Socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers’ ratings of plain and branded cigarette packaging: an experimental study

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aimed to test the potential impact of plain packaging for cigarettes on brand appeal among highly socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers using the new design for cigarettes implemented in Australia, which combines plain packaging with larger health warning labels.DesignA 2×2 factorial design trial embedded within a cross-sectional computer touchscreen survey. Data were collected between March and December 2012.SettingSocially disadvantaged welfare aid recipients were recruited through a large Social and Community Service Organisation in New South Wales, Australia.ParticipantsN=354 smokers. The majority of the sample had not completed high school (64%), earned less than $A300/week (55%) and received their income from Government payments (95%).InterventionsParticipants were randomised to one of the four different pack conditions determined by brand name: Winfield versus Benson & Hedges, and packaging type: branded versus plain. Participants were required to rate their assigned pack on measures of brand appeal and purchase intentions.ResultsPlain packaging was associated with significantly reduced smoker ratings of ‘positive pack characteristics’ (p<0.001), ‘positive smoker characteristics’ (p=0.003) and ‘positive taste characteristics’ (p=0.033) in the Winfield brand name condition only. Across the four pack conditions, no main differences were found for ‘negative smoker characteristics’ (p=0.427) or ‘negative harm characteristics’ (p=0.411). In comparison to plain packaging, the presentation of branded packaging was associated with higher odds of smokers’ purchase intentions (OR=2.18, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.54; p=0.002).ConclusionsPlain packs stripped of branding elements, featuring larger health warning labels, were associated with reduced positive cigarette brand image and purchase intentions among highly socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers.

Australian adult smokers’ responses to plain packaging with larger graphic health warnings 1 year after implementation: results from a national cross-sectional tracking survey

“…The emergence of lower perceived quality and satisfaction and the increase in beliefs that brands do not differ in prestige among smokers overall (and do not differ in taste for the young-aged and mid-aged population) occurred despite efforts from tobacco companies to reassure consumers that tobacco products would ‘remain the same’ with the changed packaging. 52 These findings signifying reduced appeal are consistent with and reinforce the results of past experimental research, 10 11 18 24 53 government-funded pretesting studies to design the Australian packs, 7 an early study of how smokers responded to the new packaging at the time they emerged onto the market 8 and a recently published study from one Australian state reporting increases in negative pack perceptions up to 6 months after plain packaging implementation. 49 …”

“…A large number of qualitative and experimental studies summarised in recent reviews, 9–11 including several naturalistic studies where smokers were assigned to carry and smoke from fully branded or plain packs over several weeks, 16–18 have demonstrated plain packaging can reduce elements of the appeal of tobacco products, as judged by measures of reduced attractiveness, liking, prestige, stylishness, quality, satisfaction and taste, 16–28 and that smokers of plain packs are associated with less desirable personality attributes. 19 20 24 25 28 29 Reductions in measures of appeal have been repeatedly evident in studies of youth and young adults, 10 11 consistent with the critical role played by brand image during youth and young adulthood, the period when smoking behaviour develops and brand preferences are established. 12 13 Experimental and naturalistic studies also suggest plain packaging makes health warnings more salient, with warnings being better recalled and considered more serious and believable.…”

Financial Stress and Smoking within a Large Sample of Socially Disadvantaged Australians

“…One survey was conducted between March and December 2012 [10,11], the other between February 2012 and December 2013. Both surveys received ethical approval from the University of Newcastle’s Human Research Ethics Committee (approval numbers H-2011-0276 and H-2010-1002).…”

Plain packaging of cigarettes: do we have sufficient evidence?

“…Several studies have examined plain packaging among adults using experimental methods. These studies have included adults from several countries including Australia, 69 – 71 Canada, 72 the US, 73 , 74 UK, 20 , 75 – 77 and Brazil. 78 Typically, participants were randomized to view plain cigarette packs or regular branded packs, and differences in perceptions of packaging and other smoking-related outcomes were assessed.…”