Jennifer C Morgan1, Michelle Jeong2, Jennifer Mendel-Sheldon3, Seth M Noar4, Kurt M Ribisl3, Noel T Brewer3. 1. Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, United States; Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, United States. Electronic address: Jennifer.Morgan@asc.upenn.edu. 2. Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, United States; Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers University, United States. 3. Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, United States; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, United States. 4. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, United States; Hussman School of Journalism and Media, University of North Carolina, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Tobacco butts are the most littered item worldwide and pose a critical environmental and public health hazard. Given the positive impact of required graphic warnings on smoking, we sought to assess the impact of a policy requiring cigarette pack anti-littering messages on smokers' littering intentions. METHODS: We randomly assigned US adult smokers (n = 719) to receive labels on the side of their cigarette packs for three weeks: anti-littering messages or messages about chemicals in cigarette smoke. RESULTS: Anti-littering messages elicited higher intentions to refrain from littering in the next month compared to chemical messages (p < .05). Anti-littering messages also led to increased knowledge about cigarette butts being the most common form of litter, the number of conversations about littering, and thinking about the proper disposal of cigarettes (all p < .05). Finally, smoking from packs labeled with anti-littering messages led to fewer weeks littering from car windows compared to packs labeled with chemical messages (p < .05), but did not affect completely refraining from littering cigarette butts. Mediators of the messages' impact on littering intentions were thinking about proper cigarette butt disposal and perceived message effectiveness (both p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Policies requiring anti-littering messages on cigarette packs would raise awareness about the problem of cigarette butt litter and bolster intentions to not litter.
OBJECTIVE: Tobacco butts are the most littered item worldwide and pose a critical environmental and public health hazard. Given the positive impact of required graphic warnings on smoking, we sought to assess the impact of a policy requiring cigarette pack anti-littering messages on smokers' littering intentions. METHODS: We randomly assigned US adult smokers (n = 719) to receive labels on the side of their cigarette packs for three weeks: anti-littering messages or messages about chemicals in cigarette smoke. RESULTS: Anti-littering messages elicited higher intentions to refrain from littering in the next month compared to chemical messages (p < .05). Anti-littering messages also led to increased knowledge about cigarette butts being the most common form of litter, the number of conversations about littering, and thinking about the proper disposal of cigarettes (all p < .05). Finally, smoking from packs labeled with anti-littering messages led to fewer weeks littering from car windows compared to packs labeled with chemical messages (p < .05), but did not affect completely refraining from littering cigarette butts. Mediators of the messages' impact on littering intentions were thinking about proper cigarette butt disposal and perceived message effectiveness (both p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Policies requiring anti-littering messages on cigarette packs would raise awareness about the problem of cigarette butt litter and bolster intentions to not litter.
Authors: Noel T Brewer; Marissa G Hall; Joseph G L Lee; Kathryn Peebles; Seth M Noar; Kurt M Ribisl Journal: Tob Control Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Ahmed Jamal; Brian A King; Linda J Neff; Jennifer Whitmill; Stephen D Babb; Corinne M Graffunder Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Jessica M Rath; Rebecca A Rubenstein; Laurel E Curry; Sarah E Shank; Julia C Cartwright Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Thomas E Novotny; Sarah N Hardin; Lynn R Hovda; Dale J Novotny; Mary Kay McLean; Safdar Khan Journal: Tob Control Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Noel T Brewer; Michelle Jeong; Jennifer R Mendel; Marissa G Hall; Dongyu Zhang; Humberto Parada; Marcella H Boynton; Seth M Noar; Sabeeh A Baig; Jennifer C Morgan; Kurt M Ribisl Journal: Tob Control Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 7.552