Dataset Information

Socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers' ratings of plain and branded cigarette packaging: an experimental study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This study aimed to test the potential impact of plain packaging for cigarettes on brand appeal among highly socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers using the new design for cigarettes implemented in Australia, which combines plain packaging with larger health warning labels.

Design

A 2×2 factorial design trial embedded within a cross-sectional computer touchscreen survey. Data were collected between March and December 2012.

Setting

Socially disadvantaged welfare aid recipients were recruited through a large Social and Community Service Organisation in New South Wales, Australia.

Participants

N=354 smokers. The majority of the sample had not completed high school (64%), earned less than $A300/week (55%) and received their income from Government payments (95%).

Interventions

Participants were randomised to one of the four different pack conditions determined by brand name: Winfield versus Benson & Hedges, and packaging type: branded versus plain. Participants were required to rate their assigned pack on measures of brand appeal and purchase intentions.

Results

Plain packaging was associated with significantly reduced smoker ratings of 'positive pack characteristics' (p<0.001), 'positive smoker characteristics' (p=0.003) and 'positive taste characteristics' (p=0.033) in the Winfield brand name condition only. Across the four pack conditions, no main differences were found for 'negative smoker characteristics' (p=0.427) or 'negative harm characteristics' (p=0.411). In comparison to plain packaging, the presentation of branded packaging was associated with higher odds of smokers' purchase intentions (OR=2.18, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.54; p=0.002).

Conclusions

Plain packs stripped of branding elements, featuring larger health warning labels, were associated with reduced positive cigarette brand image and purchase intentions among highly socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers.

SUBMITTER: Guillaumier A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3918977 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionSmoking denormalization has been paralleled by reduced smoking prevalence, but smoking rates among socioeconomically disadvantaged populations remain high. The social unacceptability of smoking has also led to increased perceptions of smoking-related stigma. By examining how smoking stigma influences cessation intervention effectiveness, we can better tailor interventions to socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers.Aims and methodsData are from a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a proactive cessation intervention on abstinence. Current smokers enrolled in Minnesota Health Care Programs were randomized to proactive outreach (n = 1200) or usual care (n = 1206). The intervention included mailings, telephone outreach, counseling, and access to free cessation treatments. Using baseline measurements, groups with lower (n = 1227) and higher (n = 1093) perceived stigma were formed. Intervention, stigma, and their interaction term were added to a logistic regression modeling abstinence at 12 months.ResultsLower perceived smoking-related stigma was associated with less support for quitting, lower rates of physician quitting advice, and less motivation for quitting. A logistic regression modeling abstinence found a significant intervention × stigma interaction. The proactive intervention was more effective among smokers with lower perceived smoking-related stigma (odds ratio 1.94, 95% confidence interval, 1.29 to 2.92) than those with higher perceived smoking-related stigma (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.70 to 1.55).DiscussionSmokers with lower perceived smoking-related stigma had social environments that were conducive to smoking, received less physician advice to quit, and were less motivated to quit than higher stigma smokers. Despite these barriers, the intervention was more effective for lower stigma smokers, suggesting that proactive outreach is an efficient treatment for these hard-to-reach smokers.ImplicationsSmoking denormalization has led to increased perceptions of smoking-related stigma among many smokers; however, little is known about how this stigma influences the cessation process. In the present study, smokers with lower levels of perceived smoking-related stigma lived in social environments that were more conducive to smoking and were less motivated to quit than higher stigma smokers. Despite these barriers, our proactive outreach cessation intervention was more effective for lower stigma smokers, suggesting that interventions which utilize proactive outreach to stimulate interest in quitting and offer facilitated access to free cessation treatments are an effective treatment approach for these hard-to-reach smokers. These strategies may be particularly effective for motivating smokers enrolled in government-subsidized health insurance programs to take advantage of cessation resources.

Project description:AIMS:The use of audio pack cues or messages is a recent trend in packaging design. There is scope to use audio technology to communicate health and cessation messages via cigarette packaging. We explored how smokers responded to cigarette packs which played audio health messages. METHODS:Twenty focus groups were conducted in Scotland in 2015 with smokers (n = 120) segmented by age (16-17, 18-24, 25-35, 36-50, >50), gender and social grade. Perceptions of cigarette packs which played audio warnings were explored, with four messages used: (1) a cessation message with a quitline number, (2) mortality message, (3) fertility message, and (4) message about ageing skin. RESULTS:Audio warnings were thought to increase message impact, particularly among younger smokers, as they would be hard to ignore or avoid, and repetition may lead to the messages being memorized. The warnings were considered annoying or embarrassing, and participants suggested they may discard the packs and use alternative storage. Some participants suggested that the audio warnings were off-putting and may alter their smoking behavior, with the mortality message deemed most effective and was considered relatable and felt personal. Older smokers were least likely to believe that audio warnings would affect their smoking behavior, although some thought that they may enhance cessation attempts among smokers seeking to quit, and could deter new or potential smokers, for example, young people. CONCLUSIONS:Cigarette packs with audio messaging may have a role to play, now or in the future, as a novel way of communicating health and cessation information. IMPLICATIONS:There is a lack of research exploring smokers' perceptions of cigarette packs which play audio health messages. This focus group study provides an understanding of smokers' immediate responses to cigarette packs which played a short health message when opened. Smokers generally viewed them as annoying or embarrassing, and some suggested the use of alternative storage. Audio warnings were thought to increase message salience, memorability, and impact, for younger smokers in particular, and some suggested that they be off-putting for themselves or others.

Project description:BackgroundSaudi Arabia implemented a plain tobacco packaging regulation, one of the World Health Organization's recommended initiatives to help reduce smoking rates, in August 2019. A few weeks after implementation, a large number of smokers complained via various media channels, especially social media (eg, Twitter), that an extreme change in cigarette taste had occurred, frequency of coughing had increased, and for some, shortness of breath had led to hospitalization.ObjectiveThe main objective is to determine whether smokers blinded to cigarette branding report differences in taste between branded and unbranded cigarettes. The secondary objective is to observe the frequency of immediate cough or shortness of breath.MethodsThis study employed a within-person, randomized crossover design that recruited current smokers 18 years and older who were cleared upon physical assessment before the experiment. Participants received 6 sequences of different random exposures (3 puffs) to 3 plain-packaged cigarettes (2 from their favorite brand and 1 from another brand as a control) and 3 branded cigarettes (2 from the favorite brand and 1 from another brand as a control). Participants wore virtual reality goggles accompanied by special software to alter visual reality and gloves to alter the touch sensation.ResultsThis study recruited 18 participants, measured at 6 time points, to produce 108 experiments. Participants were not able to identify the correct type of cigarettes (plain or branded, estimate of fixed effect=-0.01, P=.79). Moreover, there were no differences in the ability of the participants to identify their favorite brand (t107=-0.63, mean 0.47, P=.53). In terms of immediate coughing, out of the 108 experiments, 1 episode of short coughing was observed, which was attributed to the branded cigarette, not the plain-packaged cigarette.ConclusionsAfter controlling the visual and touch sensations, participants were not able to differentiate between branded and plain-packaged cigarettes in terms of taste or inducing immediate shortness of breath or cough. Interestingly, participants were not able to identify their favorite brand.