them to smoking. In addition, through this study, the university would be informed with regards to the smoking profile of its students. In addition, this study could be a mean in providing better understanding of the behavior of individuals towards cigarette smoking. This study is relevant in the Philippines since nowadays one of the issues that the Department of Health is trying to resolve is cigarette smoking.

Scope and Limitation The present study focuses on the smoking profile and emotional intelligence of Central Luzon State University (CLSU) college students. This study was limited to the college students who are engaged in cigarette smoking and are currently enrolled in CLSU. In general, this study describes the smoking profile and their emotional intelligence.

Theoretical Framework This study utilized emotional intelligence theory of Daniel Goleman. Goleman (1998) listed five components of emotional intelligence that an effective individual exhibits: self awareness, managing emotion, self management, empathy and social skill. Self awareness means having a deep understanding of one’s emotion, strength and weaknesses, as well as their on others. Managing emotion is the ability to control or redirect disruptive impulses, to think before acting. Self management is defined as a passion to work for reasons that go beyond money or status. Empathy is the ability to understand the emotional makeup of the other people. Social skill, the final component, is proficiency in managing relationship and building networks, with ability to find common ground and build rapport. The theory was chosen in understanding the study since the researcher assumes that the levels of emotional intelligence of the college student’s smoker have a relationship with their smoking profile.

Conceptual Framework Primarily, this study aims to determine the socio-demographic characteristic, smoking profile and emotional intelligence of CLSU college students who are engaged in cigarette smoking. The conceptual paradigm shows the relationship of variables. The independent variables are the socio-demographic characteristics (age, weekly allowance and number of family members) and the smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking , brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number of friends who smoke and their reasons of smoking) of the participants which have a relationship to emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self motivation, managing emotions and empathy).
Conceptual Paradigm

Fig. 1. Conceptual paradigm shows the relationship of the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents (age, year level, weekly allowance and number of family member) and their smoking profile age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking (daily), brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number Of friends who smoke and their reasons of smoking are assumed to have relationship on their emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self management, managing emotions and empathy).

Methodology
Participants
One hundred nineteen (119) students in Central Luzon State University of S.Y. 2011-2012 were selected through Purposive Sampling. This study was limited only with the students who are engaged on smoking. The mean age of the participants of this study is 19.83. On the other hand, the age in which the respondents started smoking has a mean of 14.88.
Instrument
The researcher used a questionnaire composed of three parts. The first part was composed of the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents (participant’s age, weekly allowance, number of family member) and their smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking, brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number Of friends who smoke and their reasons of smoking). The second part includes items about their smoking pofile (as to how they smoke, when they smoke, where they smoke, and with whom they smoke). This is answerable by multiple responses. The third part measured the respondents’ emotional intelligence. This subtest is a questionnaire developed by Lupdag (2001). The use of the questionnaire was approved by the author. The items were answered using the following scale: SD = Strongly Disagree D = Disagree N = I cannot say anything A = Agree SA = Strongly Agree
Data Gathering Procedure The researcher used purposive sampling to look for college student who are currently enrolled at Central Luzon State University for the School Year 2011-2012, and who admitted to be cigarette smokers. Selected students were asked first for their consent and participation. After the acceptance of the request, the researcher gave the survey questionnaire to the respondents for gathering of the information.
Data Analysis Descriptive statistics (means, frequencies and percentages) were used to determine the smoking profile as well as the emotional intelligence of the respondents. To test if significant relationships between variables occur, Pearson Correlation was used. On the other hand, T-test and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to determine if significant differences between and among variables occur.

Results and Discussion

This part of the study shows the results and interpretation of the data gathered with regards to the smoking profile and emotional intelligence of CLSU students smokers’. The first part of the result and discussion includes the socio demodraphic characteristic of CLSU student smokers. The second part discusses the smoking profile of CLSU student smokers. Next to it is the discussion of the level of emotional intelligence of CLSU smokers. It is then followed by the result of the test of difference and the discussion of socio demographic characteristics (gender and academic status) and smoking profile (if parents are smoking) in terms of the emotional intelligence. The last part is the test of relationship and the discussion of the relationship of smoking profile (age when smoking started,number of cigarettes, number of friends who smoke and amount spend for cigarette)and emotional intelligence.

Table 1. Socio Demographic Characteristics of CLSU Student Smokers
|Characteristics |Frequency |Percentage |
|Gender | | |
|Male |90 |75.63 |
|Female |29 |24.37 |
|Age | | |
|17 |8 |6.72 |
|18 |23 |19.33 |
|19 |23 |19.33 |
|20 |24 |20.17 |
|21 |32 |26.89 |
|22 |9 |7.56 |
|Mean = 19.83 | | |
|Academic Status | | |
|Regular |69 |57.98 |
|Warning |29 |24.37 |
|Irregular |19 |15.97 |
|Probation |2 |1.68 |
|Weekly Allowance | | |
|500-750 |48 |72.27 |
|Below 500 |12 |15.97 |
|Above 750 |59 |11.76 |
|Mean = 758.40 | | |
|Number of siblings | | |
|0 |18 |15.1 |
|1-5 |80 |67.1 |
|6-9 |21 |24.9 |
|Mean = 3 | | |

Table 1 shows the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents which include the gender, age, academic status, weekly allowance and their no. Of siblings. As shown on the table, almost more that half of the respondents are males (75.63%) and only 24.37% are females. This number is also evident on the findings of Jhaetal (2002) that male are more than to smoke than female, that is, there are about more than twice the number of male smokers than female, and that males are most prone to smoking initiation. This could be also be explained by the feeling of becoming braver, more confident, highly respected for males if they are engaging to smoking, Global Youth Tobacco Survey (2002),.

In terms of age, the mean is 19.83. Most of the respondents are 21 years of age (26.89%), some are 20 (20.17%), 18 and 19 (19.33% each), 22 (7.56%) and the lowest was 17 (6.72%). With regards to their acedemic status, it was found out that 57.98% of them are in regular status, some are of warning status (24.37%), others are of irregular status (15.97%0, and only one has a frequency of 1.68%. Moreover, the study found that most of the participants have a weekly allowance of 500-750 (72.27%), below 500 (15.97%) and 750 (11.76%)and has a mean average of 758.40. Lastly on this table is number of siblings wit average mean of 3, the result showed that the highest average has a (67.1%) belongs to the respondents with one to five siblings, six to nine (24.9%) and the (15.1%) are the respondents has no siblings.

Table 2 (pages 31-33)contains the data gathered with regards to the smoking profile of the respondents. This includes their age when smoking started, number of cigarette per day, money spend for smoking (daily), brand of cigarette, source of cigarette, activities while smoking, places where smoking, moods that triggers smoking, time of smoking, companions when smoking, number of sibling who smoke, parents who smoke, number Of friends who smoke and their reasons of smoking. Age when smoking started. Most of the participants started smoking at the age of 16 (28.6%). Some started at 15 years old (21.0%), 14 years old (13.4%), 18 years old (11.8%) and 17 years old (10.1%). On the average, the mean age when they started smoking was 16.09. This findings is supported by the research survey of United State Institute of Health (2009-2010) which is stated that most of the smokers try their first cigarette before the age of 18 and become addicted during adolescence.

Number of cigarettes per day. The result shows that most of the participants smokes fifteen to twenty cigarettes per day has an average of (5.9%), ten to fourteen sticks per day (25.1%), six to nine sticks per day with the average of (36.2%) while others smokes two to five cigarettes a day (32.8%).

Amount consumed for cigarettes. Most of the respondents are spending 22-35 pesos (43.6%) for cigarette, while others spend 10-18 pesos (35.3%), 16-100 pesos (6.60%) and below 8 pesos (5.70%). These findings are much higher than the result of the survey conducted by the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (2009) that men spends 339.2 pesos monthly (11.31 pesos daily on the average) and women spends 232.8 pesos monthly (7.76 pesos daily on the average) with regards to cigarettes.

Brand of cigarette. The 55.69% of the respondents smokes marlboro brand while 35.03% smokes fortune brand. Global Tobacco Industry (2010) reported that the Marlboro has been the world’s number one cigarette brand since 1972 and one of the most powerful trademarks among all consumer product.

Sources of Cigarettes. Looking with the sources of cigarette, most of them get it from the store with the score of 50.92%. This is supported with the study of Jones (2002) that the usual source of cigarette of smokers is buying their own cigarettes in a store. It is also showed that big number of participants source of cigarette are their friends (47.25%), this result can be supported by the study of Charlton (2012) which states that friends are the greatest source in youth smoking which may not be caused of peer-pressure but of peer-bonding. That is, young people may smoke because they want to belong to a particular group.

Activities while smoking. The highest percentage of participants activities while smoking was found to be drinking acohol (27.63%), walking (21.63%) and playing computer games (16.52%). This is in accordance with the study of Bocco (2012) that people usually smokes during conversations and interactions at parties or in crowded places and drinking sessions.

Places where smoking. Most of participants smokes in school (31.01%). This might be the real case since the respondents are all students and at the school most of the time. This finding may somehow be alarming since the schools should not be allowing it to happen in the first place. The participants also smoke at restuarant/bar/ foodhouse/drinking house (15.36%), park (14.53%), house (13.13%) and market (10.89%). Based on the results, it can be assumed that smokers have no specific places when smoking. It can be infer that they are liberated to their smoking since it occur even at public places. This statement can be supported by the study of National Youth Commision (2011) that there is a significant increased with the number of smokers who smoke on public places which is prohibited. It can also be observed with the findings of this study that many of the respondents smoke cigarette when drinking alcohol, in which the drinking of alcohol might be happening at restaurants, bars, foodhouses, or drinking house which is on top of the places where the participants smoke. Moods that trigger to smoke. Boredome (22.30%) triggers the participants to smoke. Many also smokes when pressured (16.91%), stressed out (15.44%), nervous (13.73), and sad (11.76). The association of moods the triggers to smoke could be supported with the study of study of Moyer (2011) which stated that most people try to smoke because their bored, stressed and tired after of work. Time of smoking. It was revealed that most of the participants smokes after meals (37.86%), before or after class (27.98), and when using comfort rooms (16.46%). Perkins (1992) stated that some of the smokers people smokes after eating can increasing whole body metabolism. Morrow (2003), smokers usually smoke when they are using comfort room and. He also mentioned that young people feel confident and alertive before and after attending their class.

Companions when smoking. Most of the paricipants smokes with their friends (44.29%) and their drinking buddies (36.53). This result supports the study of Hedeker (1994) that peer is always involed when they are having smoking sessions. This can also explained why friends are their second source of cigarettes (as shown also on the table) aside from buying their own. This also explains why they smokes when drinking (as shown also on the table) and that they smokes at restuarant/ bar/ foodhouse/ or drinking house.

How many sibling smokes. Almost half of the participants (51.2%) have one to three siblings who smoke; others have no siblings (45.4%) and four to five siblings have an average of (3.40%). The finding show that sibling effect on cigarette smoking is minimal has an average mean of 1. The finding are supported by the study of Jones (2009), which is stated that most of the smokers are not be influenced by their sibling but instead by their peers.

Table 2. Smoking Profile of CLSU Students Smokers
|Smoking Characteristics |Frequency |Percentage |
|Age when smoking started | | |
|13-16 |80 |67.2 |
|17-20 |39 |32.91 |
|Mean = 16.09 | | |
|Number of cigarettes per day | | |
|15-20 |7 |5.9 |
|10-14 |30 |25.1 |
|6-9 |43 |36.2 |
|2-5 |39 |32.8 |
|Mean = 8 | | |
|Money spent for smoking (daily) | | |
|22-35 | | |
|10-18 |52 |43.6 |
|36-100 |42 |35.3 |
|Below 8 |8 |6.60 |
|Mean = 22.08 |7 |5.70 |
|Brand Cigeratte | | |
|Marlboro |89 |55.69 |
|Fortune |55 |35.03 |
|Philip |7 |4.46 |
|I have no preference |6 |3.82 |
|Source of Cigerette | | |
|Store |111 |50.92 |
|Friends |103 |47.25 |
|Family |4 |1.83 |
|Activities while Smoking | | |
|Drinking alcohol |92 |27.63 |
|Walking |72 |21.63 |
|Playing computer games |55 |16.52 |
|Chatting with friends |41 |12.31 |
|Riding vehicles |25 |7.51 |
|Reading |24 |7.20 |
|Places where smoking | | |
|School |111 |31.1 |
|Restaurant/bar/ |55 |15.36 |
|food house/drinking | | |
|house | | |
|Park |52 |14.53 |
|House |47 |13.13 |
|Market |39 |10.89 |
|Waiting shed |32 |8.94 |
|Others (boarding house) |13 |8.94 |
|Church |9 |2.51 |
|Moods that triggers smoking | | |
|Bored |91 |22.30 |
|Pressured |69 |16.91 |
|Stressed |63 |15.44 |
|Nervous |56 |13.73 |
|Sad |48 |11.76 |
|Angry |32 |7.84 |
|Sleepy |21 |5.15 |
|Tired |21 |5.15 |
|Others (happy,lonely) |7 |1.72 |
|Time of smoking | | |
|After meal |92 |37.86 |
|Before/after class |68 |27.98 |
|When using comfort room |40 |16.46 |
|After waking up |23 |9.47 |
|Before going to bed |19 |7.82 |
|Others (whenever i want) |1 |0.41 |
|Companions when smoking | | |
|My friends |97 |44.29 |
|My drinking buddies |80 |36.53 |
|No one |27 |12.33 |
|My family |14 |6.39 |
|Others (classmate) |1 |0.26 |
|Number of sibling who smokes | | |
|0 |54 |45.4 |
|1-3 |61 |51.2 |
|4-5 |4 |3.40 |
|Mean = 1 | | |
|Parents who smoke | | |
|Father |86 |72.3 |
|Mother |21 |17.6 |
|Number of friends who smoke | | |
|Below 7 |62 |52.0 |
|8-14 |41 |34.6 |
|15-30 |16 |13.4 |
|Mean = 8 | | |
|Reason of Smoking | | |
|Curiosity |71 |20.40 |
|To be able to concentrate |64 |18.39 |
|For confidence |51 |14.66 |
|Coping mechanism |38 |10.92 |
|Conformity |38 |10.92 |
|No reason at all |36 |10.34 |
|To feel “in”cool |30 |8.36 |
|Others (Tripping) |1 |0.26 |
|Negative | | |
|No answer |86 |0.72 |
|Addicted |14 |0.11 |
|Nothing |10 |0.08 |
|Low stamina |9 |0.07 |
|Positive | | |
|No answer |87 |0.73 |
|Feel stress free |16 |0.13 |
|Relaxation |14 |0.12 |
|Enjoyment |2 |0.02 |

Parents. As shown, most of the respondents have father who smokes (72.3%), the case is opposite with regards to their mother. Again, these results are related with the study of Powell (2004) which stated that most of the young smokers have a smoker father. He also stated that the smoking initiations of the smoker are influences from their father.

Number of friends who smoke. It can be observed that all of the respondents have friends who smoke. Many of them have below 7 numbers of friends who smoke with the average of (52.0%). Some has 8-14 (34.6%); 15-30 of friends are smokers have an average of (13.4%). The results showed that the smoker has a large number of friends who are smoking are more to be smoker has a mean score of 8. Again, these findings may be related to the study of Charlton (2012) which states that friends are the greatest source in youth smoking and this may not be caused of peer-pressure but of peer-bonding.

Reason of smoking. Curiosity (20.40%) is the primary reason of the participants for smoking. According to the Tobacco Youth (2009) curiosity is one of a major factor why young people engaging to smoking. On the study of Colby (2009), it was mentioned that smoking is used as a way to suppress uncomfortable feelings, and smoking is used to alleviate stress, calm nerves, relax and way to feel confident. A study of World Health Organization (WHO, 2012) stated that many people smoke because it helps them relax and cope with difficult situations, or because it gives them confidence. These reasons mentioned by the WHO only got a score of 14.66% (for confidence) and 10.92% (for coping). Other resondents mentioned that their reasons are to concentrate (18.39%), conformity (10.92%), while some has no reason at all (10.34%). In addition, the study of Charlton (2012) also stated that smokers reasons are it give them confidence and look adult and cool. Furthermore, young people smoke because they think it helps them cope with stress, boredom, unhappiness, fear, anxiety and other trauma.

Most of the respondents are not aware of the negative experiences or effects on their smoking. But some of them was atated they become addicted to smoke once they tried it. This may be because they are still young to understand the negative effect of smoking. On the study MccCain (2002), the usual age of smokers when they started to experience the negative effect of smoking is 29-40 above and the usual experiences are nausea, dizziness, and rapid heartbeat. On the other hand, although most of the respondents did not experience any negative experience yet, those who have feel easily to get tired, bad breath, low stamina and bad smell.

Likewise, most of them have no negative experiences related with smoking but those who have said they feel stress free, relaxed, used it as coping mechanism, sociable and enjoyable. This result supported the study of Charlton (2012) that smokers believes that smoking can give them confidence and look adult and cool. In addition, young people smoke because they think it helps them cope with stress, boredom, unhappiness, fear, anxiety and other trauma.

Figure 2. Level of Emotional Intelligence of CLSU smokers

[pic]

The figure shows the level of emotional intelligence of the CLSU smokers. Result showed that most of the respondents predicted to have moderate conrol of there emotions,this can be explained by moods or emotions that triggers smoking that has a percentage of 22.30%. most of the respondents are bored that leads them to smoke, this might explain that the respondent understand’s how they feel because one way to releasthis feeling that they have may be smoking. Psychologically speaking this is their coping mechanism. These findings show that the respondents level of emotional intelligence is mopderate at all the clusters (self awareness = 3.33, managing emotions = 3.33, self management = 3.40, and empathy = 3.30). The result might has something to do with the choices of the questionaire. The respondents might chosen the safest answer since the questionaire used on this study has five choices(strongly disagree,disagree,i cannot say anything,agree and strongly agree). This could affect the result of the study which falls on the moderate level. Most of the participants chosen the safest answer.

Applying the theory of Goleman, moderate level of self awareness means that the participants have a moderate control of understanding one’s emotion. In relation to this, since the participants can consume at most 6 to 9 cigarettes in a day and most of the participants feeling bored and they trigger to smoke,this would be the reason why they have moderate control on their understanding of their emotions. This was supported by Goleman’s theory that individuals self awareness has a ability to control of deep understanding of one’s emotion.

Meanwhile, moderate level of managing emotion defines that the respondents also has a moderate control of handling appropriate feelings and ability. This can be explain the why most of them experiencing boredom (22.30%).

Furthermore, self management is in moderate level. This means that participants has the moderate level of ability to control emotion that leads to a certain goal. Moreover, this can also be the reason that smoking might also their coping machanism, this could be one of the reason why they have moderate emotion management in terms of handling of their feeling. As the results shows participants’ emotional intelligence could be lessen by smoking because there is a satisfaction effect when they are smoking while they are experiencing a certain situation. This could help them not to be more impulsive in terms of making decision or actions.

Lastly, empathy was also defined to be moderate inlevel, this means that the respondents has a moderately control in terms of sensitivity on one’s self awareness and feelings to other. Friends are one of the major reason of initiation of the participants n smoking, according to the study of Hedeker (1994) that peer is always involed when they are having smoking sessions. And peer influence the most factor of smoking initiation of young smokers. He also stated that they smoke with friends because of conformity.

Figure 3a. Socio Demographic Characteristic (Gender) Test of Difference (T-Test) in Terms of Emotional Intelligence

[pic]

The figure 3 on the next page shows the emotional intelligence of the respondents in relation to their gender. As observed, the values are close to one another. The t-test comparing the genders in terms of their emotional intelligence showed no significant difference with all the clusters of emotional intelligence identified (self awareness: t=-0.35, p=0.73; managing emotions (even that scores seems afar on the graph): t=1.11, p=0.27; self management: t=0.17, p=0.99; and empathy: t=-0.43, p=0.68).

Within the Western Pacific, Africa, and Eastern Mediterranean regions, boys and girls are equally the same on their self awareness with regards to their ability to one’s emotions (Global Youth Tobacco Survey, 2011). This insignificant result may also because of the huge difference of the total number of males and females.

Figure 3b. Socio Demographic Characteristic (academic status) Test of Difference (F-Test) in Terms of Emotional Intelligence

[pic]

The figure shows the emotional intelligence of the respondents in relation to their academic status. There were no significant differences found (self awarenss: F=.446,p=.720; managing emotion: F=.385,p=.764; self management: F=.533, p=.611 and empathy: F=1.35,p=.259). This findings contradict the study of (Smith, 2006) that the individuals who has high awareness on their emotional intelligence are more successful on their academic performance or even work because they manage their feeling such as emotions and sensitivity well.

Figure 4. Smoking Profile (if parents are smoking) Test of Significant Difference (T-Test) in Terms of Emotional Intelligence

[pic]

In this part, t test was used to identify if there is a significant difference between smoker and non smoker mother as well as to that of smoker and non smoker. The researcher chose to present both the mother and father scores at once. The figure above shows if there is significant differences on the emotional intelligence of the respondents if their parents are smokers and not. Significant difference was only found between the respondents who have smoker mother and non smoker mothers (t=2.91, p=0.03)on managing emotion. The result shoes that the average is below 0.05, and most of the respondents has a non smoker mother that to has smoker mother. This study supported by the study of Souza (2008), that mothers has a big role on child’s development on handling of emotion. She also stated that children grow and they are exposed to different situations their emotional lives also become more complex. Developing skills for managing of emotions influences by their mother and it is important for their emotional wellbeing. With regards to other domains, there are no significant differnces found (self awareness: t=-0.67, p=0.48; managing emotions: t=-.0.73, p=0.47; and empathy: t=-1.02, p=0.31). Likewise, no significant differences were found with respect to the self awareness (t=1.54, p=0.13),managing emotion (t=0.01, p=0.1), self management ( t=-1.63, p=0.11) and empathy (t=-1.90, p= 0.08)of respondents who have smoker and non-smoker fathers.

Table 3. Correlations of Socio Demographic and Emotional intelligence

| |Age |Weekly allowance |Siblings |
|Self awareness |r=-0.06 |r= 0.06 |r=-0.10 |
| |p= 0.54 |p= 0.53 |p= 0.29 |
|Managing emotion |r=-0.10 |r= 0.08 |r= 0.02 |
| |p= 0.30 |p= 0.37 |p= 0.87 |
|Self management |r= 0.06 |r= 0.04 |r=-0.10 |
| |p= 0.50 |p= 0.63 |p= 0.28 |
|Empathy |r=-0.02 |r= 0.04 |r=-0.05 |
| |p= 0.85 |p= 0.69 |p= 0.69 |

The table contains the data gathered with regards to the correlation of the socio-demographic characteristic and emotional intelliganece of CLSU students smokers. Based on the data gathered, age (self awareness: r=0.06, p=0.54, managing emotion: r=-0.10,p=0.30, self manegement: r=0.06, p=0.50, empathy: r=0.02,p=0.85), weekly allowance (self awareness: r=0.06 ,p=0.53,managing emotion: r=0.08,p=0.37, self manegement: r=0.04, p=0.63, empathy: r=0.04,p=0.69) and number of siblings(self awareness: r= 0.10, p=0.29, managing emotion: r=0.02,p=0.87, self manegement: r=-0.10, p=0.28, empathy: r=-0.05,p=0.69) has no significant relationship to emotional intelligance. The result contradict with the study of (Adeyemo,2008) that the individual age and weekly allowance have significant predictive effects on emotional intelligence in terms of self awareness, managing wmotion, self management and empathy of the individual. And it deals with how the individual manage their emotional intelligence.

Table 4. Correlations of Smoking profile and emotional intelligence

| |Age when smoking |Number of cigarettes |Number of cigarettes |Number of friends |How much do you spend |
| |started |daily |daily |who smoke |for cigarette |
|Self awareness |r= 0.13 |r=-0.07 |r=-0.19 |r=-0.10 |r= 0.10 |
| |p= 0.18 |p= 0.44 |p= 0.42 |p= 0.28 |p= 0.29 |
|Managing emotion |r= 0.84 |r=-0.09 |r=-0.13 |r=-0.10 |r=-0.05 |
| |p= 0.37 |p= 0.32 |p= 0.15 |p= 0.27 |p= 0.57 |
|Self management |r= 0.01 |r=-0.01 |r=-0.13 |r= 0.08 |r=-0.32 |
| |p= 0.29 |p= 0.95 |p= 0.15 |p= 0.40 |p= 0.00 |
|Empathy |r= 0.15 |r=-0.10 |r=-0.11 |r=-0.06 |r= 0.06 |
| |p= 0.11 |p= 0.91 |p= 0.23 |p= 0.49 |p= 0.56 |

Table 4 contains the data gathered with regards to the correlation of smoking profile and emotional intelligence of CLSU students smokers. Based on the data gathered, it was found that the amount spent for cigarette of the respondents is significantly negatively correlated (r= -0.32, p=0.00) to the self management but not to other clusters (self awareness: r=0.10,p=0.29; managing emotion: r=0.05, p=0.57 and empathy:r=0.06, p=;0.56). This may suggests that lower the self management, the more amount of money they spent for cigarette, or vice versa. In general, it can be concluded that those who has low level of self management do not seem to care on the amount of moner they spent for smoking. The result suported by the study of Brewer (2009), number of amount that spent on cigarettes has a relation to smokers self management. He also stated that the smokers has a large amount of money spending for cigarette has a low level of emotional intelligence in terms of self management.

With regards to their age when they started smoking, no significant relationship were found to all the clusters of their emotional intelligence(self awareness: r=0.13,p=0.18; managing emotion: r=0.84,p=0.37; self management: r=0.01, p=0.29 and empathy:r=0.15,p=0.11). This is also the case with the number of cigarettes they smoke in a day (self awareness: r=-0.07,p=0.44; managing emotion: r=-0.09,p=0.32; self management: r=-0.01, p=0.95 and empathy:r=-0.10,p=0.91). The number of their siblings who smoke and the emotional intelligence were also no significant difference (self awareness: r=-0.19,p=0.42; managing emotion: r=-0.13,p=0.15; self management: r=-0.13, p=0.15 and empathy:r=-0.11,p=0.23). This is the same with the number of friends they have (self awareness: r=-0.10,p=0.28; managing emotion: r=0.10,p=0.27; self management: r=0.08, p=0.40 and empathy:r=-0.06,p=0.49). This can be explained by the result of the study, the participants are less gratified with their selves. From the results it revealsed that having less satisfaction towards thereselves may increase smoking through money that the respondents spents just for the respondents smoking is one way of there coping mechanism, they would prefer to spend more on buying cigarretes rather than to feel less gartified to trheir selves.

Summary

The study was conducted to find out the smoking characteristic and emotional intelligence of the CLSU student smokers. It also sought to determine the association and differences of the respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics and that of the smoking profile and their emotional intelligence.

Most of the participants were found to be males. Majority are currently 21 years old and most of them started smoking since they were at the age 13 to 16 has a mean of 16.09. It was also found out that majority of them consumes an average mean of 8 cigarette sticks per day. Furthermore, majority of them in terms of academic status are regular. It also found out that majority of them has a weekly allownce of 500 to 750 pesos a week has a average mean of 758.40.

In line of smoking profile of the respondents, marlboro (55.69%) was their preferred brand. In terms of money spend for cigarette (daily), findings suggest that 22 to 35 pesos daily for cigarette has a average mean of 22.08. Furthermore, the data gathered shows that most of the participants source of cigarette are stores (50.92%) and friends (47.25%). The participants smoke while drinking (27.63 %) and at the school (31.1%) most of the time. It was also found that majority of the participants smoke when bored (22.30) and are smoking after meals (37.96%).

Furthermore, with regards to the companion when smoking, majority of the respondents are with friends (44.29%). Moreover, 82.4% of the respondents has a mother who does not engaged on smoking while 72.3% of them has a father who are smoking. Curiosity was the major reason of the participants for smoking (20.40%). The findings on emotional intelligence shows that the respondents level of emotional intelligence is mopderate at all the clusters (self awareness = 3.33, managing emotions = 3.33, self management = 3.40, and empathy = 3.30).

The significant differnence was only found between participants who have smokers and non-smoker mothers (t=2.91, p=.03). Meanwhile, significant relationship was only found on the amount spend for cigarette and self management (r= -0.32, p=0.00). According to Brewer (2009), number of amount that spent on cigarettes has a relation to smokers self management. He also stated that the smokers has a large amount of money spending for cigarette has a low level of emotional intelligence in terms of self management.

Conclusion

Based on the result of the study, the researcher came up with the following conclusions:

1. The characteristic of CLSU student smokers shows that most of the smokers started to smoke at the age from 13 to 16; they consumed 6 to 9 cigarettes in a day. Most of them were spending 10 to 35 pesos daily for cigarettes and their usual brand was Marlboro that mostly came from store and their friends. Furthermore, they usually smoke while drinking and walking, when they are at school and when they feel bored after having meals. They usually smoke with friends. Most of them ha s a 0 to 5 sibling who smoked and has a smoker father and non-smoking mother. Most of them have friends of 7 to 14 who are smoking. Curiosity and for concentration are the main reasons of their smoking. Most of them do not experience negative and positive experiences of smoking.
2. The CLSU student smokers have a moderate level of emotional intelligence such as self awareness, self motivation, managing emotion and empathy.
3. There is no significant relationship between socio-demographic characteristics (age, weekly allowance and number of family members) CLSU smoker students with that of their emotional intelligence. This is also the same with their smoking profile (age when smoking started, number of sticks consumed in a day, number of family members and friends who smoke) and emotional intelligence.
4. There is no significant difference in gender, course, academic status and sources of cigarettes of the CLSU smoker students in terms of their emotional intelligence.
5. The findings show that the amount of money spent for cigarettes of CLSU student smokers has a significant relationship to their emotional intelligence such as self management.
6. The findings show that the smoker mother and non smoker mother of the respondents has a significant difference on emotional intelligence in terms of managing emotion.

Recommendation

Based on the data gathered the folowing are the suggestion of the researcher for the university:

• Remind the vendors within the campus to refrain for selling cigarette among teenagers.

• Provide advertisement about the health risks of smoking to improve the awareness of smokers.

• Conduct symposium regarding negative effects of cigarette smoking among students.

For the future researchers who would like to pursue the field.

• Use other variable to measure the emotional intelligence of the smokers.

• Determine the difference between the smokers level of emotional intelligence in terms being allowed to smoke at their homes.

• Include in the socio-demographic characteristic of the participants their courses and grade point of average.

• Find out the reasons of smokers for smoking despite of having awareness towards their emotional intelligence.

References Botvin, C J Goldberg, E M Botvin, and L Dusenbury (1993). Smoking behavior of adolescents exposed to cigarette advertising. http://www.ncbi.nlm. /pmc/articles/PMC1403364/ Chassin, Presson, Sherman (2002).Cognitive and social Influence factors in adolescent smoking cessation, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ 03064 60384900388 Da Silva Pinto and Aparecida Ribeiro (2007), Variables related to smoking initiation among students in public and private high schools in the city of Belém, Brazil, http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1806- 37132007000500011

Das S, Ghosh M, Sarkar M, Joardar S, Chatterjee R, Chatterjee S (2011), Adolescents Speak: Why do we Smoke, http://tropej.oxfordjournals.org

David Derbyshire (2008). Smoking is 'good for your memory and concentration http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article- 1034701/Smoking-good-memory- concentration.html#ixzz3HoOCmj3t

Global Youth Tobacco Survey (2002). Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS), http://www.who.int/tobacco/surveillance/gyts/en/

Loureir (2006). Smoking Habits: Like Father, Like Son. http://ftp.iza.org/dp2279.pdf N. Breslau and E. L. Peterson (1996). Smoking cessation in young adults: age at initiation of cigarette smoking http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8633738 Neil Sherwood (2004). Effects of nicotine gum on psychomotor performance in smokers and non- smokers, http://www.springerlink.com/content/7824570k367613wp/

OGAWA, TOMINAGA, GELLERT and AOKI (1988). Smoking among Junior High School Students in Nagoya, Japan, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8633738

Rodrigues & Audrain-McGovern (2003). Team Sport Participation and Smoking: Analysis with General Growth Mixture Modeling, http://jpepsy.oxfordjournals.org

Santi Martini and Muji Sulistyowati 2004). ECONOMICS OF TOBACCO CONTROL PAPER NO. 32 The Determinants of Smoking Behavior among Teenagers, http://www.bmj.com/content/309/6959/923.full

Sherry A. Everett (20020. Initiation of Cigarette Smoking and Subsequent Smoking Behavior among U.S. High School Student http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii

Appendices
I. Direction: Please fill in the information needed. For the items with corresponding choices, put a check on your answers. Multiple checking is allowed.

1. Gender: ¬___ 2. Age: __
3. Weekly allowance: _______________ 4. Academic Status: ___
5. Age when smoking started: ____
6. No. of sticks smoked per day: ____
7. No. of sibling: ____ 8.how many of your siblings smokes? ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬____
9. Is your father smokes? ______ 10. Is your mother smokes? ______

11. How much do you spend for cigarettes? _________
12. What brand of cigarette do you smoke? ( ) marlboro ( ) hope ( ) others, please specify ( ) phillip morris ( ) mighty _________________ ( ) fortune ( ) I have no preference.

13. No. of friends who smoke: _______

14. Where does you cigarettes coming from: ( ) Friends ( ) Family ( ) Store, I buy it from my own money ( ) others, please specify ___________

15. Which of the following do you do the while smoking? ( ) reading ( ) watching television ( ) riding in vehicles ( ) chatting with friends ( ) drinking alcohol ( ) walking ( ) playing computer games

16. Where do you usually smoke? ( ) house ( ) park/mall ( ) school ( ) market ( ) church ( ) waiting shed ( ) restaurant/bar/food house/drinking house ( ) Others: (please specify) _____________

17. What mood often triggers you to smoke? ( ) bored ( ) sad ( ) angry ( ) sleepy ( ) others, please specify ( ) stressed out ( ) nervous ( ) pressured ( ) tired
18. What particular time do you smoke? ( ) after waking up ( ) after meals ( ) before/after classes ( ) before going to bed ( ) when using the comfort room ( ) others, please specify:________________

19. Who are your usual companions when smoking? ( ) no one ( ) my family ( ) others, please specify ( ) my drinking buddies ( ) my friends ________________

20. Why do you smoke? ( ) I need more energy ( ) conformity ( ) to be able to concentrate ( ) to feel “in“cool ( ) curiosity ( ) no reason at all ( ) for confidence ( ) other; please specify __________________ ( ) coping mechanism

21. What are your positive experiences related to smoking?

22. What are your negative experiences related to smoking?

III. Direction: Kindly indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree to each statement by putting an X mark in the parentheses under each response using the following guide. There are no right or wrong answers. SD = Strongly Disagree D = Disagree N = I cannot say anything A = Agree SA = Strongly Agree

| |SD |D |N |A |SA |
|When I was a college freshman, I was sure what I wanted to become. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|Frustrations discourage me in my studies. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I can perform better in school if I have better teachers and more library materials. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|A student’s interest in a subject is essentially due to the motivation provided by the teacher. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|When I do not like my teachers, I lose interest in the subject. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I find ways to improve my performance in subjects where I get low scores. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|I am satisfied with my low grades. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I am responsible for my performance in school. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I have a clear picture of what I would like to be in the future. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I study my lessons even if I do not find the subject matter interesting. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|My success in school depends on my efforts alone. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I am contented with a passing grade. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I like to cooperate for a good cause even with those who disagree with me. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|A student must follow rules and regulations even if he disagrees with such rules. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|Even negative criticisms have positive effects. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|A good leader listens to those who disagree with him. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I like to listen to both sides of an issue. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|My rights are very important to me so I will do anything to defend them. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|I always look for reason for helping others. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I feel comfortable when I am with other people. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I do not feel bad when my ideas are not accepted by friends. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I like friends who do not disagree with me. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|Superiors need not be followed; however, they must be listened to. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|I know when my friends have problems. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I am willing to give up personal pleasure to maintain good relationship with others. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |

|I am comfortable working with those who disagree with me. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I know when I hurt others. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|When I look the course that I am now finishing, I was sure that I have the ability to finish it. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|My feelings are important when I make discussions. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I get disgusted when my ideas are not accepted. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I express my ideas even if these are not acceptable. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|When I am angry I would rather keep quiet than express my anger. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|I get relief after expressing my feelings. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I do not care who gets hurt as long as I express what I want. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|When I am anxious, I cannot concentrate on what I am doing. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|It is natural for a student to give up on his studies |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|Criticisms help in many ways. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I do not mind getting into trouble as long as I express my ideas. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|I failed in some instances because of fear that I will fail. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I am aware of what irritates me. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I can assert myself without hurting others. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I express my anger even if my anger hurts. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|There are times when I am angry, but I keep my anger to myself. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|I do a lot of physical exercise. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I am aware of possible outcomes of what I feel. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I express my anger in different ways. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I do not feel bad when I cannot get what I want immediately. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|There is always a reason for any feeling or emotion. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I always express my feelings so as to get relief. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|There is an appropriate time and place to express one’s feelings. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
| | | | | | |
|I do not understand why I get irritated most of the time |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I get over my distress and failure easily. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |
|I keep quiet at times when I am angry. |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |[ ] |

-----------------------

Emotional Intelligence

self-awareness

self motivation

managing emotions

empathy

B. Smoking profile
- age when smoking started
- number of cigarette per day
- money spend for smoking
- brand of cigarette
- source of cigarette
- activities while smoking
- places where smoking
- moods that triggers smoking
- time of smoking
- companions when smoking
- number of sibling who smoke
- parents who smoke
- number Of friends who smoke
- reasons of smoking

A. Socio-demographic characteristics
- Age
- Weekly allowance
- Number of family member