Dataset Information

Testing competing explanations for graphic warning label effects among adult smokers and non-smoking youth.

ABSTRACT: RATIONALE:The United States courts have blocked the implementation of graphic warning labels on cigarette packages (GWLs). This decision was based, in part, on the premise that GWLs are unnecessarily emotional and are meant to scare rather than inform consumers about smoking's health effects. However, research in judgment and decision-making suggests these relationships are more complex. OBJECTIVE:In this article, we draw on several theoretical frameworks that lead to competing hypotheses about the relationships between negative affect, health risk beliefs, and quit intentions (among adult smokers) or susceptibility to start smoking (among non-smoking youth). METHOD:We tested these competing mediation models using data from two experiments with two populations each-adult smokers (Ns?=?313 and 238) and primarily non-smoking middle-school youth (Ns?=?340 and 237). Using mobile recruitment methods, we focused specifically on individuals from socioeconomically disadvantaged communities in rural and urban areas of the Northeastern United States. RESULTS:The best fitting model across all four datasets was one in which label-induced negative affect (a) directly predicted intentions/susceptibility but also (b) indirectly predicted intentions/susceptibility via risk beliefs. Although mediation analyses did not demonstrate significant serial mediation effects of label exposure on intentions/susceptibility through negative affect then risk beliefs, there was some evidence that label exposure indirectly promoted adults' quit intentions through negative affect. Additionally, negative affect consistently mediated the indirect effect of label exposure on strengthened risk beliefs among adults and youth. CONCLUSIONS:These results speak to the importance of negative affect in directly motivating adult smokers' quit intentions but also serving an informational function, directing adult smokers and non-smoking youth to accept the health risks of smoking.

SUBMITTER: Skurka C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6077088 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Testing competing explanations for graphic warning label effects among adult smokers and non-smoking youth.

Skurka Chris C Byrne Sahara S Davydova Julie J Kemp Deena D Safi Amelia Greiner AG Avery Rosemary J RJ Dorf Michael C MC Mathios Alan D AD Niederdeppe Jeff J

Social science & medicine (1982) 20180625

<h4>Rationale</h4>The United States courts have blocked the implementation of graphic warning labels on cigarette packages (GWLs). This decision was based, in part, on the premise that GWLs are unnecessarily emotional and are meant to scare rather than inform consumers about smoking's health effects. However, research in judgment and decision-making suggests these relationships are more complex.<h4>Objective</h4>In this article, we draw on several theoretical frameworks that lead to competing hy ...[more]

PMID: 29980116

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe US Food and Drug Administration's implementation of graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette packs is under challenge in US courts.ObjectiveTo determine whether GWLs can affect US smokers' perceptions about their cigarettes or health consequences and changes in smoking behavior.Design, setting, and participantsThis study was a randomized clinical trial of the effect of a 3-month, real-world experience of cigarettes with GWL packaging. Community recruitment was done from September 2016 through December 2019 of daily smokers from San Diego, California, aged 21 to 65 years, who were not ready to quit. Participants were randomized to purchase and receive cigarettes in 1 of 3 pack designs: GWL, blank, or standard US pack. Data analysis was performed from July 2020 to February 2021.InterventionsThe study manufactured GWL cigarette packs (3 versions with Australian-licensed images) and packs devoid of marketing. For 3 months, participants purchased GWL, blank, or standard US pack cigarettes that were delivered to their home.Main outcomes and measuresSmoking-related cognitions and behavior were queried by daily and weekly interactive text messages. Smoking behavior was self-reported before and after the intervention by 96% of randomized participants and was biochemically validated on a subsample.ResultsThe study sample included 357 participants (195 women [54.6%]; mean [SD] age, 39.5 [11.9] years); 116 were randomized to the standard US pack group, 118 were randomized to the GWL pack group, and 125 were randomized to the blank pack group. Over the 3 months, participants who received the GWL packs had reduced positive perceptions of recent cigarettes smoked compared with participants who received the branded US pack (mean difference, -0.46 SD; 95% CI, -0.73 SD to -0.20 SD; P < .001). Health concerns increased in all groups, with a significant increase in the GWL group vs the US pack group (mean difference, 0.35 SD; 95% CI, 0.09 SD to 0.62 SD; P = .002). Quitting cognitions increased in all study groups, with a peak mean change of 0.60 SD for GWL participants vs 0.34 SD for US pack participants (mean difference, 0.55 SD; 95% CI, 0.28 SD to 0.81 SD; P < .001). GWL participants had slightly more cigarette abstinence periods per week than the US pack group, but the difference was not significant (adjusted odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.13). At 3 months, there was no between-group difference in any smoking behavior. The blank pack group was similar to the US pack group on all measures.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the introduction of GWL packs appears to decrease positive perceptions of cigarettes and increase quitting cognitions in the short term. However, additional complementary tobacco control strategies may be necessary for GWL packs to be associated with reduced smoking behavior.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02676193.

Project description:ObjectiveObservational research suggests that placing graphic images on cigarette warning labels can reduce smoking rates, but field studies lack experimental control. Our primary objective was to determine the psychological processes set in motion by naturalistic exposure to graphic vs. text-only warnings in a randomized clinical trial involving exposure to modified cigarette packs over a 4-week period. Theories of graphic-warning impact were tested by examining affect toward smoking, credibility of warning information, risk perceptions, quit intentions, warning label memory, and smoking risk knowledge.MethodsAdults who smoked between 5 and 40 cigarettes daily (N = 293; mean age = 33.7), did not have a contra-indicated medical condition, and did not intend to quit were recruited from Philadelphia, PA and Columbus, OH. Smokers were randomly assigned to receive their own brand of cigarettes for four weeks in one of three warning conditions: text only, graphic images plus text, or graphic images with elaborated text.ResultsData from 244 participants who completed the trial were analyzed in structural-equation models. The presence of graphic images (compared to text-only) caused more negative affect toward smoking, a process that indirectly influenced risk perceptions and quit intentions (e.g., image->negative affect->risk perception->quit intention). Negative affect from graphic images also enhanced warning credibility including through increased scrutiny of the warnings, a process that also indirectly affected risk perceptions and quit intentions (e.g., image->negative affect->risk scrutiny->warning credibility->risk perception->quit intention). Unexpectedly, elaborated text reduced warning credibility. Finally, graphic warnings increased warning-information recall and indirectly increased smoking-risk knowledge at the end of the trial and one month later.ConclusionsIn the first naturalistic clinical trial conducted, graphic warning labels are more effective than text-only warnings in encouraging smokers to consider quitting and in educating them about smoking's risks. Negative affective reactions to smoking, thinking about risks, and perceptions of credibility are mediators of their impact.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01782053.

Dataset Information

Testing competing explanations for graphic warning label effects among adult smokers and non-smoking youth.

Publications

Testing competing explanations for graphic warning label effects among adult smokers and non-smoking youth.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets