We've updated our Privacy Policy to make it clearer how we use your personal data.

We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. You can read our Cookie Policy here.

Advertisement
Improving Air Quality With an Electronic Nudge
News

Improving Air Quality With an Electronic Nudge

Improving Air Quality With an Electronic Nudge
News

Improving Air Quality With an Electronic Nudge

Credit: Pixabay.
Read time:
 

Want a FREE PDF version of This News Story?

Complete the form below and we will email you a PDF version of "Improving Air Quality With an Electronic Nudge"

First Name*
Last Name*
Email Address*
Country*
Company Type*
Job Function*
Would you like to receive further email communication from Technology Networks?

Technology Networks Ltd. needs the contact information you provide to us to contact you about our products and services. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time. For information on how to unsubscribe, as well as our privacy practices and commitment to protecting your privacy, check out our Privacy Policy

SDSU researchers found at least some smokers with kids will modify their behavior with an electronic push.


A San Diego State University study found some parents who smoke at home can be nudged outdoors with a combination of coaching, lights and sound.


“Project Fresh Air” installed equipment in nearly 300 homes that flashed a warning light and emitted a tone whenever air monitors detected secondhand smoke. The result was an apparent near-20 percent reduction in smoking and other activity that set off the alerts.


Mel Hovell, who led the study at SDSU’s Center for Behavioral Epidemiology and Community Health, said his goal is  to protect children from the harm associated with secondhand smoke—including asthma, bronchitis and ear infections.


“If they’re living in a home that’s contaminated by tobacco, they’re being damaged every single day,” he said. “If they’re breathing active smoke it’s even worse.”


The study was the first to combine motivational coaching on smoking with an immediate form of feedback, and follows decades of previous research by Hovell and others at SDSU on secondhand smoke and the residue from thirdhand smoke left on carpets, furniture and other household materials.


Families throughout San Diego County were invited to participate. All had at least one child under 14 (the average age was 4). Researchers provided up to four sessions of coaching aimed at encouraging smokers to take their habit outside.


When they didn’t, the smoke they produced caused a  light on the installed home device to switch to yellow and the equipment to emit a low-frequency tone: three quick pulses. Continued exposure would lead to an even louder tone and a red light. The goal, Hovell said, was to reduce smoking inside the home by delivering almost immediate feedback.


Collecting data


Hovell’s team left the equipment in the homes for up to three months, including a one-month baseline period prior to the lights and sounds. They then crunched the data from a combined 27,443 days of measurement and compared them to a control group.


The figures showed a 19.35 percent reduction in the air “particle events” that triggered the alarms, compared to the period before the intervention efforts. In the control homes, particle events actually increased slightly.


“Smoking outdoors is relatively easy to do,” said Hovell. “Our job is to move them outside.”

This article has been republished from materials provided by San Diego State University. Note: material may have been edited for length and content. For further information, please contact the cited source.

Reference
Melbourne F Hovell, John Bellettiere, Sandy Liles, Benjamin Nguyen, Vincent Berardi, Christine Johnson, Georg E Matt, John Malone, Marie C Boman-Davis, Penelope J E Quintana, Saori Obayashi, Dale Chatfield, Robert Robinson, Elaine J Blumberg, Weg M Ongkeko, Neil E Klepeis, Suzanne C Hughes. Randomised controlled trial of real-time feedback and brief coaching to reduce indoor smoking. Tobacco Control, 2019; tobaccocontrol-2018-054717 DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054717.

Advertisement