↓ Skip to main content

Immigration concern and the white/non-white difference in smoking: Group position theory and health

Overview of attention for article published in SSM - Population Health , December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Immigration concern and the white/non-white difference in smoking: Group position theory and health
Published in
SSM - Population Health , December 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.12.010
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

National data indicate that U.S. whites have a higher prevalence of smoking compared to non-whites. Group position theory and public opinion data suggest racial differences in immigration concern. This study examines whether immigration concern mediates the racial difference in smoking. Drawing on the 2012 General Social Survey, the 2012 American National Election Study, and the 2006 Portraits of American Life Study, immigration concern was associated with smoking, controlling for covariates across all three nationally representative surveys. Mediation analysis indicated that immigration concern partially mediated the higher odds of smoking among whites across all surveys. Immigration concern also presents a possible explanation for the healthy immigrant advantage and Hispanic paradox as they pertain to smoking differences.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Student > Master 5 17%
Librarian 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 40%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 5 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 13 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 December 2016.
All research outputs
#9,598,533
of 34,360,889 outputs
Outputs from SSM - Population Health
#680
of 1,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,379
of 459,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SSM - Population Health
#20
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,360,889 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 459,023 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.