| Literature DB >> 30327667 |
Enrica Modica1,2, Dario Rossi2, Giulia Cartocci1, Davide Perrotta1, Paolo Di Feo1, Marco Mancini3, Pietro Aricò1,3,4, Bianca M S Inguscio1, Fabio Babiloni1,3,5.
Abstract
Over the past few decades, antismoking public service announcements (PSAs) have been used by governments to promote healthy behaviours in citizens, for instance, against drinking before the drive and against smoke. Effectiveness of such PSAs has been suggested especially for young persons. By now, PSAs efficacy is still mainly assessed through traditional methods (questionnaires and metrics) and could be performed only after the PSAs broadcasting, leading to waste of economic resources and time in the case of Ineffective PSAs. One possible countermeasure to such ineffective use of PSAs could be promoted by the evaluation of the cerebral reaction to the PSA of particular segments of population (e.g., old, young, and heavy smokers). In addition, it is crucial to gather such cerebral activity in front of PSAs that have been assessed to be effective against smoke (Effective PSAs), comparing results to the cerebral reactions to PSAs that have been certified to be not effective (Ineffective PSAs). The eventual differences between the cerebral responses toward the two PSA groups will provide crucial information about the possible outcome of new PSAs before to its broadcasting. This study focused on adult population, by investigating the cerebral reaction to the vision of different PSA images, which have already been shown to be Effective and Ineffective for the promotion of an antismoking behaviour. Results showed how variables as gender and smoking habits can influence the perception of PSA images, and how different communication styles of the antismoking campaigns could facilitate the comprehension of PSA's message and then enhance the related impact.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30327667 PMCID: PMC6169221 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9721561
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1PSAs selected from the stimuli set. (a, b) Effective PSAs. (c, d) Ineffective PSAs.
Figure 2The graph represents the Effort Index value for both groups (Heavy Smokers (HS) and Nonsmokers (NS)) during the observation of PSA images (Effective and Ineffective) (n=30). Brackets stand for a statistical significance equal to at least p=0.05, or lower. Error bars represent standard error.
Figure 3The graph represents the Effort Index value for the PSA kind images (Effective and Ineffective), on the left, and for Smoking Habit (Heavy Smokers (HS) and Nonsmokers (NS)), on the right (n=30). All results plotted in the graphs are statistically significant with p < 0.05 Error bars represent standard error.
Figure 4The graph represents the effect of the Gender (Female (F) and Male (M) on the EI values reported for both the PSAs selected (Effective and Ineffective) (n=30). Brackets stand for a statistical significance equal to at least p=0.05, or lower. Error bars represent standard error.
Figure 5The graph represents the VA Index value for the PSA kind images (n=30). All results plotted in the graphs are statistically significant with p < 0.05 Error bars represent standard error.
Figure 6The graph represents the VA Index value for the “Gender” variable (n=30). All results plotted in the graphs are statistically significant with p < 0.05 Error bars represent standard error.