Kathleen A Garrison1, Stephanie S O'Malley2, Ralitza Gueorguieva3, Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin2. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, 300 George Street, New Haven, CT, USA. Electronic address: kathleen.garrison@yale.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, 300 George Street, New Haven, CT, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, 60 College Street, New Haven, CT, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes are sold in flavors such as "skittles," "strawberrylicious," and "juicy fruit," and no restrictions are in place on marketing e-cigarettes to youth. Sweets/fruits depicted in e-cigarette advertisements may increase their appeal to youth and interfere with health warnings. This study tested a brain biomarker of product preference for sweet/fruit versus tobacco flavor e-cigarettes, and whether advertising for flavors interfered with warning labels. METHODS:Participants (N = 26) were college-age young adults who had tried an e-cigarette and were susceptible to future e-cigarette use. They viewed advertisements in fMRI for sweet/fruit and tobacco flavor e-cigarettes, menthol and regular cigarettes, and control images of sweets/fruits/mints with no tobacco product. Cue-reactivity was measured in the nucleus accumbens, a brain biomarker of product preference. Advertisements randomly contained warning labels, and recognition of health warnings was tested post-scan. Visual attention was measured using eye-tracking. RESULTS: There was a significant effect of e-cigarette condition (sweet/tobacco/control) on nucleus accumbens activity, that was not found for cigarette condition (menthol/regular/control). Nucleus accumbens activity was greater for sweet/fruit versus tobacco flavor e-cigarette advertisements and did not differ compared with control images of sweets and fruits. Greater nucleus accumbens activity was correlated with poorer memory for health warnings. CONCLUSIONS: These and exploratory eye-tracking findings suggest that advertising for sweet/fruit flavors may increase positive associations with e-cigarettes and/or override negative associations with tobacco, and interfere with health warnings, suggesting that one way to reduce the appeal of e-cigarettes to youth and educate youth about e-cigarette health risks is to regulate advertising for flavors.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes are sold in flavors such as "skittles," "strawberrylicious," and "juicy fruit," and no restrictions are in place on marketing e-cigarettes to youth. Sweets/fruits depicted in e-cigarette advertisements may increase their appeal to youth and interfere with health warnings. This study tested a brain biomarker of product preference for sweet/fruit versus tobacco flavor e-cigarettes, and whether advertising for flavors interfered with warning labels. METHODS:Participants (N = 26) were college-age young adults who had tried an e-cigarette and were susceptible to future e-cigarette use. They viewed advertisements in fMRI for sweet/fruit and tobacco flavor e-cigarettes, menthol and regular cigarettes, and control images of sweets/fruits/mints with no tobacco product. Cue-reactivity was measured in the nucleus accumbens, a brain biomarker of product preference. Advertisements randomly contained warning labels, and recognition of health warnings was tested post-scan. Visual attention was measured using eye-tracking. RESULTS: There was a significant effect of e-cigarette condition (sweet/tobacco/control) on nucleus accumbens activity, that was not found for cigarette condition (menthol/regular/control). Nucleus accumbens activity was greater for sweet/fruit versus tobacco flavor e-cigarette advertisements and did not differ compared with control images of sweets and fruits. Greater nucleus accumbens activity was correlated with poorer memory for health warnings. CONCLUSIONS: These and exploratory eye-tracking findings suggest that advertising for sweet/fruit flavors may increase positive associations with e-cigarettes and/or override negative associations with tobacco, and interfere with health warnings, suggesting that one way to reduce the appeal of e-cigarettes to youth and educate youth about e-cigarette health risks is to regulate advertising for flavors.
Authors: Sarah M Klein; Gary A Giovino; Dianne C Barker; Cindy Tworek; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Darren Mays; Stephen E Gilman; Richard Rende; George Luta; Kenneth P Tercyak; Raymond S Niaura Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2014-03-03 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Bridget K Ambrose; Hannah R Day; Brian Rostron; Kevin P Conway; Nicolette Borek; Andrew Hyland; Andrea C Villanti Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Cheryl L Perry; MeLisa R Creamer; Benjamin W Chaffee; Jennifer B Unger; Erin L Sutfin; Grace Kong; Ce Shang; Stephanie L Clendennen; Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin; Mary Ann Pentz Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Laura R Stroud; George D Papandonatos; Katelyn Borba; Tessa Kehoe; Lori A J Scott-Sheldon Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2018-10-29 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Zhenhao Shi; An-Li Wang; Victoria P Fairchild; Catherine A Aronowitz; Kevin G Lynch; James Loughead; Daniel D Langleben Journal: Tob Control Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Kathleen A Garrison; Kelly S DeMartini; Philip R Corlett; Patrick D Worhunsky; John H Krystal; Stephanie S O'Malley Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 4.280