Tara Elton-Marshall1, Geoffrey T Fong2, Hua-Hie Yong3, Ron Borland3, Steve Shaowei Xu4, Anne C K Quah4, Guoze Feng5, Yuan Jiang5. 1. Social and Epidemiological Research Department, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, London, Ontario, Canada School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Canada School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 3. The Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 5. Office of Tobacco Control, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The sensory belief that 'light/low tar' cigarettes are smoother can also influence the belief that 'light/low tar' cigarettes are less harmful. However, the 'light' concept is one of several factors influencing beliefs. No studies have examined the impact of the sensory belief about one's own brand of cigarettes on perceptions of harm. OBJECTIVE: The current study examines whether a smoker's sensory belief that their brand is smoother is associated with the belief that their brand is less harmful and whether sensory beliefs mediate the relation between smoking a 'light/low tar' cigarette and relative perceptions of harm among smokers in China. METHODS: Data are from 5209 smokers who were recruited using a stratified multistage sampling design and participated in Wave 3 of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) China Survey, a face-to-face survey of adult smokers and non-smokers in seven cities. RESULTS: Smokers who agreed that their brand of cigarettes was smoother were significantly more likely to say that their brand of cigarettes was less harmful (p<0.001, OR=6.86, 95% CI 5.64 to 8.33). Mediational analyses using the bootstrapping procedure indicated that both the direct effect of 'light/low tar' cigarette smokers on the belief that their cigarettes are less harmful (b=0.24, bootstrapped bias corrected 95% CI 0.13 to 0.34, p<0.001) and the indirect effect via their belief that their cigarettes are smoother were significant (b=0.32, bootstrapped bias-corrected 95% CI 0.28 to 0.37, p<0.001), suggesting that the mediation was partial. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the importance of implementing tobacco control policies that address the impact that cigarette design and marketing can have in capitalising on the smoker's natural associations between smoother sensations and lowered perceptions of harm. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
BACKGROUND: The sensory belief that 'light/low tar' cigarettes are smoother can also influence the belief that 'light/low tar' cigarettes are less harmful. However, the 'light' concept is one of several factors influencing beliefs. No studies have examined the impact of the sensory belief about one's own brand of cigarettes on perceptions of harm. OBJECTIVE: The current study examines whether a smoker's sensory belief that their brand is smoother is associated with the belief that their brand is less harmful and whether sensory beliefs mediate the relation between smoking a 'light/low tar' cigarette and relative perceptions of harm among smokers in China. METHODS: Data are from 5209 smokers who were recruited using a stratified multistage sampling design and participated in Wave 3 of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) China Survey, a face-to-face survey of adult smokers and non-smokers in seven cities. RESULTS: Smokers who agreed that their brand of cigarettes was smoother were significantly more likely to say that their brand of cigarettes was less harmful (p<0.001, OR=6.86, 95% CI 5.64 to 8.33). Mediational analyses using the bootstrapping procedure indicated that both the direct effect of 'light/low tar' cigarette smokers on the belief that their cigarettes are less harmful (b=0.24, bootstrapped bias corrected 95% CI 0.13 to 0.34, p<0.001) and the indirect effect via their belief that their cigarettes are smoother were significant (b=0.32, bootstrapped bias-corrected 95% CI 0.28 to 0.37, p<0.001), suggesting that the mediation was partial. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the importance of implementing tobacco control policies that address the impact that cigarette design and marketing can have in capitalising on the smoker's natural associations between smoother sensations and lowered perceptions of harm. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; Bill King; K Michael Cummings; Geoffrey T Fong; Tara Elton-Marshall; David Hammond; Ann McNeill Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Megan L Saddleson; Emily Gup; Angela Halstead; Darren Mays; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Hua-Hie Yong; Ron Borland; K Michael Cummings; Eric N Lindblom; Lin Li; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Richard J O'Connor; Tara Elton-Marshall; James F Thrasher; David Hammond; Mary E Thompson; Timea R Partos Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Benjamin Albelda; Darren Mays; Valentina Souprountchouk; Daniel P Giovenco; Janet Audrain-McGovern; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Tob Control Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Bill King; Ron Borland; Michael Le Grande; Richard O'Connor; Geoffrey Fong; Ann McNeill; Dorothy Hatsukami; Michael Cummings Journal: Tob Control Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Jennifer L Pearson; Mika Watanabe; Jennifer Sanchez; Suman Mann; Cara Drake; Melissa Mercincavage Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 5.825
Authors: Annika C Green; Geoffrey T Fong; Ron Borland; Anne C K Quah; Hong Gwan Seo; Yeol Kim; Tara Elton-Marshall Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-11-07 Impact factor: 3.295