Dataset Information

Australian adult smokers' responses to plain packaging with larger graphic health warnings 1?year after implementation: results from a national cross-sectional tracking survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We assessed whether the Australian plain packs with larger graphic health warnings (GHWs) achieved three specific objectives of reducing the appeal of tobacco, increasing health warning effectiveness and reducing the ability of packaging to mislead about smoking harms.

Methods

We compared responses from continuous cross-sectional telephone surveys of n=2176 cigarette smokers during pre-plain packaging (April-September 2012, pre-PP) with n=759 surveyed in the transition period (October-November 2012) and n=4240 during the first year of implementation (December 2012-November 2013, PP year 1), using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

From pre-PP to PP year 1, more smokers disliked their pack (p<0.001), perceived lower pack appeal (p<0.001), lower cigarette quality (p<0.001), lower satisfaction (p<0.001) and lower value (p<0.001) and disagreed brands differed in prestige (p=0.003). There was no change in perceived differences in taste of different brands. More smokers noticed GHWs (p<0.001), attributed much motivation to quit to GHWs (p<0.001), avoided specific GHWs when purchasing (p<0.001), and covered packs (p<0.001), with no change in perceived exaggeration of harms. PP year 1 saw an increased proportion believing that brands do not differ in harmfulness (p=0.004), but no change in the belief that variants do not differ in strength or the perceived harmfulness of cigarettes compared with a year ago. Interactions signified greater change for four outcomes assessing aspects of appeal among young adults and two appeal outcomes among mid-aged adults.

Conclusions

The specific objectives of plain packaging were achieved and generally sustained among adult smokers up to 12?months after implementation.

SUBMITTER: Wakefield M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4401339 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Australian adult smokers' responses to plain packaging with larger graphic health warnings 1 year after implementation: results from a national cross-sectional tracking survey.

Wakefield Melanie M Coomber Kerri K Zacher Meghan M Durkin Sarah S Brennan Emily E Scollo Michelle M

Tobacco control 20150225 Suppl 2

<h4>Background</h4>We assessed whether the Australian plain packs with larger graphic health warnings (GHWs) achieved three specific objectives of reducing the appeal of tobacco, increasing health warning effectiveness and reducing the ability of packaging to mislead about smoking harms.<h4>Methods</h4>We compared responses from continuous cross-sectional telephone surveys of n=2176 cigarette smokers during pre-plain packaging (April-September 2012, pre-PP) with n=759 surveyed in the transition ...[more]

PMID: 28407606

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Graphic health warnings on tobacco packaging and the plain packaging of tobacco products are key tobacco control interventions. This systematic review investigates the perceptions of adolescents towards these packaging interventions. METHODS:Published, original-research, English-language articles from 1 January 2000 to 1 September 2017 were identified through a systematic literature search of the PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Articles describing investigations into the perceptions of adolescents aged 11 to 19?years towards graphic health warnings and/or plain-packaged cigarettes were included in this review. RESULTS:Nineteen articles, involving 15,935 adolescent participants, of which 72.85% were non-smokers or ex-smokers and 27.15% occasional or daily smokers, met the eligibility criteria. Graphic health warnings were perceived as more effective than text-only warnings, with warnings depicting lung cancer, and oral diseases being perceived as particularly effective. Health warnings increased viewer fear, anxiety, shock, and guilt and were considered effective in preventing non-smokers from experimenting with tobacco and prompting current smokers to quit. Plain packaging reduced the attractiveness and other positive attributes of cigarette packaging, with darker colours found to be the most effective. When used in combination, plain packaging increased the visibility of graphic health warnings, with participants also perceiving them as having an increased tar content and having more serious health risks, and increased thoughts of quitting amongst smokers. CONCLUSIONS:Graphic health warnings and plain packaging appear to increase adolescent awareness of the dangers of tobacco use. Further research into the most effective warnings to use in combination with plain packaging is needed to ensure the greatest reduction in tobacco use and prevent tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality in this vulnerable population.

Project description:AimsTo measure how cigarette packaging (standardised packaging and branded packaging) and health warning size affect visual attention and pack preferences among Colombian smokers and non-smokers.DesignTo explore visual attention, we used an eye-tracking experiment where non-smokers, weekly smokers and daily smokers were shown cigarette packs varying in warning size (30%-pictorial on top of the text, 30%-pictorial and text side-by-side, 50%, 70%) and packaging (standardised packaging, branded packaging). We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine the impact of warning size, packaging and brand name on preferences to try, taste perceptions and perceptions of harm.SettingEye-tracking laboratory, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.ParticipantsParticipants (n = 175) were 18 to 40 years old.MeasurementsFor the eye-tracking experiment, our primary outcome measure was the number of fixations toward the health warning compared with the branding. For the DCE, outcome measures were preferences to try, taste perceptions and harm perceptions.FindingsWe observed greater visual attention to warning labels on standardised versus branded packages (F[3,167] = 22.87, P < 0.001) and when warnings were larger (F[9,161] = 147.17, P < 0.001); as warning size increased, the difference in visual attention to warnings between standardised and branded packaging decreased (F[9,161] = 4.44, P < 0.001). Non-smokers visually attended toward the warnings more than smokers, but as warning size increased these differences decreased (F[6,334] = 2.92, P = 0.009). For the DCE, conditional trials showed that increasing the warning size from 30% to 70% reduced preferences to try (odds ratio [OR] = 0.48, 95% CI = [0.42,0.54], P < 0.001), taste perceptions (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = [0.54,0.68], P < 0.001); and increased harm perceptions (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = [0.76,0.80], P < 0.001). Compared with branded packaging, standardised packaging reduced our DCE outcome measures with ORs ranging from OR = 0.25 (95% CI = [0.17,0.38], P < 0.001) to OR = 0.79 (95% CI = [0.67,0.93], P < 0.001) across two brands. These effects were more pronounced among non-smokers, males and younger participants. Unconditional trials showed similar results.ConclusionsStandardised cigarette packaging and larger health warnings appear to decrease positive pack perceptions and have the potential to reduce the demand for cigarette products in Colombia.

Project description:IntroductionThe social and health care costs of smoking are immense. To reduce these costs, several tobacco control policies have been introduced (eg, graphic health warnings [GHWs] on cigarette packs). Previous research has found plain packaging (a homogenized form of packaging), in comparison to branded packaging, effectively increases attention to GHWs using UK packaging prototypes. Past studies have also found that illness sensitivity (IS) protects against health-impairing behaviors. Building on this evidence, the goal of the current study was to assess the effect of packaging type (plain vs. branded), IS level, and their interaction on attention to GHWs on cigarette packages using proposed Canadian prototypes.Aims and methodsWe assessed the dwell time and fixations on the GHW component of 40 cigarette pack stimuli (20 branded; 20 plain). Stimuli were presented in random order to 50 smokers (60.8% male; mean age = 33.1; 92.2% daily smokers) using the EyeLink 1000 system. Participants were divided into low IS (n = 25) and high IS (n = 25) groups based on scores on the Illness Sensitivity Index.ResultsOverall, plain packaging relative to branded packaging increased fixations (but not dwell time) on GHWs. Moreover, low IS (but not high IS) smokers showed more fixations to GHWs on plain versus branded packages.ConclusionsThese findings demonstrate that plain packaging is a promising intervention for daily smokers, particularly those low in IS, and contribute evidence in support of impending implementation of plain packaging in Canada.ImplicationsOur findings have three important implications. First, our study provides controlled experimental evidence that plain packaging is a promising intervention for daily smokers. Second, the findings of this study contribute supportive evidence for the impending plain packaging policy in Canada, and can therefore aid in defense against anticipated challenges from the tobacco industry upon its implementation. Third, given its effects in increasing attention to GHWs, plain packaging is an intervention likely to provide smokers enhanced incentive for smoking cessation, particularly among those low in IS who may otherwise be less interested in seeking treatment for tobacco dependence.