Pallav Pokhrel1, Pebbles Fagan2, Thaddeus A Herzog3, Qimei Chen4, Nicholas Muranaka5, Lisa Kehl6, Jennifer B Unger7. 1. Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA. Electronic address: ppokhrel@cc.hawaii.edu. 2. Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA. Electronic address: pfagan@cc.hawaii.edu. 3. Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA. Electronic address: therzog@cc.hawaii.edu. 4. Department of Marketing, Shidler College of Business, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA. Electronic address: qimie@hawaii.edu. 5. Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA. Electronic address: nmuranaka@cc.hawaii.edu. 6. Health Promotion Services, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA. Electronic address: kehl@hawaii.edu. 7. Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, USA. Electronic address: unger@usc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study tested whether exposure to e-cigarette advertising affects the subliminal-spontaneous or automatic-attitudes towards e-cigarettes as a more pleasant or safer alternative to cigarettes among non-smoking young adults. METHODS: 187 young adult (mean age=21.9; SD=4.1) current non-smokers who had never used an e-cigarette were randomly assigned to one of the 3 conditions that involved viewing magazine advertisements. Two of the 3 conditions were experimental conditions where thematically different [harm-reduction ("Health") vs. social enhancement ("Social") focused] e-cigarette ads were interspersed among ads of everyday objects. The third condition was the control condition in which participants viewed ads of everyday objects only. Participants provided data on explicit (e.g., harm perceptions) and implicit [e.g., Implicit Association Test (IAT), Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP)] measures after viewing the ads. RESULTS: Relative to the Control condition, participants in the Social condition showed 2.8 times higher odds of being open to using an e-cigarette in the future. Participants in the Health condition showed significantly higher implicit attitudes towards e-cigarettes as a safer alternative to cigarettes than participants in the Control condition. E-cigarette stimuli elicited more positive spontaneous affective reactions among participants in the Social condition than participants in the Health condition. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette ads may implicitly promote e-cigarettes as a reduced-harm cigarette alternative. Marketing of e-cigarette use as a way to enhance social life or self-image may encourage non-smoking young adults to try e-cigarettes. Findings may inform regulations on e-cigarette marketing.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: This study tested whether exposure to e-cigarette advertising affects the subliminal-spontaneous or automatic-attitudes towards e-cigarettes as a more pleasant or safer alternative to cigarettes among non-smoking young adults. METHODS: 187 young adult (mean age=21.9; SD=4.1) current non-smokers who had never used an e-cigarette were randomly assigned to one of the 3 conditions that involved viewing magazine advertisements. Two of the 3 conditions were experimental conditions where thematically different [harm-reduction ("Health") vs. social enhancement ("Social") focused] e-cigarette ads were interspersed among ads of everyday objects. The third condition was the control condition in which participants viewed ads of everyday objects only. Participants provided data on explicit (e.g., harm perceptions) and implicit [e.g., Implicit Association Test (IAT), Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP)] measures after viewing the ads. RESULTS: Relative to the Control condition, participants in the Social condition showed 2.8 times higher odds of being open to using an e-cigarette in the future. Participants in the Health condition showed significantly higher implicit attitudes towards e-cigarettes as a safer alternative to cigarettes than participants in the Control condition. E-cigarette stimuli elicited more positive spontaneous affective reactions among participants in the Social condition than participants in the Health condition. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette ads may implicitly promote e-cigarettes as a reduced-harm cigarette alternative. Marketing of e-cigarette use as a way to enhance social life or self-image may encourage non-smoking young adults to try e-cigarettes. Findings may inform regulations on e-cigarette marketing.
Authors: Jennifer C Duke; Youn O Lee; Annice E Kim; Kimberly A Watson; Kristin Y Arnold; James M Nonnemaker; Lauren Porter Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Daniel S Kreitzberg; Josephine T Hinds; Keryn E Pasch; Alexandra Loukas; Cheryl L Perry Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Kimberly G Wagoner; Micah Berman; Shyanika W Rose; Eunyoung Song; Jennifer Cornacchione Ross; Elizabeth G Klein; Dannielle E Kelley; Jessica L King; Mark Wolfson; Erin L Sutfin Journal: Tob Control Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Lauren Collins; Allison M Glasser; Haneen Abudayyeh; Jennifer L Pearson; Andrea C Villanti Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 4.244