BACKGROUND: There are almost no data on whether the different channels through which pro-smoking media appear (i.e., point-of-sale advertising, movie smoking) differently influence smoking. PURPOSE: This study used ecological momentary assessment to examine whether differences in smoking risk were observed for exposures to different pro-smoking media channels. METHODS: College students (n = 134) carried smartphones for 21 days, recording their exposures to pro-smoking media and the media channels for that exposure and responding to three randomly issued control prompts per day. Participants answered questions about their future smoking risk after each pro-smoking media exposure and random prompt. RESULTS: Participants had elevated future smoking risk following exposure to pro-smoking media at point of sale (p < 0.001); smoking risk at times of exposure to smoking in movies did not differ from risk measured during control prompts (p = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: There is merit to examining the relative contribution of different pro-smoking media channels to smoking behavior.
BACKGROUND: There are almost no data on whether the different channels through which pro-smoking media appear (i.e., point-of-sale advertising, movie smoking) differently influence smoking. PURPOSE: This study used ecological momentary assessment to examine whether differences in smoking risk were observed for exposures to different pro-smoking media channels. METHODS: College students (n = 134) carried smartphones for 21 days, recording their exposures to pro-smoking media and the media channels for that exposure and responding to three randomly issued control prompts per day. Participants answered questions about their future smoking risk after each pro-smoking media exposure and random prompt. RESULTS:Participants had elevated future smoking risk following exposure to pro-smoking media at point of sale (p < 0.001); smoking risk at times of exposure to smoking in movies did not differ from risk measured during control prompts (p = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: There is merit to examining the relative contribution of different pro-smoking media channels to smoking behavior.
Authors: James D Sargent; Madeline A Dalton; Michael L Beach; Leila A Mott; Jennifer J Tickle; M Bridget Ahrens; Todd F Heatherton Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Marieke Hiemstra; Roy Otten; Rebecca N H de Leeuw; Onno C P van Schayck; Rutger C M E Engels Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2010-12-30 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Cendrine D Robinson; Christine Muench; Emily Brede; Romano Endrighi; Edwin H Szeto; Joanna R Sells; John P Lammers; Kolawole S Okuyemi; Grant Izmirlian; Andrew J Waters Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2017-10-24 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Kimberly G Wagoner; Erin L Sutfin; Eunyoung Y Song; Jessica L King; Kathleen L Egan; Beth Reboussin; Beata Debinski; John Spangler; Mark Wolfson Journal: J Am Coll Health Date: 2018-01-09
Authors: Ce Shang; Jidong Huang; Kai-Wen Cheng; Qing Li; Frank J Chaloupka Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 3.390