An-Li Wang1, Steven B Lowen2, Daniel Romer1, Mario Giorno1, Daniel D Langleben3. 1. Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Warning labels on cigarette packages are an important venue for information about the hazards of smoking. The 2009 US Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act mandated replacing the current text-only labels with graphic warning labels. However, labels proposed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were challenged in court by the tobacco companies, who argued successfully that the proposed labels needlessly encroached on their right to free speech, in part because they included images of high emotional salience that indiscriminately frightened rather than informed consumers. METHODS: We used functional MRI to examine the effects of graphic warning labels' emotional salience on smokers' brain activity and cognition. Twenty-four smokers viewed a random sequence of blocks of graphic warning labels that have been rated high or low on an 'emotional reaction' scale in previous research. RESULTS: We found that labels rated high on emotional reaction were better remembered, associated with reduction in the urge to smoke, and produced greater brain response in the amygdala, hippocampi, inferior frontal gyri and the insulae. CONCLUSIONS: Recognition memory and craving are, respectively, correlates of effectiveness of addiction-related public health communications and interventions, and amygdala activation facilitates the encoding of emotional memories. Thus, our results suggest that emotional reaction to graphic warning labels contributes to their public health impact and may be an integral part of the neural mechanisms underlying their effectiveness. Given the urgency of the debate about the constitutional risks and public health benefits of graphic warning labels, these preliminary findings warrant consideration while longitudinal clinical studies are underway. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
BACKGROUND: Warning labels on cigarette packages are an important venue for information about the hazards of smoking. The 2009 US Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act mandated replacing the current text-only labels with graphic warning labels. However, labels proposed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were challenged in court by the tobacco companies, who argued successfully that the proposed labels needlessly encroached on their right to free speech, in part because they included images of high emotional salience that indiscriminately frightened rather than informed consumers. METHODS: We used functional MRI to examine the effects of graphic warning labels' emotional salience on smokers' brain activity and cognition. Twenty-four smokers viewed a random sequence of blocks of graphic warning labels that have been rated high or low on an 'emotional reaction' scale in previous research. RESULTS: We found that labels rated high on emotional reaction were better remembered, associated with reduction in the urge to smoke, and produced greater brain response in the amygdala, hippocampi, inferior frontal gyri and the insulae. CONCLUSIONS: Recognition memory and craving are, respectively, correlates of effectiveness of addiction-related public health communications and interventions, and amygdala activation facilitates the encoding of emotional memories. Thus, our results suggest that emotional reaction to graphic warning labels contributes to their public health impact and may be an integral part of the neural mechanisms underlying their effectiveness. Given the urgency of the debate about the constitutional risks and public health benefits of graphic warning labels, these preliminary findings warrant consideration while longitudinal clinical studies are underway. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advertising and Promotion; Litigation; Packaging and Labelling; Prevention; Public policy
Authors: K K Kwong; J W Belliveau; D A Chesler; I E Goldberg; R M Weisskoff; B P Poncelet; D N Kennedy; B E Hoppel; M S Cohen; R Turner Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1992-06-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Sander M Daselaar; Heather J Rice; Daniel L Greenberg; Roberto Cabeza; Kevin S LaBar; David C Rubin Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2007-06-04 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: René Hurlemann; Michael Wagner; Barbara Hawellek; Harald Reich; Peter Pieperhoff; Katrin Amunts; Ana-Maria Oros-Peusquens; Nadim J Shah; Wolfgang Maier; Raymond J Dolan Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2006-10-06 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Benjamin A Toll; Alana M Rojewski; Lindsay R Duncan; Amy E Latimer-Cheung; Lisa M Fucito; Julie L Boyer; Stephanie S O'Malley; Peter Salovey; Roy S Herbst Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-01-16 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ellen Peters; Brittany Shoots-Reinhard; Abigail T Evans; Abigail Shoben; Elizabeth Klein; Mary Kate Tompkins; Daniel Romer; Martin Tusler Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2019-03-20
Authors: An-Li Wang; Zhenhao Shi; Victoria P Fairchild; Catherine A Aronowitz; Daniel D Langleben Journal: Eur J Public Health Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: Daniel Romer; Stuart G Ferguson; Andrew A Strasser; Abigail T Evans; Mary Kate Tompkins; Joseph Macisco; Michael Fardal; Martin Tusler; Peters Ellen Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2018-01-05
Authors: Kathryn Peebles; Marissa G Hall; Jessica K Pepper; M Justin Byron; Seth M Noar; Noel T Brewer Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2016-09-16 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Nicole Cooper; Steven Tompson; Matthew B O'Donnell; Jean M Vettel; Danielle S Bassett; Emily B Falk Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: James F Thrasher; Noel T Brewer; Jeff Niederdeppe; Ellen Peters; Andrew A Strasser; Rachel Grana; Annette R Kaufman Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 4.244