Dataset Information

An Experimental Study of Nicotine Warning Statements in E-cigarette Tweets.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:It is unclear whether warnings on electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) advertisements required by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will apply to social media. Given the key role of social media in marketing e-cigarettes, we seek to inform FDA decision making by exploring how warnings on various tweet content influence perceived healthiness, nicotine harm, likelihood to try e-cigarettes, and warning recall. METHODS:In this 2 × 4 between-subjects experiment participants viewed a tweet from a fictitious e-cigarette brand. Four tweet content versions (e-cigarette product, e-cigarette use, e-cigarette in social context, unrelated content) were crossed with two warning versions (absent, present). Adult e-cigarette users (N = 994) were recruited via social media ads to complete a survey and randomized to view one of eight tweets. Multivariable regressions explored effects of tweet content and warning on perceived healthiness, perceived harm, and likelihood to try e-cigarettes, and tweet content on warning recall. Covariates were tobacco and social media use and demographics. RESULTS:Tweets with warnings elicited more negative health perceptions of the e-cigarette brand than tweets without warnings (p < .05). Tweets featuring e-cigarette products (p < .05) or use (p < .001) elicited higher warning recall than tweets featuring unrelated content. CONCLUSIONS:This is the first study to examine warning effects on perceptions of e-cigarette social media marketing. Warnings led to more negative e-cigarette health perceptions, but no effect on perceived nicotine harm or likelihood to try e-cigarettes. There were differences in warning recall by tweet content. Research should explore how varying warning content (text, size, placement) on tweets from e-cigarette brands influences health risk perceptions. IMPLICATIONS:FDA's 2016 ruling requires warnings on advertisements for nicotine-containing e-cigarettes, but does not specify whether this applies to social media. This study is the first to examine how e-cigarette warnings in tweets influence perceived healthiness and harm of e-cigarettes, which is important because e-cigarette brands are voluntarily including warnings on Twitter and Instagram. Warnings influenced perceived healthiness of the e-cigarette brand, but not perceived nicotine harm or likelihood to try e-cigarettes. We also saw higher recall of warning statements for tweets featuring e-cigarettes. Findings suggest that expanding warning requirements to e-cigarette social media marketing warrants further exploration and FDA consideration.

SUBMITTER: Guillory J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7171270 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An Experimental Study of Nicotine Warning Statements in E-cigarette Tweets.

Guillory Jamie J Kim Annice E AE Fiacco Leah L Cress Margaret M Pepper Jessica J Nonnemaker James J

Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco 20200401 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>It is unclear whether warnings on electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) advertisements required by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will apply to social media. Given the key role of social media in marketing e-cigarettes, we seek to inform FDA decision making by exploring how warnings on various tweet content influence perceived healthiness, nicotine harm, likelihood to try e-cigarettes, and warning recall.<h4>Methods</h4>In this 2 × 4 between-subjects experiment parti ...[more]

PMID: 30820571

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIn 2018, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required that electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) manufacturers, packagers, importers, distributors, and retailers display an addictive or alternate warning statement on e-cigarette visual advertisements. Few studies have investigated the FDA-mandated and other warnings on social media. This study examined the prevalence and content of warning statements in e-cigarette-related YouTube videos.MethodsIn 2019, The Virginia Commonwealth University Center for the Study of Tobacco Products conducted bi-monthly (February-June) YouTube searches by relevance and view count to identify e-cigarette-related videos. Overall, 178 videos met the inclusion criteria. Staff coded each video for the presence of a visual/verbal warning statement, warning statement type (eg, FDA-mandated, addiction/tobacco, safety/toxic exposure, health effects), sponsorship, and tobacco product characteristics. A data extraction tool collected the video URL, title, upload date, and number of views, likes/dislikes, and comments.ResultsOnly 5.1% of videos contained FDA-mandated and 21.9% contained non-mandated warnings. All videos with FDA-mandated and 46.2% of non-mandated warnings were represented visually. Only 13.1% of industry-sponsored videos uploaded after the mandate effective date had an FDA-mandated warning statement and videos with FDA-mandated and non-mandated (v. no) warnings had significantly fewer views, likes, dislikes, and comments. Among all non-mandated warnings, 31.3% featured an addiction/tobacco, 18.8% a safety/toxic exposure, and 37.5% a health effects warning.ConclusionsThe prevalence of FDA-mandated warning statements in e-cigarette related YouTube videos was low. FDA enforcement of the warning statement mandate on YouTube could increase the public's understanding of the addictive nature of nicotine in e-cigarettes.ImplicationsThe FDA has the authority to regulate the advertisement and promotion of e-cigarettes on the Internet. These data can inform future FDA requirements related to the language content and visual representation of addiction/tobacco, safety/exposure, and health effects warning statements that appear in YouTube videos and other visual social media popular among young people. Such data would help consumers make informed decisions about purchasing e-cigarette products, using e-cigarettes, and avoiding unintentional harm related to e-cigarettes. In addition, these data may help social media platforms make decisions on whether they will prohibit advertisements that promote or facilitate the sale of tobacco products.

Project description:Introduction:Prior to the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulation of electronic cigarettes and warning statements related to nicotine addiction, there was no critical examination of manufacturer/distributor voluntary practices that could potentially inform FDA actions aimed to protect consumers. This study examined the content of warning statements and safety characteristics of electronic cigarette liquid bottles using a national sample. Methods:Research staff randomly selected four electronic cigarette liquid manufacturers/distributors from four US geographic regions. Staff documented the characteristics of product packaging and content of warning statements on 147 electronic cigarette liquids (0-30 mg/ml of nicotine) purchased online from 16 manufacturers/distributors in April of 2016. Results:Data showed that 97.9% of the electronic cigarette liquid bottles included a warning statement, most of which focused on nicotine exposure rather than health. Only 22.4% of bottles used a warning statement that indicated the product "contained nicotine." Of bottles that advertised a nicotine-based concentration of 12 mg/ml, 26% had a warning statements stated that the product "contains nicotine." None of the statements that indicated that the product "contained nicotine" stated that nicotine was "addictive." All bottles had a safety cap and 12% were in plastic shrink-wrap. Fifty-six percent of the websites had a minimum age requirement barrier that prevented under-aged persons from entering. Conclusions:Most manufacturers/distributors printed a warning statement on electronic cigarette liquid bottles, but avoided warning consumers about the presence and the addictiveness of nicotine. Studies are needed to examine manufacturer/distributor modifications to product packaging and how packaging affects consumer behaviors. Implications:These data can inform future FDA requirements related to the packaging and advertising of e-cigarette liquids; regulation related to the content of warning statements, including exposure warning statements, which are not currently mandated; and requirements on websites or language on packaging to help manufacturers adhere to the minimum age of purchase regulation. The data can also be used to help FDA develop additional guidance on the framing of statements on packaging that helps consumers make informed decisions about purchasing the product or protecting young people from use or unintentional exposure to the product.

Project description:INTRODUCTION Tobacco remains the world’s leading preventable cause of death, with the majority of tobacco-caused deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries. The first global health treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), outlines a set of policy initiatives that have been demonstrated as effective in reducing tobacco use. Article 11 of the FCTC focuses on using the tobacco package to communicate tobacco-caused harms; it also seeks to restrict the delivery of misleading information on the pack about the product. The objective of his study is to establish a surveillance system for tobacco packs in Nigeria to assess pack compliance with in-country health warning label requirements. The Tobacco Pack Surveillance System (TPackSS) monitors whether required health warnings on tobacco packages are being implemented as intended and identifies pack designs that might violate the communication of harm-related information and undermine the impact of the country’s tobacco packaging laws. METHODS Tobacco cigarette packs were collected in three cities in 2019–2020. The intention was, to the extent possible, to construct a census of ‘unique’ pack presentations available for purchase in Nigeria. We implemented the TPackSS standardized Protocol for acquiring packs from 36 diverse neighborhoods across three cities. At the time of purchase, data on the price and place of acquisition of each pack were recorded. We photographed packs, coded, and archived them. Each pack was coded for compliance according to the current health warning label laws. Each pack was coded by two independent coders consistently. We routinely measured intercoder reliability and only retained variables for which a good level of reliability was achieved. RESULTS Across the three cities in Nigeria, the team collected 90 tobacco packs. Overall, 77% of packs evaluated for HWL compliance complied with all the relevant common indicators of HWL compliance. There was a 92% compliance with the location of the HWL (e.g. top or bottom of pack, front or back panel) with in-country requirements. Of the four compliance indicators, the size of the HWL (the minimum required coverage) showed the lowest compliance (31%) (i.e. the HWL was too small on most of the packs). Label elements (such as color contrast or content of warnings) showed 85% compliance overall. CONCLUSIONS The analysis of the packs showed various levels of compliance with Health Warning Label provisions for Nigeria. Periodic evaluations are required to ensure that minimum requirements are met.

Project description:IntroductionPursuant to the Tobacco Control Act (TCA), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is developing new cigarette health warnings to convey the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking.Aims and methodsThis study assessed which of 15 revised warning statements (10 on topics similar to TCA statements and 5 on other topics) promoted greater understanding of cigarette smoking risks relative to TCA statements. In February 2018, adolescent and adult smokers and adolescents susceptible to smoking (n = 2505) completed an online experiment. Control condition participants viewed TCA statements; treatment condition participants viewed combinations of TCA and revised statements. Analyses compared revised statements to TCA statements on the same health topic or to randomly selected TCA statements if there were no statements on the same topic.ResultsRelative to TCA statements, 12 of 15 revised statements were more likely to be considered new information, and 12 resulted in more self-reported learning. Three revised statements made participants think more about health risks than TCA statements; the reverse was true for one revised statement. Participants rated most TCA and revised statements as moderately believable and informative. Seven revised statements were found to be less believable and factual, and one revised statement more believable and factual. Treatment condition participants correctly selected more smoking-related health conditions than control condition participants (13.79 versus 12.42 of 25).ConclusionsFindings suggest that revised statements can promote greater understanding of cigarette smoking risks. Results informed FDA's selection of warning text that was paired with images for testing in a follow-up study.ImplicationsThe US FDA may adjust the text of the cigarette warning statements provided in the TCA if the revised statements promote greater public understanding of the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking. Most of the revised warning statements tested were more likely to be considered new information and resulted in more self-reported learning compared with paired TCA statements, providing support for using revised statements as part of cigarette health warnings. These results informed the development of pictorial cigarette warnings by FDA that were tested in a follow-up study and included in a proposed rule.

Project description:BackgroundThe sale of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) containing nicotine is prohibited in all Australian states and territories; yet, the growing availability and convenience of the internet enable the promotion and exposure of e-cigarettes across countries. Social media's increasing pervasiveness has provided a powerful avenue to market products and influence social norms and risk behaviors. At present, there is no evidence of how e-cigarettes and vaping are promoted on social media in Australia.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate how e-cigarettes are portrayed and promoted on Twitter through a content analysis of vaping-related tweets containing an image posted and retweeted by Australian users and how the portrayal and promotion have emerged and trended over time.MethodsIn total, we analyzed 1303 tweets and accompanying images from 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018 collected through the Tracking Infrastructure for Social Media Analysis (TrISMA), a contemporary technical and organizational infrastructure for the tracking of public communication by Australian users of social media, via a list of 15 popular e-cigarette-related terms.ResultsDespite Australia's cautious approach toward e-cigarettes and the limited evidence supporting them as an efficacious smoking cessation aid, it is evident that there is a concerted effort by some Twitter users to promote these devices as a health-conducive (91/129, 70.5%), smoking cessation product (266/1303, 20.41%). Further, Twitter is being used in an attempt to circumvent Australian regulation and advocate for a more liberal approach to personal vaporizers (90/1303, 6.90%). A sizeable proportion of posts was dedicated to selling or promoting vape products (347/1303, 26.63%), and 19.95% (260/1303) were found to be business listings. These posts used methods to try and expand their clientele further than immediate followers by touting competitions and giveaways, with those wanting to enter having to perform a sequence of steps such as liking, tagging, and reposting, ultimately exposing the post among the user's network and to others not necessarily interested in vaping.ConclusionsThe borderless nature of social media presents a clear challenge for enforcing Article 13 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which requires all ratifying nations to implement a ban on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship. Countering the advertising and promotion of these products is a public health challenge that will require cross-border cooperation with other World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control parties. Further research aimed at developing strategies to counter the advertising and promotion of e-cigarettes is therefore needed.

Project description:BackgroundAs the majority of Twitter content is publicly available, the platform has become a rich data source for public health surveillance, providing insights into emergent phenomena, such as vaping. Although there is a growing body of literature that has examined the content of vaping-related tweets, less is known about the people who generate and disseminate these messages and the role of e-cigarette advocates in the promotion of these devices.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify key conversation trends and patterns over time, and discern the core voices, message frames, and sentiment surrounding e-cigarette discussions on Twitter.MethodsA random sample of data were collected from Australian Twitter users who referenced at least one of 15 identified e-cigarette related keywords during 2012, 2014, 2016, or 2018. Data collection was facilitated by TrISMA (Tracking Infrastructure for Social Media Analysis) and analyzed by content analysis.ResultsA sample of 4432 vaping-related tweets posted and retweeted by Australian users was analyzed. Positive sentiment (3754/4432, 84.70%) dominated the discourse surrounding e-cigarettes, and vape retailers and manufacturers (1161/4432, 26.20%), the general public (1079/4432, 24.35%), and e-cigarette advocates (1038/4432, 23.42%) were the most prominent posters. Several tactics were used by e-cigarette advocates to communicate their beliefs, including attempts to frame e-cigarettes as safer than traditional cigarettes, imply that federal government agencies lack sufficient competence or evidence for the policies they endorse about vaping, and denounce as propaganda "gateway" claims of youth progressing from e-cigarettes to combustible tobacco. Some of the most common themes presented in tweets were advertising or promoting e-cigarette products (2040/4432, 46.03%), promoting e-cigarette use or intent to use (970/4432, 21.89%), and discussing the potential of e-cigarettes to be used as a smoking cessation aid or tobacco alternative (716/4432, 16.16%), as well as the perceived health and safety benefits and consequences of e-cigarette use (681/4432, 15.37%).ConclusionsAustralian Twitter content does not reflect the country's current regulatory approach to e-cigarettes. Rather, the conversation on Twitter generally encourages e-cigarette use, promotes vaping as a socially acceptable practice, discredits scientific evidence of health risks, and rallies around the idea that e-cigarettes should largely be outside the bounds of health policy. The one-sided nature of the discussion is concerning, as is the lack of disclosure and transparency, especially among vaping enthusiasts who dominate the majority of e-cigarette discussions on Twitter, where it is unclear if comments are endorsed, sanctioned, or even supported by the industry.

Dataset Information

An Experimental Study of Nicotine Warning Statements in E-cigarette Tweets.

Publications

An Experimental Study of Nicotine Warning Statements in E-cigarette Tweets.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets