Why High Income Fails to Reduce E-Cigarette Use: The Knowledge-Attitude Paradox in the SMOKES Study.

Background: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use and vaping tobacco have increased rapidly worldwide, raising concerns about their health effects, social acceptability, and regulatory challenges. In many countries, e-cigarettes are more commonly used by individuals from higher socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds, who, in theory, should have greater knowledge about e-cigarettes and their associated risks. However, it remains unclear why a group with more knowledge about e-cigarette risks would also hold more positive attitudes toward vaping and exhibit higher usage rates - a phenomenon that may represent a knowledge-behavior paradox. Understanding this paradox, along with the complex relationships between e-cigarette knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, is critical for informing effective public health interventions, campaigns, social media messaging, and regulatory policies. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the complex relationship between SES, correct e-cigarette knowledge, pro-vaping attitudes, and actual e-cigarette use. Methods: The SMOKES Study (Study of Measurement of Knowledge and Examination of Support for Tobacco Control Policies) used a multi-center, cross-sectional design, collecting data from 2,403 college and university students across 15 provinces in Iran (covering nearly half of the country's provinces). The survey measured family income, age, sex, ethnicity, e-cigarette use, knowledge, and attitudes. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was employed to examine the interrelations between SES, knowledge, attitudes, and behavior, while adjusting for age, sex, and ethnic minority status. Results: SEM analysis confirmed the hypothesized paradox. Although greater knowledge about e-cigarettes was linked to less favorable attitudes toward vaping and lower use, pro-vaping attitudes emerged as the strongest predictor of vaping behavior, while knowledge played a weaker protective role. Notably, individuals with higher SES simultaneously showed higher knowledge and, paradoxically, more pro-e-cigarette attitudes and greater usage. Female students and ethnic minority students reported higher correct knowledge and lower pro-vaping attitudes and use. Although age and higher family income were associated with more favorable attitudes, they did not directly predict vaping behavior. These results suggest that for higher SES individuals, poor knowledge is not the main driver of e-cigarette use; rather, their pro-e-cigarette attitudes, which seem to outweigh the influence of knowledge, play a key role. Conclusions: Although individuals from higher SES backgrounds report greater correct knowledge about e-cigarettes, this knowledge does not necessarily translate into reduced positive attitudes or lower usage. This study highlights the complexity of these paradoxical effects and suggests that public health strategies need to go beyond simple education and knowledge-based interventions. Targeted approaches should address industry messaging, challenge misconceptions, and strengthen regulatory efforts to reduce e-cigarette use among young adults, including those from higher SES backgrounds.