Linking mass media campaigns to pictorial warning labels on cigarette packages: a cross-sectional study to evaluate effects among Mexican smokers

Thrasher, James F.; Murukutla, Nandita; Pérez-Hernández, Rosaura; Alday, Jesús Martínez; Arillo-Santillán, Edna; Cedillo, Claudia; Gutiérrez, Juan Pablo

doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050282

Cited by 53 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, brand segment and SES differences in the likelihood of smoking from a plain pack could be due to the differential availability of plain packs by brand or residential area. The higher rate of recall of the mass media campaign among those with plain packs might be due to the accompanying large pack health warnings assisting the memorability or impact of the television messages, as has been found in past studies 16 17. However, the difference observed in past quitting behaviour between those with plain and branded packs is more consistent with differential choice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Introduction effects of the Australian plain packaging policy on adult smokers: a cross-sectional study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo determine whether smokers smoking from packs required under Australia's plain packaging law had different smoking beliefs and quitting thoughts, compared with those still smoking from branded packs.DesignCross-sectional survey during the roll-out phase of the law, analysed by timing of survey.SettingAustralian state of Victoria, November 2012.Participants536 cigarette smokers with a usual brand, of whom 72.3% were smoking from a plain pack and 27.7% were smoking from a branded pack.Primary outcome measuresPerceived quality and satisfaction of cigarettes compared with 1 year ago, frequency of thoughts of smoking harm, perceived exaggeration of harms, frequency of thoughts of quitting, quitting priority in life, intention to quit, approval of large graphic health warnings and plain packaging.ResultsCompared with branded pack smokers, those smoking from plain packs perceived their cigarettes to be lower in quality (adjusted OR (AdjOR)=1.66, p=0.045), tended to perceive their cigarettes as less satisfying than a year ago (AdjOR=1.70, p=0.052), were more likely to have thought about quitting at least once a day in the past week (AdjOR=1.81, p=0.013) and to rate quitting as a higher priority in their lives (F=13.11, df=1, p<0.001). Plain pack smokers were more likely to support the policy than branded pack smokers (AdjOR=1.51, p=0.049). Branded and plain pack smokers did not differ on measures of less immediate smoking intentions, frequency of thoughts about harms or perceived exaggeration of harms. Appeal outcomes, but not other outcomes, were sensitive to the extent of roll-out, with responses from branded pack smokers approaching those of plain pack smokers, once 80% of survey respondents were smoking from plain packs 1–2 weeks before the December implementation date.ConclusionsThe early indication is that plain packaging is associated with lower smoking appeal, more support for the policy and more urgency to quit among adult smokers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Introduction effects of the Australian plain packaging policy on adult smokers: a cross-sectional study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, campaigns and warning labels with constituent information in other countries have been associated with higher constituent awareness. 18,27 Participants overwhelmingly-and incorrectly-believed that tobacco companies' additives are responsible for most of the harmful and potentially harmful chemicals in cigarette smoke. Though most of the harmful health effects of smoking come from constituents formed when burning tobacco, manufacturers add ingredients to tobacco products, either to convey a specific taste or flavor, or for a specific purpose such as moisture provision or preservation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16 Extant research about the public's perceptions of cigarette smoke constituents largely focuses on quantitative measures of awareness of tobacco product and cigarette smoke constituents and attitudes about tobacco and cigarettes. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] Consequently, gaps remain in our understanding of how people think about chemicals in cigarette smoke, the natural language people use to talk about constituents, potential misperceptions about the origins and dangers of various constituents, and what people want to know about constituents. 23,26,[28][29][30] Previous research suggests that the public is largely unaware of the constituents in cigarettes and cigarette smoke, including those included on the FDA's abbreviated list of 18 harmful constituents.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“My First Thought was Croutons”: Perceptions of Cigarettes and Cigarette Smoke Constituents Among Adult Smokers and Nonsmokers

Moracco

Morgan

Mendel

et al. 2015

NICTOB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Understanding what people think about harmful and potentially harmful constituents in cigarettes and cigarette smoke has new urgency given legislation requiring US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to disclose constituent information. Our study sought to obtain qualitative information on what people think about these constituents and the language they use to talk about them. Methods: We conducted six focus groups in 2014 with 40 adults in North Carolina. Open-ended questions focused on cigarette and cigarette smoke constituents in general and on the 18 constituents on the FDA's abbreviated list. We coded the transcripts for emergent themes, and all four coders discussed themes until we reached consensus. Results: Participants knew that cigarette smoke contains chemicals but did not know how many chemicals nor what those chemicals are, beyond tar and nicotine. Dangers of constituents mentioned included "chemicals, " physical disease, and addiction. Participants incorrectly believed harmful constituents came primarily from tobacco companies' additives. For unfamiliar constituents, people tried to make associations based on similar-sounding words. Recognizable constituents that participants associated with health harms most discouraged them from wanting to smoke. Most participants wanted to know health harms associated with constituents and what else the chemicals were in. Conclusions: Participants showed enthusiasm for learning more information about constituents, and also showed substantial misunderstandings about the source of harmful constituents. Our findings contribute to the limited body of research on adults' knowledge and perceptions of cigarette smoke constituents and can aid the FDA as it plans to disclose constituent information to the public. Implications: Our study provides information about adults' understanding of cigarette smoke constituents and what adults would like to know about these constituents. This information can help communication campaigns describe cigarette smoke constituents in a way that discourages people from wanting to smoke.

show abstract

“…The majority of evidence indicates that these mass media campaigns are effective in motivating individuals to think about quitting, try to quit, get help for quitting and stay quit (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29). At the population level, advertisements are also associated with decreases in cigarette consumption and smoking prevalence (13,15,16,19,(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recall of Anti-Tobacco Advertisements and Effects on Quitting Behavior: Results From the California Smokers Cohort

Leas

Myers²,

Strong³

et al. 2015

Am J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionEvidence indicates that anti-tobacco advertisement can be an effective way of encouraging smokers to quit smoking, but the majority of this evidence uses aggregate measures of assessing advertisement exposure rather than exposure to specific advertisements. ObjectiveUsing a sample of California Adults (18-64 years) (n = 2596), we sought to assess recall of four anti-tobacco television advertisements developed by the California Tobacco Control Program (CTCP) and assess how recall of each advertisement predicted quitting behavior after one year. ResultsCompared to three other ads, more respondents recalled an advertisement depicting a girl who transforms into a women with a whole in hear throat, as a women explains how she was targeted by the tobacco industry at a young age (58.5% vs 23.1%, 23.4% and 25.6%; p <0.0001). Respondents who reported seeing this advertisement at baseline had a higher probability of making a quit attempt between baseline and follow-up (Adjusted Risk Ratio (aRR): 1.18; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.03 to 1.34) and a higher probability being in a period of smoking abstinence for a month at follow up (aRR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.37). This association was not found for recall of other television advertisements. ConclusionProducing even one television advertisement with a spokesperson who discusses their personal negative experience with tobacco may be recalled by large portion of the smoking population and may have an impact on cessation.

show abstract

Linking mass media campaigns to pictorial warning labels on cigarette packages: a cross-sectional study to evaluate effects among Mexican smokers

Cited by 53 publications

References 25 publications

Introduction effects of the Australian plain packaging policy on adult smokers: a cross-sectional study

Introduction effects of the Australian plain packaging policy on adult smokers: a cross-sectional study

“My First Thought was Croutons”: Perceptions of Cigarettes and Cigarette Smoke Constituents Among Adult Smokers and Nonsmokers

Recall of Anti-Tobacco Advertisements and Effects on Quitting Behavior: Results From the California Smokers Cohort

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About