Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non‐Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?

Gallopel-Morvan, Karine; Hoek, Janet; Rieunier, Sophie

doi:10.1111/joca.12145

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of type of pack on the effectiveness of pictorial and threatening warnings Studies showed that plain packs increase visual attention to warnings (Maynard et al, 2013), are less appealing, reduce attitude toward tobacco brand (McCool et al, 2012;Dunlop et al, 2014;Gallopel-Morvan et al, 2018), increase quitting intentions and reduce tobacco consumption (Hoek et al, 2011b;Durkin et al, 2015;Moodie and Ford, 2011). However, no study has yet been performed to examine plain pack effects on negative emotions elicited by PTW, whereas emotion plays a key role in PTW effectiveness.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do smokers respond to pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings? The role of threat level, repeated exposure, type of packs and warning size

Lacoste-Badie

Gallopel-Morvan

Lajante

et al. 2019

JCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to investigate the role of two structural factors – threat level depicted on fear messages and warning size – as well as two contextual factors – repeated exposure and type of packs – on pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings’ effectiveness. Design/methodology/approach A two (warning threat level: moderate vs high) × two (coverage: 40 vs 75 per cent) × two (packaging type: plain vs branded) within-subjects experiment was carried out. Subjects were exposed three times to pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings. Both self-report and psychophysiological measurements of emotion were used. Findings Results indicate that threat level is the most effective structural factor to influence smokers’ reactions, while warning size has very low impact. Furthermore, emotional arousal, fear and disgust, as well as attitude toward tobacco brand, decrease after the second exposure to pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings, but stay stable at the third exposure. However, there is no effect of repetition on the emotional valence component, arousal-subjective component, on intention of quitting or of reducing cigarette consumption. Finally, there is a negative effect of plain packs on attitude toward tobacco brand over repeated exposures, but there is no effect of the type of packs on smokers’ emotions and intentions. Social implications Useful marketing social guidance, which might help government decision-makers increase the effectiveness of smoking reduction measures, is offered. Originality/value For the first time in this context, psychophysiological and self-report measurements were combined to measure smokers’ reactions toward pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings in a repeated exposure study.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do smokers respond to pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings? The role of threat level, repeated exposure, type of packs and warning size

Lacoste-Badie

Gallopel-Morvan

Lajante

et al. 2019

JCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The comparison between the three control conditions will work as a replication of recent work 33 on the independent effect of plain versus branded packages and hence serve as an independent validation of our methodology, especially the incentivised mechanism. We will use both the typical questionnaire measures used in this type of study and our own methodology based on financial incentives (WTP).…”

Section: Experimentally Testing the Efficacy Of Warnings: Conventional Indicators And A New Incentive-compatible Methods Generalitiesmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Following recent studies that have examined the combined effect of the plain pack and the warnings, [31][32][33] we will seek to evaluate whether the efficacy of warnings is enhanced by the plain packaging. Indeed, it is possible that such a packaging, without the advertising communication of the brand, reinforces the efficacy of warnings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protocol for creating new warnings on cigarette packs and evaluating their efficacy in a randomised experimental setting

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionTobacco smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable death. This is not inevitable as tobacco control tools have become more powerful and more effective. Among these, warnings on cigarette packs have proven to be somewhat effective. Our objective is to increase the efficacy of antismoking warnings by using innovative psychological approaches and to create an experimental setting for the evaluation of these new warnings based on behavioural indicators.Methods and analysisFirst, we created new warnings based on three categories of motivational leverage and on harm reduction. New warnings with innovative texts and pictures were designed for each category and inserted on plain packs. We will then use standard indicators to compare their effect to that of control packs: plain pack without warning, plain pack with conventional warning and branded pack with conventional warning. Second, the novelty of our approach will consist in designing an experimental protocol that uses monetary incentives to evaluate the effect of warnings. Subjects will be able to ‘sacrifice’ part of their participation defrayal to purchase a good whose subjective value is related to one’s attitude towards smoking. These monetarily incentivised measures are designed to assess smokers’ immediate/mid-term intention to quit and non-smokers’ aversion to smoking. In both cases, the monetary amounts individuals accept to sacrifice may be a more reliable measure than declarative responses, which may be distorted by several hypothetical biases. In the end, we should be able to robustly measure the impact of our new warnings between intervention and control groups by using both traditional indicators and our new monetarily incentivised measure.Ethics and disseminationThe ethics committee of the Groupement des Hôpitaux de l’Institut Catholique de Lille approved the research protocol on 5 July 2019 (CIER 2019-22). Results will be presented at scientific meetings and published.

show abstract

“…Plain packaging and pictorial warning independently and synergistically acts alter smoking behaviour among non-smokers. 19 In comparison to text warning, implementation of pictorial warning is more effective to reduce/quit smoking and it to increase support for plain packaging. 20 Pictorial warning also is crucial to deliver its message especially for countries with low literacy rates and for younger smokers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plain packaging and Pictorial Warning in Asia Countries: Where are we?

Jetly¹,

Nawi²,

Ghazali³

et al. 2022

IJPHR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Worldwide, around 8 million people die yearly due to tobacco usage. Cigarette smoking is the most popular form of tobacco usage. Smoking has linked to many detrimental health effects among adults and adolescents. Recognising the burden of smoking, World Health Organization have implemented various tobacco control strategies under the Framework Convention of Tobacco Control and mPOWER. This includes implementation of plain packaging and pictorial warning. In Asia, only Thailand, Singapore, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel have implemented plain cigarette pack. However, some countries have made progress to implement plain cigarette pack. Although some countries have not implemented plain pack, implementation of larger pictorial warning serve as a pathway for implementation of plain packaging. Countries with pictorial warning on cigarette pack should ensure it covers at least 50% of pack. Timor Leste has the largest pictorial warning on cigarette pack in the world. In conclusion, only 5 countries in Asia have implemented plain pack and some countries in this region are yet to implement size of pictorial warning according to requirement of World Health Organization. All countries should target to implement standardized pack to denormalise tobacco usage.

show abstract

Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non‐Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?

Cited by 8 publications

References 88 publications

How do smokers respond to pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings? The role of threat level, repeated exposure, type of packs and warning size

How do smokers respond to pictorial and threatening tobacco warnings? The role of threat level, repeated exposure, type of packs and warning size

Protocol for creating new warnings on cigarette packs and evaluating their efficacy in a randomised experimental setting

Plain packaging and Pictorial Warning in Asia Countries: Where are we?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About