INTRODUCTION: Article 11 of the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) requires countries to implement health warnings on tobacco products. The Article 11 guidelines advise countries to periodically rotate warnings to prevent "wearout" of the health warnings. This study investigates potential wearout of cigarette health warnings during a period of 9 years in 2 countries: Canada, where larger pictorial warnings were implemented approximately 1 year prior to the study, and in the United States, where small text-only warnings were in place for 17 years at the beginning of the study. METHODS: Data were drawn from national samples of smokers from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Surveys in Canada (N = 5,309), and the United States (N = 6,412) who were originally recruited by telephone with random digit dialing. Changes in 4 measures of health warning effectiveness and in a composite Labels Impact Index were examined over 8 waves of survey data (2002-2011). Analyses were conducted in 2012. RESULTS: The health warning effectiveness measures and the Labels Impact Index indicated that the effectiveness of both the Canadian, and the U.S. warnings declined significantly over time. The Canadian warnings showed greater declines in effectiveness than the U.S. warnings, likely due to the initial novelty of the Canadian warnings. Despite the greater decline in Canada, the Canadian pictorial warnings were significantly more effective than the U.S. text-only warnings throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Health warnings decline in effectiveness over time. Health warnings on tobacco products should be changed periodically to maintain effectiveness.
INTRODUCTION: Article 11 of the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) requires countries to implement health warnings on tobacco products. The Article 11 guidelines advise countries to periodically rotate warnings to prevent "wearout" of the health warnings. This study investigates potential wearout of cigarette health warnings during a period of 9 years in 2 countries: Canada, where larger pictorial warnings were implemented approximately 1 year prior to the study, and in the United States, where small text-only warnings were in place for 17 years at the beginning of the study. METHODS: Data were drawn from national samples of smokers from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Surveys in Canada (N = 5,309), and the United States (N = 6,412) who were originally recruited by telephone with random digit dialing. Changes in 4 measures of health warning effectiveness and in a composite Labels Impact Index were examined over 8 waves of survey data (2002-2011). Analyses were conducted in 2012. RESULTS: The health warning effectiveness measures and the Labels Impact Index indicated that the effectiveness of both the Canadian, and the U.S. warnings declined significantly over time. The Canadian warnings showed greater declines in effectiveness than the U.S. warnings, likely due to the initial novelty of the Canadian warnings. Despite the greater decline in Canada, the Canadian pictorial warnings were significantly more effective than the U.S. text-only warnings throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Health warnings decline in effectiveness over time. Health warnings on tobacco products should be changed periodically to maintain effectiveness.
Authors: Janet Hoek; Nick Wilson; Matthew Allen; Richard Edwards; George Thomson; Judy Li Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2010-10-05 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: G T Fong; K M Cummings; R Borland; G Hastings; A Hyland; G A Giovino; D Hammond; M E Thompson Journal: Tob Control Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: R Borland; N Wilson; G T Fong; D Hammond; K M Cummings; H-H Yong; W Hosking; G Hastings; J Thrasher; A McNeill Journal: Tob Control Date: 2009-06-28 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Sara C Hitchman; Ute Mons; Gera E Nagelhout; Romain Guignard; Ann Mcneill; Marc C Willemsen; Pete Driezen; Jean-Louis Wilquin; François Beck; Enguerrand Du-Roscöat; Martina Pötschke-Langer; David Hammond; Geoffrey T Fong Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2011-09-15 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; Nick Wilson; Geoffrey T Fong; David Hammond; K Michael Cummings; Warwick Hosking; Ann McNeill Journal: Addiction Date: 2009-02-10 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Lin Li; Ron Borland; Hua Yong; Kenneth M Cummings; James F Thrasher; Sara C Hitchman; Geoffrey T Fong; David Hammond; Maansi Bansal-Travers Journal: Health Educ Res Date: 2014-12-08
Authors: Kamala Swayampakala; James F Thrasher; Hua-Hie Yong; Gera E Nagelhout; Lin Li; Ron Borland; David Hammond; Richard J O'Connor; James W Hardin Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Jennifer C Morgan; Brian G Southwell; Seth M Noar; Kurt M Ribisl; Shelley D Golden; Noel T Brewer Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Sarah Kahnert; Pete Driezen; James Balmford; Christina N Kyriakos; Sarah Aleyan; Sara C Hitchman; Sarah Nogueira; Tibor Demjén; Esteve Fernández; Paraskevi A Katsaounou; Antigona C Trofor; Krzysztof Przewoźniak; Witold A Zatoński; Geoffrey T Fong; Constantine I Vardavas; Ute Mons Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: Annika C Green; Susan C Kaai; Geoffrey T Fong; Pete Driezen; Anne C K Quah; Premduth Burhoo Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2014-04-18 Impact factor: 4.244