Literature DB >> 32994296

Shedding 'light' on cigarette pack design: colour differences in product perceptions, use and exposure following the US descriptor ban.

Melissa Mercincavage1, Benjamin Albelda2, Darren Mays3, Valentina Souprountchouk2, Daniel P Giovenco4, Janet Audrain-McGovern2, Andrew A Strasser2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Many countries removed misleading descriptors (eg, 'light,' 'mild') from cigarette packaging because they falsely conveyed messages of reduced risk. It is unclear if relabelled products currently promote misperceptions or differences in product use and toxicant exposure. We compared product perceptions, use and exposure between a US sample of Marlboro Gold (formerly 'light') and Red smokers.
METHODS: 240 non-treatment-seeking adult daily Marlboro smokers (70% male, 71% White, mean cigarettes/day=16.4 (SD=8.3)) completed two laboratory sessions over a 5-day period. During sessions, participants smoked two cigarettes through a topography device to capture their puffing behaviour, provided precigarette and postcigarette carbon monoxide (CO) assessments, and completed risk perception and subjective rating questionnaires. Self-reported cigarettes per day were verified via daily filter collection; urine collected at the end of the period was assayed for nicotine metabolites.
RESULTS: Gold (n=49) smokers were more likely than Red (n=191) to incorrectly believe their cigarettes had less nicotine and tar than regular cigarettes (ps<0.001), and rated them as weaker, less harsh, and mild tasting (ps<0.05). Differences between Red and Gold smokers in cigarettes per day and puffing behaviours trended towards significance (ps<0.1). Notably, there were no group differences on CO boost or total nicotine equivalents (ps>0.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Misperceptions about nicotine and tar exist years after rebranding Marlboro Lights as Marlboro Gold. Biological results support that Gold smokers do not have lower toxicant exposure. The US should consider comprehensive packaging or product design regulations to properly inform smokers of product risks.Trial registeration number NCT02301351. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  advertising and promotion; nicotine; packaging and labelling; public policy; smoking topography

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32994296      PMCID: PMC8261712          DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-055886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tob Control        ISSN: 0964-4563            Impact factor:   7.552


  25 in total

Review 1.  Cigarette filter ventilation is a defective design because of misleading taste, bigger puffs, and blocked vents.

Authors:  L T Kozlowski; R J O'Connor
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  The cigarette pack as image: new evidence from tobacco industry documents.

Authors:  M Wakefield; C Morley; J K Horan; K M Cummings
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 3.  The dark side of marketing seemingly "Light" cigarettes: successful images and failed fact.

Authors:  R W Pollay; T Dewhirst
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 7.552

4.  What happened to smokers' beliefs about light cigarettes when "light/mild" brand descriptors were banned in the UK? Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey.

Authors:  R Borland; G T Fong; H-H Yong; K M Cummings; D Hammond; B King; M Siahpush; A McNeill; G Hastings; R J O'Connor; T Elton-Marshall; M P Zanna
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2008-04-21       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  Awareness of FDA-mandated cigarette packaging changes among smokers of 'light' cigarettes.

Authors:  M Falcone; M Bansal-Travers; P M Sanborn; K Z Tang; A A Strasser
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2014-12-08

6.  Beyond light and mild: cigarette brand descriptors and perceptions of risk in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey.

Authors:  Seema Mutti; David Hammond; Ron Borland; Michael K Cummings; Richard J O'Connor; Geoffrey T Fong
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 6.526

7.  Smokers' sensory beliefs mediate the relation between smoking a light/low tar cigarette and perceptions of harm.

Authors:  Tara Elton-Marshall; Geoffrey T Fong; Hua-Hie Yong; Ron Borland; Steve Shaowei Xu; Anne C K Quah; Guoze Feng; Yuan Jiang
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 7.552

8.  A Randomized Controlled Trial of Progressively Reduced Nicotine Content Cigarettes on Smoking Behaviors, Biomarkers of Exposure, and Subjective Ratings.

Authors:  Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Kathy Z Tang; Rachel L Dumont; E Paul Wileyto; Steven G Carmella; Stephen S Hecht; Andrew A Strasser
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  PREP advertisement features affect smokers' beliefs regarding potential harm.

Authors:  A A Strasser; K Z Tang; M D Tuller; J N Cappella
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 7.552

10.  The effect of menthol on cigarette smoking behaviors, biomarkers and subjective responses.

Authors:  Andrew A Strasser; Rebecca L Ashare; Madeline Kaufman; Kathy Z Tang; A Clementina Mesaros; Ian A Blair
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 4.254

View more
  5 in total

1.  Responses to reduced nicotine cigarette marketing features: a systematic review.

Authors:  Andrea C Johnson; Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Sasha Rogelberg; Anupreet K Sidhu; Cristine D Delnevo; Andrew A Strasser
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2021-10-07       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Construct validity of the Cigarette Ratings Scale and associations with tobacco use and product feature outcomes.

Authors:  Andrea C Johnson; Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Anupreet K Sidhu; Andrea C Villanti; Cristine D Delnevo; Andrew A Strasser
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 4.852

3.  Risk perceptions and continued smoking as a function of cigarette filter ventilation level among US youth and young adults who smoke.

Authors:  Dana Mowls Carroll; Katelyn M Tessier; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor; Sarah Reisinger; Peter G Shields; Irina S Stepanov; Xianghua Luo; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Vaughan W Rees
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 6.953

4.  Comparing video observation to electronic topography device as a method for measuring cigarette puffing behavior.

Authors:  Melissa Mercincavage; Joshua L Karelitz; Catherine L Kreider; Valentina Souprountchouk; Benjamin Albelda; Andrew A Strasser
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 4.492

5.  Smokers' perceptions of different classes of cigarette brand descriptors.

Authors:  Nicholas J Felicione; Kaila J Norton; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Vaughan W Rees; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor
Journal:  Tob Prev Cessat       Date:  2021-02-09
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.