The impact of product information and trials on demand for smokeless tobacco and cigarettes: Evidence from experimental auctions

Abstract

Introduction Epidemiological and toxicological evidence suggests lower risk of smokeless tobacco (ST) products compared to cigarettes. Less is known, however, about consumer perceptions and use of novel forms of ST, including snus and dissolvable tobacco. Methods In this study, we conducted in-person experimental auctions in Buffalo, NY, Columbia, SC, and Selinsgrove, PA with 571 smokers to test the impact of information and product trials on smokers’ preferences. Auctions were conducted between November 2010-November 2011. Results We found no evidence of an impact of product trials on demand in our auctions. Anti-ST information increased demand for cigarettes when presented alone, but when presented with Pro-ST information it decreased demand for cigarettes. It did not decrease demand for ST products. Anti-smoking information increased demand for ST products, but did not affect cigarette demand. Conclusions These findings suggest that credible and effective communications about tobacco harm reduction should reinforce the negative effects of smoking.

Naturalistic assessment of demand for cigarettes, snus, and nicotine gum

“…Greater frequency of null demand for observed for snus compared to cigarettes is also consistent with the findings of O’Connor et al (also see Rousu et al 2014). Because we provided direct exposure to snus in the present study, reduced valuation of snus compared to cigarettes observed by O’Connor et al was not likely due to neophobia or product inexperience.…”

“…In contrast, demand elasticity for medicinal nicotine gum in the present study was statistically undifferentiated from both snus and cigarettes. Despite these null findings, however, we note that levels of elasticity for nicotine gum were generally intermediate to those for snus and cigarettes, which is at least ordinally consistent with prior data (O’Connor et al 2014; Rousu et al 2014) despite differences in the form of medicinal nicotine between studies. Although nicotine gum was not a primary focus of the present study and was included only as a comparator product, future work should compare demand for nicotine gum and cigarettes more thoroughly.…”

Interviews with smokers about smokeless tobacco products, risk messages and news articles: Table 1

“…One focus group study found that smokers did not believe tobacco health information (including information on comparative risks) to be very valuable in thinking about switching to SLT 24. One study measuring effects of health information found that while exposure to a brochure with antismoking information increased smokers’ SLT demand, exposure to pro-SLT information did not 25. Another found that young Canadian smokers exposed to product images with SLT health warning labels had decreased willingness to try SLT, while those exposed to images with a reduced-risk message (ie, that using SLT is less harmful than smoking) had both higher odds of reporting correct beliefs about SLT/cigarette relative risks, and willingness to try SLT as a cessation aid 23…”

Does winning an experimental auction change people's behavior? An application to e-cigarettes

“…The auction effect is of special concern in studies dealing with addictive substances or harmful behaviors. Experimental auctions, traditionally used to estimate willingness to pay for ordinary consumer goods (Lusk and Shogren 2007), have recently been used in a series of studies focused on tobacco products, including labeling differences between cigarettes (Rousu and Thrasher 2013), novel smokeless tobacco products (Rousu et al 2014), and e-cigarettes (Rousu et al 2017). A potential concern with this design is that exposing users to a tobacco product that is new to them, as well as allowing them to win it via auction, could encourage further use of that product or forestall quit attempts.…”