Dataset Information

Evaluating the actual and perceived effectiveness of E-cigarette prevention advertisements among adolescents.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The efficacy of e-cigarette prevention ads among adolescents has seldom been studied. We examined the impact of ads from the The Real Cost vaping prevention media campaign on what adolescents think and believe about vaping. We also sought to test whether perceived message effectiveness (PME) served as a proxy for ad impact.

Methods

Participants were 543 U.S. adolescents ages 13-17. In an online experiment, we randomized participants to either: 1) persuasive e-cigarette prevention video ads from the Food and Drug Administration's The Real Cost campaign that was targeted to adolescents or 2) information-only e-cigarette harms control videos (control condition). Participants in each condition viewed 2 videos in a random order. After ad exposure, the survey assessed PME (message and effects perceptions), risk beliefs about vaping, attitudes toward vaping, and intentions to vape.

Results

The FDA's The Real Cost ads led to higher beliefs about the harms of vaping (p < .001), more negative attitudes toward vaping (p < .001), and lower intentions to vape (p < .05) compared to the control videos. The Real Cost ads also scored higher on both message perceptions (p < .001) and effects perceptions (p < .001) compared to control videos. Effects perceptions were associated with all three outcomes (all ps < 0.001, adjusting for both types of PME and covariates), but message perceptions did not offer additional predictive value.

Conclusions

Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads gave adolescents a more negative view of vaping and lowered their intentions to vape compared to control videos. Effects perceptions may be superior to message perceptions as a proxy for e-cigarette prevention ad impact.

SUBMITTER: Noar SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7901805 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionWe examined the effect of visual optimizations on warning text recall.MethodsWe used Amazon's Mechanical Turk to recruit 1854 young adult (18-34 years) electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) users or susceptible nonusers. We conducted a between-subjects 3 × 2 × 2 experiment to examine the influence of color (black text on white background [BW] vs. black on yellow [BY] vs. yellow on black [YB]), shape (rectangle vs. novel), and signal word (presence vs. absence of the word "warning"). We randomized participants to view one of 12 warnings on a fictional e-cigarette advertisement. We coded open-ended recall responses into three categories: (1) recalled nothing, (2) recalled something, (3) recalled the concept. We examined main effects on warning text recall using multinomial regression. We examined differences in attention, perceived message effectiveness, and appeal.ResultsThose exposed to BW or BY warnings were more likely than those exposed to YB to recall something (AOR = 1.6, AOR = 1.5, respectively) or the concept (OR = 1.4, BW). Those exposed to novel shape (44.7% novel vs. 37.9% rectangle; p = .003) or color (44.5% BY vs. 41.9% YB vs. 37.5% BW; p = .04) warnings were more likely to report attention to the warning. In aided recall, those exposed to the signal word were more likely than those not exposed to select the correct response (64.0% vs. 31.3%; p < .0001). We did not find differences for message effectiveness or appeal.ConclusionsVisual optimizations such as color may influence warning text recall and should be considered for new warnings. Research should continue exploring variations for advertisement warnings to maximize attention to warning text.ImplicationsThis study examines the impact of visual optimizations on recall of the US Food and Drug Administration-mandated e-cigarette advertisement warning text. We found that color might influence warning text recall, but we did not find effects for shape or signal word. It is possible the newly mandated e-cigarette advertisement warnings, which are required to occupy at least 20% of the advertisement, are currently novel enough to attract attention. Future research should examine optimizations following implementation of the new advertisement warnings.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular prevention guidelines use estimated 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk based on the pooled cohort equations to guide treatment decisions and engage patients in shared decision-making. We sought to determine patient perceived versus actual risk of atherosclerotic CVD and associations with willingness for preventive therapy.MethodsWe evaluated calculated and perceived CVD risk among 4187 patients across 124 sites in the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management Registry. Ten-year risk was assessed using the pooled cohort equations; risk relative-to-peers was determined based on age-, sex-, and race-based percentiles; and patient estimates of risk were assessed using patient surveys. Poisson regression models evaluated associations between risk estimates, statin use, and willingness to take prevention therapy.ResultsOverall, there was no correlation between patients' estimates of their 10-year CVD risk and calculated 10-year risk (ρ=-0.01, Pcorrelation=0.46), regardless of age, sex, race, or socioeconomic status. The majority (72.2%) overestimated their 10-year CVD risk relative to the pooled cohorts equation (mean perceived 33.3% versus mean calculated 17.1%, Pdifference<0.01). Patients' perceptions of their risk relative-to-peers were slightly correlated with standardized risk percentiles (ρ=0.19, P<0.01), although most had overly optimistic views of how risk compared with their peers. Increasing perceived risk was not associated with current statin use (P=0.18) but was associated with willingness to consider future prevention therapy (P<0.01). Perceived risk relative-to-peers was associated with increased prevalent statin use (risk ratio 1.04 per category increase [95% CI, 1.02-1.06]) and reported willingness for prevention therapy (risk ratio 1.11 [95% CI, 1.07-1.16]).ConclusionsWhen asked, most patients overestimate their 10-year risk but hold an optimistic bias of their risk relative to age-, race-, and sex-matched peers. Providing accurate absolute risk assessments to patients without proper context may paradoxically decrease many patients' perceived risk of CVD, thereby disincentivizing initiation of CVD risk reduction therapy.