Literature DB >> 24359298

Scaring the snus out of smokers: testing effects of fear, threat, and efficacy on smokers' acceptance of novel smokeless tobacco products.

Lucy Popova1.   

Abstract

Novel smokeless tobacco products (such as snus) are aggressively promoted to smokers by the tobacco companies. The Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM; Witte, 1992) was used to evaluate the current perceptions of threat, efficacy, attitudes, and behavioral intentions regarding snus in a nationally representative sample of 1,836 smokers. Participants were then exposed to messages designed to discourage smokers from trying snus. On average, smokers perceived health threat of snus as somewhat serious, but believed they can effectively avert this threat. Support was found for the EPPM's proposition that when efficacy is high, greater perceived threat is associated with greater desired outcomes (less favorable attitudes toward snus and lower behavioral intentions to try snus in the future). No support was found for the proposition that when perceived efficacy is low, greater threat is associated with greater message rejection. Instead, message rejection was explained by fear felt while exposed to the anti-smokeless ads. This finding indicates the need to more clearly distinguish between cognitive (danger control) and affective (fear control) responses posited by the EPPM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24359298      PMCID: PMC4029854          DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2013.824063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Commun        ISSN: 1041-0236


  30 in total

1.  Predicting risk behaviors: development and validation of a diagnostic scale.

Authors:  K Witte; K A Cameron; J K McKeon; J M Berkowitz
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  1996 Oct-Dec

2.  On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables.

Authors:  Robert C MacCallum; Shaobo Zhang; Kristopher J Preacher; Derek D Rucker
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2002-03

3.  A meta-analysis of fear appeals: implications for effective public health campaigns.

Authors:  K Witte; M Allen
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2000-10

Review 4.  Smokeless tobacco use: harm reduction or induction approach?

Authors:  Dorothy K Hatsukami; Charlotte Lemmonds; Scott L Tomar
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Mexican American women in a rural area and barriers to their ability to enact protective behaviors against breast cancer.

Authors:  Anne P Hubbell
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2006

Review 6.  Developing smokeless tobacco products for smokers: an examination of tobacco industry documents.

Authors:  C M Carpenter; G N Connolly; O A Ayo-Yusuf; G Ferris Wayne
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 7.552

7.  Bulimia interventions via interpersonal influence: the role of threat and efficacy in persuading bulimics to seek help.

Authors:  J L Smalec; R S Klingle
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2000-02

8.  Two large prospective studies of mortality among men who use snuff or chewing tobacco (United States).

Authors:  S Jane Henley; Michael J Thun; Cari Connell; Eugenia E Calle
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  Tobacco use and risk of myocardial infarction in 52 countries in the INTERHEART study: a case-control study.

Authors:  Koon K Teo; Stephanie Ounpuu; Steven Hawken; M R Pandey; Vicent Valentin; David Hunt; Rafael Diaz; Wafa Rashed; Rosario Freeman; Lixin Jiang; Xiaofei Zhang; Salim Yusuf
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2006-08-19       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 10.  Smokeless tobacco and cancer.

Authors:  Paolo Boffetta; Stephen Hecht; Nigel Gray; Prakash Gupta; Kurt Straif
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 41.316

View more
  8 in total

1.  Systematic Review of Health Communication for Non-Cigarette Tobacco Products.

Authors:  Jennifer Cornacchione Ross; Seth M Noar; Erin L Sutfin
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2017-12-13

2.  Reactions to tobacco warning labels: predictors and outcomes of adaptive and maladaptive responses.

Authors:  Daniel Owusu; Jiyeon So; Lucy Popova
Journal:  Addict Res Theory       Date:  2019-02-22

3.  Health Warning Labels for Smokeless Tobacco: The Impact of Graphic Images on Attention, Recall, and Craving.

Authors:  Elizabeth G Klein; Amanda J Quisenberry; Abigail B Shoben; Sarah Cooper; Amy K Ferketich; Micah Berman; Ellen Peters; Mary Ellen Wewers
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 4.244

4.  'It brings light to what you really put into your body': a focus group study of reactions to messages about nicotine reduction in cigarettes.

Authors:  Hue Trong Duong; Emily E Loud; James F Thrasher; Katherine C Henderson; David L Ashley; Lucy Popova
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2021-04-16       Impact factor: 6.953

5.  Assessing Smoking Cessation Messages with a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Dien Anshari; Victoria Lambert-Jessup; Farahnaz Islam; Erin Mead; Lucy Popova; Ramzi Salloum; Crawford Moodie; Jordan Louviere; Eric N Lindblom
Journal:  Tob Regul Sci       Date:  2018-03

6.  The influence of graphic warning labels on efficacy beliefs and risk perceptions: a qualitative study with low-income, urban smokers.

Authors:  Erin L Mead; Joanna E Cohen; Caitlin E Kennedy; Joseph Gallo; Carl A Latkin
Journal:  Tob Induc Dis       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 2.600

7.  A Cognitive-Emotional Model to Explain Message Framing Effects: Reducing Meat Consumption.

Authors:  Valentina Carfora; Massimiliano Pastore; Patrizia Catellani
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-03-29

8.  Testing Cessation Messages for Cigarette Package Inserts: Findings from a Best/Worst Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Farahnaz Islam; Rachel E Davis; Lucy Popova; Victoria Lambert; Yoo Jin Cho; Ramzi G Salloum; Jordan Louviere; David Hammond
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 3.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.