Elizabeth G Klein1, Abigail B Shoben2, Sarah Krygowski1, Amy Ferketich3, Micah Berman4, Ellen Peters5, Unnava Rao6, Mary Ellen Wewers1. 1. Division of Health Behavior & Health Promotion, The Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, OH. 2. Division of Biostatistics, The Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, OH. 3. Division of Epidemiology, The Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, OH. 4. Division of Health Services, Management and Policy, The Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, OH. 5. Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University College of Arts & Sciences, Columbus, OH. 6. Department of Marketing and Logistics, The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business, Columbus, OH.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the attention paid to larger sizes of graphic health warnings (GHWs) embedded within cigarette advertisements so as to assess their impacts on rural smokers. METHODS:Daily smokers (N = 298) were randomly assigned to view a cigarette advertisement with 3 conditions: 2 intervention conditions with GHW comprising 20% or 33% of the ad area, or a text-only control. Eye-tracking software measured attention in milliseconds. Binary outcome mediation was conducted. RESULTS: Intervention participants spent 24% of their time viewing the GHWs, compared to 10% for control (p < .01). The odds of GHW recall in the combined (20% and 33%) intervention group were 3.3 times higher than controls. Total dwell time mediated 33% of the effect of the graphic condition on any recall. CONCLUSIONS: GHWs in 20% of cigarette advertisement space attracted significantly more attention than text-only warnings; larger GHWs did not increase attention. Attention was significantly associated with warning recall; total time viewing mediated warning recall. Tobacco ads should include GHWs to attract the attention of smokers.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the attention paid to larger sizes of graphic health warnings (GHWs) embedded within cigarette advertisements so as to assess their impacts on rural smokers. METHODS: Daily smokers (N = 298) were randomly assigned to view a cigarette advertisement with 3 conditions: 2 intervention conditions with GHW comprising 20% or 33% of the ad area, or a text-only control. Eye-tracking software measured attention in milliseconds. Binary outcome mediation was conducted. RESULTS: Intervention participants spent 24% of their time viewing the GHWs, compared to 10% for control (p < .01). The odds of GHW recall in the combined (20% and 33%) intervention group were 3.3 times higher than controls. Total dwell time mediated 33% of the effect of the graphic condition on any recall. CONCLUSIONS:GHWs in 20% of cigarette advertisement space attracted significantly more attention than text-only warnings; larger GHWs did not increase attention. Attention was significantly associated with warning recall; total time viewing mediated warning recall. Tobacco ads should include GHWs to attract the attention of smokers.
Entities:
Keywords:
advertising; eye tracking; graphic warning; health communication; smoking
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
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
Authors: Amy McQueen; Matthew W Kreuter; Sonia Boyum; Vetta S Thompson; Charlene A Caburnay; Erika A Waters; Kimberly A Kaphingst; Suchitra Rath; Qiang Fu Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Andrew A Strasser; Kathy Z Tang; Daniel Romer; Christopher Jepson; Joseph N Cappella Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 5.043
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
Authors: Sherry T Liu; Julianna M Nemeth; Elizabeth G Klein; Amy K Ferketich; Mei-Po Kwan; Mary Ellen Wewers Journal: Tob Control Date: 2012-10-09 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Chris Skurka; Motasem Kalaji; Michael C Dorf; Deena Kemp; Amelia Greiner Safi; Sahara Byrne; Alan D Mathios; Rosemary J Avery; Jeff Niederdeppe Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Chris Skurka; Deena Kemp; Julie Davydova; James F Thrasher; Sahara Byrne; Amelia Greiner Safi; Rosemary J Avery; Michael C Dorf; Alan D Mathios; Leah Scolere; Jeff Niederdeppe Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 4.244
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
Authors: Kirsten Lochbuehler; Melissa Mercincavage; Kathy Z Tang; C Dana Tomlin; Joseph N Cappella; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Tob Control Date: 2017-05-16 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Stephen T Higgins; Allison N Kurti; Marissa Palmer; Jennifer W Tidey; Antonio Cepeda-Benito; Maria R Cooper; Nicolle M Krebs; Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati; Joy L Hart; Cassandra A Stanton Journal: Prev Med Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Kristen L Jarman; Sarah D Kowitt; Tara L Queen; Leah M Ranney; KyungSu Kim; Ellen E Jones; Emily Donovan; Adam O Goldstein Journal: Tob Regul Sci Date: 2018-11
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Jordan Burdge; Kirsten Lochbuehler; Valentina Souprountchouk; Alexandra A McCullough; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Tob Regul Sci Date: 2018-11