Seema Mutti1, Jessica L Reid2, Prakash C Gupta3, Mangesh S Pednekar3, Gauri Dhumal3, Nigar Nargis4, Akm Ghulam Hussain5, David Hammond1. 1. School of Public Health & Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 2. Propel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 3. Healis-Sekhsaria Institute for Public Health, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 4. Department of Economics, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 5. Department of Economics, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the perceived effectiveness of text and pictorial smokeless tobacco health warnings in India and Bangladesh, including different types of message content. METHODS: An experimental study was conducted in Navi Mumbai, India (n=1002), and Dhaka, Bangladesh (n=1081). Face-to-face interviews were conducted on tablets with adult (≥19 years) smokeless tobacco users and youth (16-18 years) users and non-users. Respondents viewed warnings depicting five health effects, within one of the four randomly assigned warning label conditions (or message themes): (1) text-only, (2) symbolic pictorial, (3) graphic pictorial or (4) personal testimonial pictorial messages. RESULTS: Text-only warnings were perceived as less effective than all of the pictorial styles (p<0.001 for all). Graphic warnings were given higher effectiveness ratings than symbolic or testimonial warnings (p<0.001). No differences were observed in levels of agreement with negative attitudes and beliefs across message themes, after respondents had viewed warnings. CONCLUSIONS: Pictorial warnings are more effective than text-only messages. Pictorial warnings depicting graphic health effects may have the greatest impact, consistent with research from high-income countries on cigarette warnings. 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/
OBJECTIVE: To examine the perceived effectiveness of text and pictorial smokeless tobacco health warnings in India and Bangladesh, including different types of message content. METHODS: An experimental study was conducted in Navi Mumbai, India (n=1002), and Dhaka, Bangladesh (n=1081). Face-to-face interviews were conducted on tablets with adult (≥19 years) smokeless tobacco users and youth (16-18 years) users and non-users. Respondents viewed warnings depicting five health effects, within one of the four randomly assigned warning label conditions (or message themes): (1) text-only, (2) symbolic pictorial, (3) graphic pictorial or (4) personal testimonial pictorial messages. RESULTS: Text-only warnings were perceived as less effective than all of the pictorial styles (p<0.001 for all). Graphic warnings were given higher effectiveness ratings than symbolic or testimonial warnings (p<0.001). No differences were observed in levels of agreement with negative attitudes and beliefs across message themes, after respondents had viewed warnings. CONCLUSIONS: Pictorial warnings are more effective than text-only messages. Pictorial warnings depicting graphic health effects may have the greatest impact, consistent with research from high-income countries on cigarette warnings. 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/
Entities:
Keywords:
Low/Middle income country; Non-cigarette tobacco products; Packaging and Labelling
Authors: Seema Mutti-Packer; Jessica L Reid; James F Thrasher; Daniel Romer; Geoffrey T Fong; Prakash C Gupta; Mangesh S Pednekar; Nigar Nargis; David Hammond Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: David Hammond; Jessica L Reid; Pete Driezen; James F Thrasher; Prakash C Gupta; Nigar Nargis; Qiang Li; Jiang Yuan; Christian Boudreau; Geoffrey T Fong; K Michael Cummings; Ron Borland Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Taghrid Asfar; Sara Chehab; Michael Schmidt; Kenneth D Ward; Wasim Maziak; Rima Nakkash Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2022-08-06 Impact factor: 5.825
Authors: Shannon Gravely; Geoffrey T Fong; Pete Driezen; Steve Xu; Anne C K Quah; Genevieve Sansone; Prakash C Gupta; Mangesh S Pednekar Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-12-13 Impact factor: 3.295