Dataset Information

Effect of alcohol label designs with different pictorial representations of alcohol content and health warnings on knowledge and understanding of low-risk drinking guidelines: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

The UK low-risk drinking guidelines (LRDG) recommend not regularly drinking more than 14 units of alcohol per week. We tested the effect of different pictorial representations of alcohol content, some with a health warning, on knowledge of the LRDG and understanding of how many drinks it equates to.

Design

Parallel randomized controlled trial.

Setting

On-line, 25 January-1 February 2019.

Participants

Participants (n = 7516) were English, aged over 18 years and drink alcohol.

Interventions

The control group saw existing industry-standard labels; six intervention groups saw designs based on: food labels (serving or serving and container), pictographs (servings or containers), pie charts (servings) or risk gradients. A total of 500 participants (~70 per condition) saw a health warning under the design.

Measurements

Primary outcomes: (i) knowledge: proportion who answered that the LRDG is 14 units; and (ii) understanding: how many servings/containers of beverages one can drink before reaching 14 units (10 questions, average distance from correct answer).

Findings

In the control group, 21.5% knew the LRDG; proportions were higher in intervention groups (all P < 0.001). The three best-performing designs had the LRDG in a separate statement, beneath the pictograph container: 51.1% [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.08-4.54], pictograph serving 48.8% (aOR = 4.11, 95% CI = 3.39-4.99) and pie-chart serving, 47.5% (aOR = 3.57, 95% CI = 2.93-4.34). Participants underestimated how many servings they could drink: control mean = -4.64, standard deviation (SD) = 3.43; intervention groups were more accurate (all P < 0.001), best performing was pictograph serving (mean = -0.93, SD = 3.43). Participants overestimated how many containers they could drink: control mean = 0.09, SD = 1.02; intervention groups overestimated even more (all P < 0.007), worst-performing was food label serving (mean = 1.10, SD = 1.27). Participants judged the alcohol content of beers more accurately than wine or spirits. The inclusion of a health warning had no statistically significant effect on any measure.

Conclusions

Labels with enhanced pictorial representations of alcohol content improved knowledge and understanding of the UK's low-risk drinking guidelines compared with industry-standard labels; health warnings did not improve knowledge or understanding of low-risk drinking guidelines. Designs that improved knowledge most had the low-risk drinking guidelines in a separate statement located beneath the graphics.

SUBMITTER: Gold N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8248341 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction:Social interactions are a key mechanism through which health communication efforts, including pictorial cigarette pack warnings, may exert their effects. We sought to better understand social interactions elicited by pictorial cigarette pack warnings. Methods:A controlled trial randomly assigned US adult smokers (n = 2149) to have their cigarette packs labeled with pictorial or text-only warnings for 4 weeks. Smokers completed surveys during the baseline visit and each of the subsequent 4 weekly visits. Results:Smokers with pictorial warnings on their packs had more conversations throughout the trial compared to those with text-only warnings (8.2 conversations vs 5.0, p<.01). The highest number of conversations occurred during the first week. Smokers with pictorial warnings were more likely than those with text-only warnings to discuss the health effects of smoking, whether the warnings would make them want to quit and whether the warnings would make others want to quit (all p < .05). Smokers were more likely to describe pictorial warnings as scary, gross, or depressing and gloomy during conversations than text-only warnings (all p < .05). Conclusions:Pictorial warnings sparked more conversations about the warnings, the health effects of smoking, and quitting smoking than text-only warnings. These social interactions may extend the reach of pictorial warnings beyond the targeted smoker and may be one of the processes by which pictorial warnings have impact. Implications:Health communication can influence behavior by changing social interactions. Our trial characterized social interactions about pictorial cigarette pack warnings with a large longitudinal sample in a real-world setting. Understanding these conversations can inform the United States and other countries as they improve existing warnings and help tobacco control policy makers and health communication theorists understand how social interactions triggered by warnings affect smoking.

Project description:Background:Pictorial warnings on cigarette packs are a cost-effective policy-level intervention for smoking cessation; however, little research has examined changes in the impact of warnings over time, especially shortly following the first exposure to pictorial warnings. We sought to characterize the trajectories of responses to pictorial cigarette pack warnings soon after first exposure. Methods:Participants were 2149 adult smokers in North Carolina and California, United States. In 2014-2015, we randomized smokers to have pictorial (intervention) or text-only (control) warnings on their cigarette packs for 4 weeks. Weekly surveys assessed psychosocial and behavioral outcomes. Results:After 1 week, smokers in the intervention arm reported higher levels of most outcomes, compared with the control arm. Over subsequent weeks, smokers in both trial arms had decreases in thinking about the harms of smoking (? = -0.046), positive (? = -0.036), and negative (? = -0.042) smoking reinforcement attitudes, and increases in quit intentions (? = 0.070) and cigarette forgoing (? = 0.137) (all p < .05). Only negative affective reactions decreased more in the intervention versus control condition (pinteraction < .01). Conclusions:The impact of pictorial cigarette pack warnings on emotions and cognitions may wane over time. In contrast, quit intentions and cigarette forgoing may continue to increase, at least during the initial period after introduction. Rotation of pictorial warnings may help prevent warning wear-out. Implications:Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality and warnings on cigarette packs are a cost-effective policy-level intervention. Prior studies reporting on cigarette pack warning "wear out" have been limited by being short-term single-session experimental studies. Ours are the first study to experimentally examine the trajectories of several outcomes after first exposure and report that the impact of pictorial cigarette pack warnings on emotions and cognitions may wane over time while quit intentions and cigarette forgoing may continue to increase. Trials Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02247908; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02247908.

Project description:IntroductionThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) selected six text-only warnings for cigarillos to be implemented on packaging and advertising. Pictorial warnings are more effective at discouraging cigarette use than text-only warnings, yet no research exists for cigarillos. We sought to understand what types of images might be most effectively paired with the cigarillo text warnings to inform broad principles for developing pictorial warnings, with a focus on young adults, who have the highest rate of cigarillo use.MethodsWe conducted five focus groups with a total of N = 30 young adult cigarillo users and susceptible nonusers (53% female, 50% White, and 33% Black). Participants were shown four to eight unique images for each of the six text statements and were asked about visual-verbal congruency, emotional and cognitive reactions, and perceived effectiveness of each image. Sessions were recorded and transcribed; two investigators independently coded transcripts for emergent themes.ResultsParticipants reported images that were graphic or "gross" would best grab attention and discourage use of cigarillos. Participants preferred images that were a direct illustration of the information in the warning text, rather than abstract images that required more cognitive effort to understand. Participants also highlighted that including people in the images, especially youth and young adults making eye contact, helped them relate to the warnings, garner their attention, and positively influence their reactions.ConclusionsWe identified several principles to inform the selection of images to pair with the FDA-required cigarillo text statements. These insights may also apply to pictorial warnings for other tobacco products.ImplicationsThis focus group study identified principles for selecting images to develop pictorial warnings for the six FDA text-only cigarillo warnings. We found that young adult cigarillo users and susceptible nonusers preferred images that were graphic and gross, believable, congruent to the warning text, and included people. Images that match young adults' visual expectations of a disease and are emotion-provoking may be most effective in pictorial warnings and highlight challenges for developing pictorial warnings for health effects that do not have a visible health consequence.