Literature DB >> 30726984

Can Removing Tar Information From Cigarette Packages Reduce Smokers' Misconceptions About Low-Tar Cigarettes? An Experiment From One of the World's Lowest Tar Yield Markets, South Korea.

Hye-Jin Paek1, Timothy Dewhirst2, Thomas Hove1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Despite regulations that forbid cigarette packages from displaying messages such as "mild," "low-tar," and "light," many smokers still have misperceptions about "light" or "low-tar" cigarettes. One reason may be that tar amount displays continue to be permitted. This study examines whether removing tar delivery information from packaging reduces consumer misperceptions about "low-tar" cigarettes.
METHODS: An online experiment was conducted in South Korea among 531 smokers who were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: with and without tar information on cigarette packages. Participants evaluated which type of cigarette was mildest, least harmful, easiest for nonsmokers to start smoking, and easiest for smokers to quit.
RESULTS: Ten out of 12 chi-square tests showed that people judged the lowest reported tar delivery cigarette to be the mildest (p < .01), least harmful (p < .05), easiest to start (p < .05), and easiest to quit (p < .05)-less so in the "no-tar" condition than the "tar" condition. A higher level of misbeliefs about supposed low-tar cigarettes were found in the "tar" condition compared to the "no-tar" condition for all three brands (t = 5.85, 4.07, 3.82, respectively, p < .001). Regression analyses showed that the "no-tar" condition negatively predicted the level of misbeliefs after controlling for demographic and smoking-related variables (B [SE] = -.72 (.12), -.50 (.12), -.48 (.13), respectively, p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Banning reported tar deliveries from cigarette packages is likely to reduce smokers' misconceptions about "low-tar" cigarettes. When reported tar deliveries are absent, smokers have inconsistent judgments about differently packaged cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: When cigarette packages depict lower reported tar number deliveries, participants erroneously perceive them to be less harmful than packages displaying higher tar numbers. These misperceptions of harm may prompt smokers who might otherwise attempt to quit smoking to instead consume cigarettes with lower tar deliveries due to the mistaken belief that they will reduce their risk.
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 30726984     DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntz016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res        ISSN: 1462-2203            Impact factor:   4.244


  4 in total

1.  Lifestyle, body mass index, diabetes, and the risk of pancreatic cancer in a nationwide population-based cohort study with 7.4 million Korean subjects.

Authors:  Byung Kyu Park; Jeong Hun Seo; Jae Bock Chung; Jung Kyu Choi
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2022-04-20       Impact factor: 9.075

2.  The impacts of including information about the number of carcinogens in smoke on standardized cigarette packs in the UK.

Authors:  Crawford Moodie; Catherine Best; Nathan Critchlow; Sara Hitchman; Martine Stead; Ann McNeill
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2021-10-26       Impact factor: 3.367

3.  Machine-assessed tar yield marketing on cigarette packages from two cities in South Korea.

Authors:  Michael Iacobelli; Juhee Cho; Kevin Welding; Kate Smith; Joanna E Cohen
Journal:  Tob Induc Dis       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 2.600

4.  Impact of Cigarette Filter Ventilation on U.S. Smokers' Perceptions and Biomarkers of Exposure and Potential Harm.

Authors:  Dana M Carroll; Irina Stepanov; Richard O'Connor; Xianghua Luo; K Michael Cummings; Vaughan W Rees; Warren K Bickel; Micah L Berman; David L Ashley; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Peter G Shields; Dorothy K Hatsukami
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 4.090

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.