Literature DB >> 24399267

Examining the relationship between psychosocial and behavioral proxies for future consumption behavior: self-reported impact and bidding behavior in an experimental auction study on cigarette labeling.

Matthew C Rousu1, James F Thrasher.   

Abstract

Experimental and observational research often involves asking consumers to self-report the impact of some proposed option. Because self-reported responses involve no consequence to the respondent for falsely revealing how he or she feels about an issue, self-reports may be subject to social desirability and other influences that bias responses in important ways. In this article, we analyzed data from an experiment on the impact of cigarette packaging and pack warnings, comparing smokers' self-reported impact (four-item scale) and the bids they placed in experimental auctions to estimate differences in demand. The results were consistent across methods; however, the estimated effect size associated with different warning labels was two times greater for the four-item self-reported response scale when compared to the change in demand as indicated by auction bids. Our study provides evidence that self-reported psychosocial responses provide a valid proxy for behavioral change as reflected by experimental auction bidding behavior. More research is needed to better understand the advantages and disadvantages of behavioral economic methods and traditional self-report approaches to evaluating health behavior change interventions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24399267      PMCID: PMC3959201          DOI: 10.1093/her/cyt114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Educ Res        ISSN: 0268-1153


  22 in total

Review 1.  Social marketing in public health.

Authors:  Sonya Grier; Carol A Bryant
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 21.981

2.  The effect of antismoking advertisement executional characteristics on youth comprehension, appraisal, recall, and engagement.

Authors:  Yvonne Terry-McElrath; Melanie Wakefield; Erin Ruel; George I Balch; Sherry Emery; Glen Szczypka; Katherine Clegg-Smith; Brian Flay
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2005-03

3.  Text and graphic warnings on cigarette packages: findings from the international tobacco control four country study.

Authors:  David Hammond; Geoffrey T Fong; Ron Borland; K Michael Cummings; Ann McNeill; Pete Driezen
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Decomposing the value of cigarettes using experimental auctions.

Authors:  Daniel C Monchuk; Matthew C Rousu; Jason F Shogren; James Nonnemaker; Katherine M Kosa
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.244

5.  Estimating the impact of different cigarette package warning label policies: the auction method.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Matthew C Rousu; Rafael Anaya-Ocampo; Luz Myriam Reynales-Shigematsu; Edna Arillo-Santillán; Mauricio Hernández-Avila
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  2007-06-12       Impact factor: 3.913

6.  Do graphic health warning labels have an impact on adolescents' smoking-related beliefs and behaviours?

Authors:  Victoria White; Bernice Webster; Melanie Wakefield
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 6.526

7.  How reactions to cigarette packet health warnings influence quitting: findings from the ITC Four-Country survey.

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

8.  Cigarette warning label policy alternatives and smoking-related health disparities.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Matthew J Carpenter; Jeannette O Andrews; Kevin M Gray; Anthony J Alberg; Ashley Navarro; Daniela B Friedman; K Michael Cummings
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 5.043

9.  Appraisal of anti-smoking advertising by youth at risk for regular smoking: a comparative study in the United States, Australia, and Britain.

Authors:  M Wakefield; R Durrant; Y Terry-McElrath; E Ruel; G I Balch; S Anderson; G Szczypka; S Emery; B Flay
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 7.552

10.  Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: testing effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries.

Authors:  Gerda I J Feunekes; Ilse A Gortemaker; Astrid A Willems; René Lion; Marcelle van den Kommer
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2007-06-03       Impact factor: 3.868

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Systematic Review of Measures Used in Pictorial Cigarette Pack Warning Experiments.

Authors:  Diane B Francis; Marissa G Hall; Seth M Noar; Kurt M Ribisl; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 4.244

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.