» Articles » PMID: 28031378

Cigarette Graphic Warning Labels Are Not Created Equal: They Can Increase or Decrease Smokers' Quit Intentions Relative to Text-Only Warnings

Overview
Specialty Public Health
Date 2016 Dec 30
PMID 28031378
Citations 26
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Cigarette graphic-warning labels elicit negative emotion. Research suggests negative emotion drives greater risk perceptions and quit intentions through multiple processes. The present research compares text-only warning effectiveness to that of graphic warnings eliciting more or less negative emotion.

Methods: Nationally representative online panels of 736 adult smokers and 469 teen smokers/vulnerable smokers were randomly assigned to view one of three warning types (text-only, text with low-emotion images, or text with high-emotion images) four times over 2 weeks. Participants recorded their emotional reaction to the warnings (measured as arousal), smoking risk perceptions, and quit intentions. Primary analyses used structural equation modeling.

Results: Participants in the high-emotion condition reported greater emotional reaction than text-only participants (bAdult = 0.21; bTeen = 0.27, p's < .004); those in the low-emotion condition reported lower emotional reaction than text-only participants (bAdult = -0.18; bTeen = -0.22, p's < .018). Stronger emotional reaction was associated with increased risk perceptions in both samples (bAdult = 0.66; bTeen = 0.85, p's < .001) and greater quit intentions among adults (bAdult = 1.00, p < .001). Compared to text-only warnings, low-emotion warnings were associated with reduced risk perceptions and quit intentions whereas high-emotion warnings were associated with increased risk perceptions and quit intentions.

Conclusion: Warning labels with images that elicit more negative emotional reaction are associated with increased risk perceptions and quit intentions in adults and teens relative to text-only warnings. However, graphic warnings containing images which evoke little emotional reaction can backfire and reduce risk perceptions and quit intentions versus text-only warnings.

Implications: This research is the first to directly manipulate two emotion levels in sets of nine cigarette graphic warning images and compare them with text-only warnings. Among adult and teen smokers, high-emotion graphic warnings were associated with increased risk perceptions and quit intentions versus text-only warnings. Low-emotion graphic warnings backfired and tended to reduce risk perceptions and quit intentions versus text-only warnings. Policy makers should be aware that merely placing images on cigarette packaging is insufficient to increase smokers' risk perceptions and quit intentions. Low-emotion graphic warnings will not necessarily produce desired population-level benefits relative to text-only or high-emotion warnings.

Citing Articles

Smoking cessation policy and treatments derived from the protective motivation of smokers: a study on graphic health warning labels.

Pang Q, Wang L, Yao J, Yuen K, Su M, Fang M Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1205321.

PMID: 38022915 PMC: 10644284. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1205321.


Evaluation of the smoking cessation effects of QuitAction, a smartphone WeChat platform.

Xie J, Qiu Y, Zhu L, Hu Y, Chang X, Wang W Tob Induc Dis. 2023; 21:49.

PMID: 37057059 PMC: 10088363. DOI: 10.18332/tid/161257.


Effects of emotional arousal on the neural impact and behavioral efficacy of cigarette graphic warning labels.

Shi Z, Wang A, Fairchild V, Aronowitz C, Padley J, Lynch K Addiction. 2022; 118(5):914-924.

PMID: 36562154 PMC: 10081532. DOI: 10.1111/add.16112.


Exploring factors that influence COVID-19 vaccination intention in China: Media use preference, knowledge level and risk perception.

Chen X, Liu Y, Yu G Front Psychol. 2022; 13:954073.

PMID: 36172238 PMC: 9511104. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954073.


Operating on Anxiety: Negative Affect toward Breast Cancer and Choosing Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy.

Silverstein M, Lee C, Scherer L, Phommasathit C, Merrill A, Peters E Med Decis Making. 2022; 43(2):152-163.

PMID: 36059240 PMC: 9898882. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X221121134.


References
1.
Cameron L, Pepper J, Brewer N . Responses of young adults to graphic warning labels for cigarette packages. Tob Control. 2013; 24(e1):e14-22. PMC: 3884029. DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050645. View

2.
Peters E, Romer D, Slovic P, Hall Jamieson K, Wharfield L, Mertz C . The impact and acceptability of Canadian-style cigarette warning labels among U.S. smokers and nonsmokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2007; 9(4):473-81. DOI: 10.1080/14622200701239639. View

3.
Romer D, Peters E, Strasser A, Langleben D . Desire versus efficacy in smokers' paradoxical reactions to pictorial health warnings for cigarettes. PLoS One. 2013; 8(1):e54937. PMC: 3558430. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054937. View

4.
Dillard A, Ferrer R, Ubel P, Fagerlin A . Risk perception measures' associations with behavior intentions, affect, and cognition following colon cancer screening messages. Health Psychol. 2011; 31(1):106-13. DOI: 10.1037/a0024787. View

5.
Hammond D, Fong G, Borland R, Cummings K, McNeill A, Driezen P . Text and graphic warnings on cigarette packages: findings from the international tobacco control four country study. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 32(3):202-9. PMC: 1868456. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2006.11.011. View