Influence of Natural American Spirit advertising on current and former smokers’ perceptions and intentions

Gratale, Stefanie K; Maloney, Erin K.; Sangalang, Angeline; Cappella, Joseph N.

doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053881

Cited by 28 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is also possible that the manipulations used in Study 1 were not strong enough to prompt meaningful reactions to influence beliefs, nor meaningful emotional responses. Second, the established eight-item belief scale was employed because it was previously validated as a misinformation measure in this specific context (Gratale et al, 2018). However, only some of the specific belief items within this scale were directly related to the messages explicitly appearing in the stories.…”

Section: Study 1 Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beliefs were measured with eight Likert-type items on a 8-point scale, anchored by strongly disagree to strongly agree (M = 4.34, SD = 1.49, α = .94), that was validated by a previous study (Gratale, Maloney, Sangalang, & Cappella, 2018). Items were averaged.…”

Section: Misinformed Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ten Likert-type items were averaged to assess misinformed beliefs related to natural tobacco products, anchored by strongly agree (7) and strongly disagree (1), such that higher values indicated more endorsements of misinformation (i.e., beliefs in favor of natural tobacco product use, with no robust factual bases; M = 3.78, SD = 1.35, α = .92). The items were previously validated in two pilot studies (Gratale et al, 2018). The items included statements such as: "organic cigarettes are not as bad for your lungs as regular cigarettes," "there is a lower chance of becoming addicted to organic cigarettes than traditional cigarettes," and "organic cigarettes contain no chemicals or additives."…”

Section: Misinformed Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Potential for Narrative Correctives to Combat Misinformation†

Sangalang

Ophir

Cappella

2019

Journal of Communication

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Misinformation can influence personal and societal decisions in detrimental ways. Not only is misinformation challenging to correct, but even when individuals accept corrective information, misinformation can continue to influence attitudes: a phenomenon known as belief echoes, affective perseverance, or the continued influence effect. Two controlled experiments tested the efficacy of narrative-based correctives to reduce this affective residual in the context of misinformation about organic tobacco. Study 1 (N = 385) tested within-narrative corrective endings, embedded in four discrete emotions (happiness, anger, sadness, and fear). Study 2 (N = 586) tested the utility of a narrative with a negative, emotional corrective ending (fear and anger). Results provide some evidence that narrative correctives, with or without emotional endings, can be effective at reducing misinformed beliefs and intentions, but narratives consisting of emotional corrective endings are better at correcting attitudes than a simple corrective. Implications for misinformation scholarship and corrective message design are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Study 1 Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Misinformed Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Misinformed Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Potential for Narrative Correctives to Combat Misinformation†

Sangalang

Ophir

Cappella

2019

Journal of Communication

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of experimental studies have established that "organic" or "additive-free" descriptors decrease tobacco harm perceptions. [1][2][3][4][5] Two nationally representative studies have shown that Natural American Spirit (NAS) smokers specifically misunderstand the relative harm of their brand, which uses the "organic" descriptor on some products and, until late 2017, used the "additive-free" descriptor on its cigarette sub-brands. 6,7 However, the overall prevalence of belief that "organic" and "additive-free" tobacco products are less harmful than regular tobacco products has not been reported in the United States.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Widespread Belief That Organic and Additive-Free Tobacco Products are Less Harmful Than Regular Tobacco Products: Results From the 2017 US Health Information National Trends Survey

Pearson

Moran

Delnevo

et al. 2019

Nicotine &Amp; Tobacco Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significance US smokers of Natural American Spirit, a brand marketed as “organic” and “additive-free,” are more likely than other cigarette smokers to believe that their brand might be less harmful than other brands. This article (1) describes the prevalence of belief that “organic” and “additive-free” tobacco is less harmful than regular tobacco products in the US population and (2) describes the sociodemographic characteristics of adults who believe tobacco products with these descriptors are less harmful. Methods Data were drawn from the 2017 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS), a nationally representative survey of US adults. Logistic regression models were used to examine correlates of the belief that “organic” or “additive-free” tobacco products are less harmful than regular tobacco products. Results Overall, 26.7% of US adults and 45.3% of adult smokers believe that “organic” tobacco products are less harmful than regular tobacco products. Similarly, 35.2% of US adults and 47.1% of smokers believe that “additive-free” tobacco products are less harmful. When examining gender, age, education, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and smoking status, only age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] ~0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.97, 0.99 for both outcomes) and smoking status (current vs. never smokers, aOR ~1.78, 95% CI 1.03, 3.07 for both outcomes) were correlates of believing that “organic” or “additive-free” tobacco is less harmful than regular tobacco products. Conclusions Belief that “organic” and “additive-free” tobacco products are less harmful than other products is widespread. Younger adults and current smokers are most likely to be misinformed by “organic” or “additive-free” tobacco product descriptors. Implications Belief that “organic” and “additive-free” tobacco products are less harmful than other products is widespread among US adults and most prevalent among smokers. Removal of terms that incorrectly imply reduced harm may correct current and future consumers’ misperceptions about the brand.

show abstract

“…When consumers read that e-cigarettes are natural, they might assume that the known risks associated with smoking are natural too ( McDaniel & Malone, 2007 ; Swanson, 1977 ) much like drowning is a risk associated with swimming. In the past, tobacco companies have engaged in similar misleading marketing practices to promote tobacco and menthol products by claiming they could produce fresh and natural sensations ( Anderson, 2011 ; Baig, Byron, Lazard, & Brewer, 2018 ; Epperson, Henriksen, & Prochaska, 2017 ; Gratale, Maloney, Sangalang, & Cappella, 2017 ; Moran, Pierce, Weiger, Cunningham, & Sargent, 2017 ). If there is systematic evidence that healthy food terms are now being used in advertising to promote e-cigarettes, then such marketing practices would be a potential subject for U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vaping associated with healthy food words: A content analysis of Twitter

Basáñez

Majmundar

Cruz

et al. 2018

Addictive Behaviors Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

E-cigarettes were initially introduced as a less harmful alternative to combustible cigarettes, but marketing efforts may now be exceeding these claims by associating e-cigarettes with words related to healthy foods. These associations could mislead people to assume vaping is a healthy practice. Tweets from January to March 2017 were obtained from the Twitter Streaming Application Programming Interface (API) to assess content about vaping linked to healthy food words. Tweets were classified into one of nine categories along with their source (marketer vs. non-marketer). We content analyzed original English language public postings on Twitter that included vaping-related keywords and at least one of eight co-occurring healthy food-related labels (e.g., ‘natural,’ ‘vitamin,’ ‘vegan,’ and ‘organic’) (N = 1205). Chi-square analyses compared themes by message source. Findings suggest vaping is being marketed in ways that could paradoxically lead consumers to believe that e-cigarettes are health-enhancing. We found more tweets representing vaping as health-enhancing (9%) than referring to it as a smoking-cessation device (1%). The largest category of tweets referred to vaping as harmless (28%) and therefore compatible with a healthy lifestyle. Tweets presenting vaping as harmless or with a sensation theme were more likely to be authored by marketers than by non-marketers. Food and drug regulation needs to be more vigilant to prevent misleading advertising from e-cigarette marketers.

show abstract

Influence of Natural American Spirit advertising on current and former smokers’ perceptions and intentions

Abstract: The findings of this study provide causal support for the need for further regulatory action to address the potentially harmful ramifications of claims used in NAS advertising.

Cited by 28 publications

References 14 publications

The Potential for Narrative Correctives to Combat Misinformation†

The Potential for Narrative Correctives to Combat Misinformation†

Widespread Belief That Organic and Additive-Free Tobacco Products are Less Harmful Than Regular Tobacco Products: Results From the 2017 US Health Information National Trends Survey

Vaping associated with healthy food words: A content analysis of Twitter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About