Stigma against Cannabis and Tobacco Users by Nonusers in the U.S.: The Role of Culture and Honor Values
Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA
*Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, 142 Flagg Rd, Kingston, RI 02881, USA. ceren.gunsoy@uri.edu (C. Günsoy).Abstract
People who strongly endorse honor values protect their reputation by avoiding and condemning potentially dishonorable behaviors. In this research, we examined whether honor values were associated with stigma against cannabis and tobacco users, as the use of stigmatized substances can damage one’s reputation. Participants were nonusers of cannabis or tobacco from South Asian American (n = 77; 44 women, 33 men) - an understudied honor culture - and European American background in the U.S. North (n = 140; 96 women, 41 men, 3 non-binary) - a dignity culture, in which honor values are less likely to shape people’s lives. They completed an online survey about their stigma against cannabis and tobacco users, endorsement of honor values, religiosity, and demographic background. Among South Asian American nonusers, cannabis stigma was positively associated with personal honor values and religiosity. Among European American nonusers, tobacco stigma was positively associated with family honor values. These findings show that honor values can play different roles in substance use stigma depending on people’s cultural background. Understanding the cultural factors behind substance use stigma is necessary to facilitate help seeking, especially in diverse societies.
Stigma against substance users has detrimental effects on users’ health, as it can prevent them from disclosing their use and seeking treatment (e.g., Earnshaw, 2020; King et al., 2024; van Boekel et al., 2013). Whereas stigma against illicit drugs is nearly universal (e.g., Palamar et al., 2012), stigma against legal or partially legal substances, such as tobacco and cannabis, respectively, can vary across cultures (e. g., Evans-Polce et al., 2015; Topkaya et al., 2021). Even those who do not use these substances heavily can be stigmatized in certain cultural contexts, which can make them conceal their use due to concerns about being ostracized (e.g., Arfken & Ahmed, 2016). In this research, we focused on stigma against cannabis and tobacco users among South Asian American and European American nonusers, whose stigma levels can differ due to their cultural orientations.
Perceptions of cannabis and tobacco
The U.S. is one of the countries with the highest estimated cannabis use ratio (19.81 %; United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2025; World Health Organization, 2025a). From the 70s until the late 90s, cannabis was perceived as harmful and highly restricted in the U.S., after which several states have started legalizing its medicinal and later recreational use (Rafei et al., 2023). Legalization of cannabis in the U.S. has increased its use and acceptance and decreased its perception as a risky substance (e.g., Hall et al., 2019; Zellers et al., 2023). There are, however, differences in cannabis use and stigma across cultural groups in the U.S.; for example, adolescents from Asian (vs. European) American backgrounds are less likely to use, more likely to disapprove, and more likely to report parental disapproval of cannabis (Wu et al., 2015). Help seeking for cannabis dependence is already low (e.g., Stinson et al., 2006) and perceiving stigma from their cultural community can additionally discourage users from receiving treatment (Ellingstad et al., 2006; van der Pol et al., 2013).
Perceptions and use of tobacco have also fluctuated in the U.S. Until the early 60s, smoking was highly acceptable and portrayed as a desirable behavior in the media, after which regulations and bans were put in place against its use, sale, and advertisement due to its link to serious illness (e.g., Cummings & Proctor, 2014). In anti-smoking public service announcements, smokers have started being portrayed as lacking self-control and threatening the health of nonsmokers (Graham, 2012; Ritchie et al., 2010). As a result, tobacco use ratios have declined significantly, while stigma against smokers has increased (e.g., Riley et al., 2017). As in the case of cannabis, however, there are cultural differences in the perception and use of tobacco in the U.S., especially when the specific type of tobacco product is considered. For example, whereas 20 % Korean Americans are estimated to smoke cigarettes (Truth Initiative, 2020), approximately 40 % of Bangladeshi Americans use smokeless tobacco products (Han et al., 2019). Although denormalization of smoking is associated with an increased likelihood of quitting (e.g., Schoenaker et al., 2018), there is also evidence for the negative consequences of perceived stigma and self-stigma for some tobacco users, such as shame, social anxiety, and defensiveness, which may prevent individuals from seeking help to quit (e.g., Curry et al., 2013; Evans-Polce et al., 2015).
To address the needs of cannabis and tobacco users from different cultural backgrounds, it is necessary to understand the culturally specific factors behind the stigma against them. In this research, we focused on the potential role of honor values in cannabis and tobacco stigma - a construct that has not been investigated in this area.
Honor values and substance use stigma
Honor means having respect for oneself and being respected by others (Pitt-Rivers, 1965). People who strongly endorse honor values tend to maintain their positive reputation by avoiding dishonorable and shameful behaviors (e.g., Günsoy et al., 2015), by engaging in risky behaviors that can reinforce their image of strength (e.g., Barnes et al., 2012), and by retaliating against those who attack their reputation (e.g., Uskul et al., 2015). In honor cultures, such as South Asian, Middle Eastern and North African (MENA), and Latin American societies, as well as Southern and Mountain states of the U.S. (e.g., Texas, Wyoming), honor values strongly shape people’s behaviors and perceptions of others (e.g., Cohen et al., 1996; Leung & Cohen, 2011; Uskul et al., 2023). In these cultures, not only personal honor but also family honor is something to be protected vigilantly (e.g., Rodriguez Mosquera, 2016). For example, people from honor cultures tend to avoid behaviors that could damage their family reputation (e.g., Günsoy et al., 2015). Moreover, people with strong family honor values may stigmatize or distance themselves from those who engage in dishonorable behaviors, because they may perceive them unfavorably (i.e., as someone who does not care about the consequences of their behaviors for their family), or they may not want to be associated with them to protect their own family’s reputation. In dignity cultures, in contrast, such as European Americans from Northern and Midwestern states of the U.S., people tend to believe that their honor and self-worth is internal and less dependent on what other people think about them (e.g., Leung & Cohen, 2011). Moreover, family honor is a less emphasized and less consequential construct in these cultures compared to honor cultures (e.g., Rodriguez Mosquera et al., 2014).
While substance use stigma has not been examined in honor cultures, the connection between honor values and stigmatized behaviors has been well-established. For example, people from U.S. honor states and those who hold strong honor values tend to display greater stigma against help seeking for mental health issues, as this may imply weakness (e.g., Brown et al., 2014; Foster et al., 2021a). Other research has shown that feminine honor values (i.e., a focus on sexual purity, modesty, and loyalty in women) are associated with greater stigma against sexual activity, which manifests itself as greater reluctance to receive STI screenings among women (Foster et al., 2021b; 2022a), particularly in U.S. honor states. Research has also revealed that men with greater masculine honor endorsement are more likely to stigmatize erectile dysfunction medication use (Foster et al., 2022b). The underlying mechanism behind these findings is reputation concerns, such that people who strongly value honor tend to avoid behaviors that can jeopardize their reputation and stigmatize those who engage in these behaviors. Substance use, especially the use of stigmatized substances, can be one of these behaviors.
The present study
In the present study, we focused on South Asian Americans (e.g., people from Indian, Pakistani, or Bengali heritage) as an example of an honor culture, who have been understudied in psychological research, especially with regards to substance use (Inman et al., 2014). We examined whether the endorsement of honor values was relevant to cannabis and tobacco stigma in this cultural group among nonusers. Cannabis is currently an illegal substance in India and other South Asian countries (e.g., Ransing et al., 2022) and the estimated use ratio in this region is lower than the U.S. (2.81 % vs. 19.81 %; United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2025). The data on South Asian Americans’ cannabis use and perceptions are scant because they have usually been combined with other Asian American groups in research (Goh & McCue, 2021; Lee & Ramakrishnan, 2020). As a federally illegal substance, cannabis use can be stigmatized in honor cultures like South Asian communities, as it may be perceived as immoral and hence, dishonorable in these cultures (e.g., Cross et al., 2014; Rodriguez Mosquera, 2016). This stigma can be particularly strong for religious South Asian Americans because substance use is prohibited in some of the religions that are prevalent in this community (e.g., Islam and some sects of Hinduism; DeWall et al., 2014; Doukas & Ahmed, 2016;).
Tobacco use is more prevalent in South Asian countries (e.g., 30 % in India) than in the U.S. (20 %; World Health Organization, 2025b). Although cigarette smoking rates of South Asian Americans tend to be lower than the national U.S. average (e.g., Delnevo et al., 2011), tobacco products that are specific to South Asian communities (e.g., smokeless tobacco) have usually been omitted from national surveillance measures (Mukherjea & Modayil, 2013). Several studies revealed that consumption of indigenous tobacco products is highly prevalent among South Asian Americans (e.g., Glenn et al., 2009; Han et al., 2019) and the existing surveillance measures may be underestimating the prevalence of tobacco use in this group (Manderski et al., 2016). For these reasons, people from South Asian background may be more tolerant of others’ tobacco use and hold less stigma against them relative to cannabis users.
Although substance users themselves can hold a stigma against other users, we focused on nonusers of tobacco and cannabis in this study because they can be a significant source of judgement and a potential barrier to help-seeking among users. Research has shown that nonusers (vs. users) are more likely to stigmatize substance users and to endorse derogatory stereotypes about them (Farrimond & Joffe, 2006; Palamar et al., 2012), as a potential mechanism to prevent use (e.g., Palamar et al., 2013) and to perceive themselves as more moral or logical relative to users (e.g., Peretti-Watel et al., 2014).
We compared South Asian American nonusers with European American nonusers (a dignity culture), in which the endorsement of honor values is less likely to shape people’s behaviors and perceptions (Leung & Cohen, 2011). We expected South Asian (vs. European) American nonusers to have greater stigma against cannabis users but less stigma against tobacco users. Moreover, among South Asian American nonusers, we expected honor values to be more strongly and positively associated with stigma against cannabis users than against tobacco users. Among European American nonusers, we did not expect honor values to be relevant to stigma against these substances. Finally, we explored whether the endorsement of honor values plays a unique role in substance stigma among nonusers after taking into account their religiosity, as religiosity has been found to be a factor in substance use decisions and stigma against users (e.g., Arfken & Ahmed, 2016; DeWall et al., 2014).
Method
Participants
Upon receiving approval from the Institutional Review Board of the researchers’ institution, data for this study were collected as part of a larger survey. South Asian American participants were recruited through CloudResearch panel services (in return for compensation from specific research platforms) and European American participants were recruited through the psychology department’s participant pool at a northeastern university in the U.S. (in return for course credit). Participants reported their frequency of cannabis and tobacco use (1 = never to 5 = four or more times a week) in a Qualtrics survey and only nonusers of each substance were included in the present study. In the South Asian American sample (n = 77; 44 women, 33 men), there were 72 cannabis nonusers and 61 tobacco nonusers. In the European American sample (n = 140; 96 women, 41 men, 3 non-binary; all from U.S. dignity states; Cohen, 1998), there were 76 cannabis nonusers and 120 tobacco nonusers (see Supplementary Materials for additional information on participants and exclusions).1
Materials
Upon providing online consent, participants completed scales on their stigma against cannabis and tobacco users, personal and family honor values, religiosity, and demographic background.
Stigma against substance users
Participants completed the Social Distance Scale for Substance Users (SDSU; Brown, 2011) and Affect Scale for Substance Users (ASSU; Brown, 2011) for each substance. The wording of the original scales was revised to reflect stigma against people who use cannabis or tobacco. In SDSU, participants stated their willingness to have people who use these substances in their social life (seven items; e.g., how would you feel having someone who uses cannabis [tobacco] as a neighbor?; 1 = definitely willing to 4 = definitely unwilling; cannabis: αSouthAsianAmerican = .92; αEuropeanAmerican = .91; tobacco: αSouthAsianAmerican = .90; αEuropeanAmerican = .89). In ASSU, participants indicated the way they would feel if they interacted with people who use these substances (10 item pairs; e.g., 1 = empathic to 7 = angry; cannabis: αSouthAsianAmerican = .93; αEuropeanAmerican = .95; tobacco: αSouthAsianAmerican = .92; αEuropeanAmerican = .93). Composite scores were calculated by summing up the scores for all items (Brown, 2011). For the sake of brevity, we combined the two scales after standardizing them, as they were highly correlated in both cultural groups (cannabis: rSouthAsianAmerican = .57, rEuropeanAmerican = .67, ps < .001; tobacco: rSouthAsianAmerican = .51, rEuropeanAmerican = .44, ps < .001).
Personal honor
Participants completed an honor values scale that assessed their agreement with statements such as “people must always be ready to defend their honor” (three items; 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree; αSouthAsianAmerican = .71; αEuropeanAmerican = .71; taken from Smith et al., 2017, honor subscale). Composite scores were calculated by averaging the scores for all items.
Family honor
Participants completed a family honor scale, in which they stated their agreement with statements such as “people should be concerned about damaging their families’ reputation” (eight items; 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree; αSouthAsianAmerican = .86; αEuropeanAmerican = .87; taken from Guerra et al., 2013, family honor subscale, and Yao et al., 2017, honor subscale). Composite scores were calculated by averaging the scores for all items.
Religiosity
Participants indicated which religion or spiritual practice they identified with (see Supplementary Materials) and to what extent they were religious or spiritual (1 = not at all to 9 = very religious/spiritual; Table 1).
Demographic background
Participants provided information on their gender, age, highest level of education (1 = 8th grade or less to 9 = professional or doctoral degree), current household income (1 = $0 - $15,000 to 6 = more than $120,000), and acculturation level with their heritage (South Asian) and main- stream culture (North American; The Vancouver Index of Acculturation; Ryder et al., 2000; Table 1).
Results
We conducted stepwise linear regression analyses for stigma against users of each substance, in which we entered cultural group, personal and family honor values, and the control variables (i.e., age, gender, education, income, religiosity, and acculturation) in the first step and the interactions of cultural group with the two honor scales in the second step.
Cannabis stigma
We found a significant main effect of cultural group, gender, and religiosity in the first step (Table 2), such that South Asian (vs. European) American nonusers, women (vs. men & non-binary; MWomen = .13, SD = .89; MMen = −.22, SD = .93; MNonbinary = −.10, SD = .12), and more (vs. less) religious participants had greater stigma against cannabis users. The main effect of culture disappeared when the interaction terms were entered in the second step, and the interaction of cultural group and personal honor values was significant.
Next, we examined the bivariate correlations of cannabis stigma in each cultural group (Table 3). As predicted, among South Asian American nonusers, personal honor and religiosity were positively associated with cannabis stigma, whereas among European American nonusers, neither honor nor religiosity were significantly associated with cannabis stigma. To shed light on the unique role of honor values, we then conducted linear regression analyses in each cultural group, in which cannabis stigma was entered as a dependent variable, whereas honor values, religiosity, and the demographic variables were entered as predictor variables (Table 4). Among South Asian Americans, personal honor was not significantly associated with cannabis stigma anymore (p = .064); however, the relationship remained to be in the expected direction. Among European Americans, none of the honor variables was related to cannabis stigma.
Tobacco stigma
We found a significant main effect of cultural group, gender, and religiosity in the first step (Table 2), such that South Asian (vs. European) American nonusers, women (vs. men & non-binary; MWomen = .05, SD = .89; MMen = −.07, SD = .84; MNonbinary = −.66, SD = .82), and more (vs. less) religious participants had greater stigma against tobacco users. There was also a significant main effect of family honor in the first step, such that those who endorsed stronger family honor values were more likely to hold tobacco stigma. The main effect of culture disappeared when we entered the interaction terms in the second step; however, none of the interactions were significant.
For the sake of consistency, we also examined the bivariate correlations of tobacco stigma (Table 3). Among South Asian Americans, only religiosity was positively associated with tobacco stigma, whereas among European Americans, personal and family honor values were positively associated with tobacco stigma. Finally, linear regression analyses in each cultural group revealed that among South Asian Americans, there was no significant association of honor values or religiosity with tobacco stigma after taking into account all variables, whereas among European Americans, the significant positive association between family honor and tobacco stigma remained (Table 4).
Discussion
This study showed that people’s stigma against substance users is associated with their cultural background, values, and substance type. South Asian (vs. European) Americans who did not use cannabis were more likely to hold a stigma against cannabis users, especially if they strongly endorsed personal honor values and if they were religious. Although the association between personal honor and cannabis stigma became non-significant (p = .064) after controlling religiosity and demographic background, it remained positive. These findings suggest that cannabis could be a stigmatized substance among South Asian American nonusers, primarily because it may damage one’s personal reputation and be perceived as contradictory to religious expectations. Although cannabis stigma has not been examined in other honor cultures, previous research from U.S. honor states revealed a strong connection between honor values and stigma against behaviors that may damage one’s reputation (e.g., Brown et al., 2014; Foster et al., 2021a). Future studies can test the generalizability of these associations in other honor cultures (e.g., MENA communities).
Among European Americans who did not use cannabis, honor values or religiosity were not relevant to its stigmatization. Those who did not use tobacco and who valued family honor, however, were more likely to hold a stigma against tobacco users. This could be because the European American sample was younger, therefore, family-related factors, such as living up to the expectations of one’s parents and not embarrassing them, may play a role in people’s health decisions and perception of health behaviors. Moreover, health risks of tobacco (vs. cannabis) are more widely known (e.g., Asbridge et al., 2016); therefore, family honor values may have a stronger association with tobacco stigma in this group. People who strongly endorse family honor values may be particularly prone to stigmatizing behaviors that are known to be risky (i.e., tobacco use), as these behaviors are more likely to be seen as un-desirable by their family members relative to those that are considered less risky (i.e., cannabis use) in that cultural context. These findings highlight the necessity of conducting research in diverse cultural groups, as the same value can play different roles in people’s substance use stigma depending on cultural context.
We did not find an association between family honor and cannabis stigma in the South Asian American sample, which could be because South Asian American participants were older. Family honor concerns are particularly consequential for young adults and shape their choices and perceptions (e.g., Foster et al., 2022a; Günsoy et al., 2015), whereas older adults may act more autonomously, expect to face less judgement from their family members, and thus, their behaviors and perceptions may be primarily driven by personal rather than family honor values. More research is needed on the role of age in the relationship between honor concerns and perception of health behaviors. We also expected tobacco stigma to be less prevalent among South Asian (vs. European) American nonusers; however, we found the opposite. Although tobacco use is more prevalent in South Asian societies than in the U.S., South Asian Americans may perceive it unfavorably because of the way tobacco and tobacco users have been portrayed in the U.S. (Riley et al., 2017). Moreover, the tobacco stigma measure in this study did not differentiate between tobacco products. Smokeless tobacco use is common in South Asia and among South Asian Americans (e.g., Han et al., 2019), and perhaps, when participants stated their stigma against tobacco users, they primarily considered cigarette smokers rather than smokeless tobacco users. As honor values were not associated with tobacco stigma in the South Asian American sample, other factors may play a role, for example, personal health concerns. South Asian Americans may want to distance themselves from tobacco smokers (i.e., hold a stigma against them), so that they do not subject themselves to second-hand smoking. Predictors of tobacco stigma in this cultural group remains to be examined and the role of perceived health risks in substance use stigma needs to be assessed directly in future research.
Limitations and future research
The design of this study was cross-sectional and correlational, limiting conclusions about the causal relationship between honor and substance stigma. Future studies can utilize experimental or longitudinal designs to investigate this relationship. Moreover, the stigma measures in this study did not include information about the gender of the users. Women are more likely than men to be stigmatized for their substance use (e.g., Greaves & Hemsing, 2020). This could be especially true in honor cultures, in which there are gender-specific expectations for maintaining a positive reputation (e.g., purity and modesty for women; e.g., Uskul et al., 2023). As mentioned earlier, another limitation was that our measures did not distinguish between stigma against different types of tobacco products. Future studies may find less stigma against smokeless tobacco products among South Asian American nonusers relative to cigarettes. Finally, more research is needed on the stigma against these substances across subgroups of South Asian Americans - a heterogeneous community with members from different countries and religions.
Conclusions
Stigma against substance users can vary across cultures. This study showed that South Asian (vs. European) American nonusers were more likely to hold a stigma against cannabis and tobacco users. Cannabis stigma was particularly strong among South Asian Americans who were concerned about protecting their personal honor and who were religious. European Americans who emphasized family honor values were more likely to hold a stigma against tobacco users. These findings show that the endorsement of honor values can play different roles in substance use stigma depending on cultural context. More research with diverse cultural groups is needed to understand the mechanisms of substance use stigma and increase help-seeking among users.
Supplementary Material
Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.cresp.2025.100237.
Funding Statement
This project was supported by the University of Rhode Island’s Undergraduate Project Grant awarded to Sanah Feroz. Nicole H. Weiss acknowledges the support from the Center for Biomedical Research and Excellence (COBRE) on Opioids and Overdose funded by the National Institute on General Medical Sciences (P20 GM125507).
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
| South Asian American (Honor) | European American (Dignity) | Cultural Comparisons | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | n | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | t | P |
| Age | 77 | 42.47 | 15.88 | 139 | 19.82 | 3.22 | 16.26 | <.001 |
| Education | 75 | 6.56 | 2.00 | 140 | 4.12 | 0.88 | 12.41 | <.001 |
| Household Income | 76 | 4.07 | 1.55 | 139 | 4.53 | 1.56 | −2.07 | .04 |
| Acculturation | 77 | −0.23 | 1.52 | 140 | 0.44 | 1.07 | −3.77 | <.001 |
| Religiosity | 76 | 5.84 | 2.34 | 139 | 4.24 | 2.47 | 4.62 | <.001 |
| Personal Honor | 77 | 4.49 | 1.27 | 139 | 3.67 | 1.20 | 4.69 | <.001 |
| Family Honor | 77 | 5.27 | 1.20 | 140 | 4.90 | 1.24 | 2.13 | .034 |
| Cannabis Stigma | 72 | 0.37 | 0.82 | 76 | −0.36 | 0.85 | 5.36 | <.001 |
| Tobacco Stigma | 61 | 0.48 | 0.85 | 120 | −0.24 | 0.78 | 5.72 | <.001 |
| Variables | Cannabis Stigma | Tobacco Stigma | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95 % CI | 95 % CI | |||||||||||
| β | SE (B) | p | LB | UB | R 2 | β | SE (B) | p | LB | UB | R 2 | |
| Step 1 | 0.34 | 0.28 | ||||||||||
| Culture Dummy | 0.29 | 0.21 | 0.012 | 0.12 | 0.95 | 0.29 | 0.21 | 0.010 | 0.13 | 0.94 | ||
| Personal Honor | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.723 | −0.09 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.562 | −0.08 | 0.14 | ||
| Family Honor | 0.12 | 0.06 | 0.152 | −0.03 | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.06 | 0.023 | 0.02 | 0.23 | ||
| Gender Dummy | 0.23 | 0.14 | 0.002 | 0.16 | 0.69 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.013 | 0.07 | 0.57 | ||
| Age | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.657 | −0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.799 | −0.01 | 0.01 | ||
| Education | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.563 | −0.06 | 0.12 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.913 | −0.09 | 0.10 | ||
| Income | 0.11 | 0.05 | 0.172 | −0.03 | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.04 | 0.069 | −0.01 | 0.15 | ||
| Religiosity | 0.17 | 0.03 | 0.038 | 0.00 | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.03 | 0.047 | 0.00 | 0.10 | ||
| Acculturation | −0.11 | 0.05 | 0.157 | −0.17 | 0.03 | −0.04 | 0.05 | 0.586 | −0.13 | 0.07 | ||
| Step 2 | 0.37 | 0.28 | ||||||||||
| Culture Dummy | −0.07 | 0.60 | 0.836 | −1.31 | 1.06 | 0.43 | 0.59 | 0.181 | −0.38 | 1.97 | ||
| Personal Honor | −0.13 | 0.08 | 0.234 | −0.24 | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.826 | −0.12 | 0.16 | ||
| Family Honor | 0.15 | 0.07 | 0.135 | −0.03 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 0.07 | 0.023 | 0.02 | 0.28 | ||
| Gender Dummy | 0.22 | 0.13 | 0.003 | 0.14 | 0.67 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.015 | 0.06 | 0.56 | ||
| Age | 0.08 | 0.01 | 0.482 | −0.01 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.704 | −0.01 | 0.02 | ||
| Education | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.649 | −0.07 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.941 | −0.09 | 0.10 | ||
| Income | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.236 | −0.04 | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.075 | −0.01 | 0.15 | ||
| Religiosity | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.030 | 0.01 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.03 | 0.038 | 0.00 | 0.11 | ||
| Acculturation | −0.12 | 0.05 | 0.150 | −0.17 | 0.03 | −0.04 | 0.05 | 0.618 | −0.13 | 0.08 | ||
| Culture Dummy × Personal Honor | 0.66 | 0.11 | 0.030 | 0.02 | 0.47 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.715 | −0.18 | 0.26 | ||
| Culture Dummy × Family Honor | −0.24 | 0.11 | 0.484 | −0.30 | 0.14 | −0.26 | 0.12 | 0.473 | −0.33 | 0.15 | ||
| Variables | Cannabis Stigma | Tobacco Stigma | Personal Honor | Family Honor | Religiosity | Age | Education | Income | Acculturation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cannabis Stigma | 1 | .65*** | .34** | .19 | .36** | .15 | .18 | .23+ | −.37** |
| Tobacco Stigma | .69*** | 1 | .18 | .19 | .26* | .07 | .08 | .10 | −.31* |
| Personal Honor | −.01 | .19* | 1 | .43*** | .14 | .001 | .10 | .30* | −.20* |
| Family Honor | .17 | .29** | .44*** | 1 | .25* | .15 | .01 | .19 | −.17 |
| Religiosity | .21+ | .16+ | .26** | .21* | 1 | −.02 | .02 | −.11 | −.38*** |
| Age | −.15 | −.14 | −.11 | −.10 | −.13 | 1 | .31** | .18 | −.16 |
| Education | −.06 | −.03 | −.02 | −.11 | −.11 | .26** | 1 | .23* | −.18 |
| Income | −.08 | .08 | .02 | −.002 | −.14+ | .02 | .13 | 1 | |
| Acculturation | −.20+ | −.03 | −.17* | −.22** | −.32*** | .08 | −.03 | .07 | 1 |
| Cultures & Variables | South Asian American (Honor Culture) | European American (Dignity Culture) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95 % CI | 95 % CI | |||||||||||
| β | SE (B) | p | LB | UB | R 2 | β | SE (B) | p | LB | UB | R 2 | |
| Cannabis Stigma | 0.30 | 0.17 | ||||||||||
| Personal Honor | 0.24 | 0.08 | 0.064 | −0.01 | 0.32 | −0.13 | 0.08 | 0.296 | −0.25 | 0.08 | ||
| Family Honor | −0.01 | 0.09 | 0.936 | −0.19 | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.133 | −0.04 | 0.27 | ||
| Gender Dummy | 0.15 | 0.19 | 0.207 | −0.14 | 0.62 | 0.30 | 0.21 | 0.014 | 0.11 | 0.94 | ||
| Age | 0.12 | 0.01 | 0.337 | −0.01 | 0.02 | −0.03 | 0.02 | 0.823 | −0.05 | 0.04 | ||
| Education | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.793 | −0.08 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.753 | −0.19 | 0.26 | ||
| Income | 0.17 | 0.07 | 0.184 | −0.04 | 0.22 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.788 | −0.13 | 0.17 | ||
| Religiosity | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.093 | −0.01 | 0.18 | 0.20 | 0.04 | 0.133 | −0.02 | 0.15 | ||
| Acculturation | −0.17 | 0.06 | 0.161 | −0.22 | 0.04 | −0.06 | 0.08 | 0.651 | −0.21 | 0.13 | ||
| Tobacco Stigma | 0.21 | 0.15 | ||||||||||
| Personal Honor | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.607 | −0.14 | 0.24 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.707 | −0.11 | 0.17 | ||
| Family Honor | 0.06 | 0.12 | 0.713 | −0.19 | 0.28 | 0.27 | 0.07 | 0.012 | 0.04 | 0.29 | ||
| Gender Dummy | 0.18 | 0.24 | 0.213 | −0.18 | 0.77 | 0.16 | 0.17 | 0.100 | −0.05 | 0.60 | ||
| Age | 0.08 | 0.01 | 0.561 | −0.01 | 0.02 | −0.07 | 0.02 | 0.487 | −0.06 | 0.03 | ||
| Education | −0.06 | 0.06 | 0.676 | −0.15 | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.443 | −0.11 | 0.24 | ||
| Income | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.468 | −0.10 | 0.21 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 0.157 | −0.03 | 0.15 | ||
| Religiosity | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.294 | −0.05 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.03 | 0.081 | −0.01 | 0.12 | ||
| Acculturation | −0.21 | 0.08 | 0.159 | −0.26 | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.08 | 0.260 | −0.07 | 0.24 | ||