» Articles » PMID: 9651633

Smokers' Misperceptions of Light and Ultra-light Cigarettes May Keep Them Smoking

Overview
Journal Am J Prev Med
Specialty Public Health
Date 1998 Jul 4
PMID 9651633
Citations 70
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: This study examined smokers' understanding of the relative tar deliveries of Ultra-light, Light, and Regular cigarettes, reasons for smoking Ultra-light/Light cigarettes, and the likelihood of both quitting smoking and switching to Regular cigarettes if they came to learn that one Ultra-light/Light cigarette gave the same amount of tar as one Regular cigarette.

Design: Ten- to fifteen-minute random-digit-dialed, computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI) were conducted with both a national probability sample (n = 788) and a state random sample (n = 266) of daily smokers over the age of 18.

Results: Less than 10% of smokers in the national sample and only 14% of smokers in the state sample knew that one Light cigarette could give the same amount of tar as one Regular cigarette. Less than 10% of smokers in the state sample knew that one Ultra-light cigarette could give the same amount of tar as one Regular cigarette. Thirty-two percent of the Light and 26% of the Ultra-light smokers in the national sample, and 27% of Light and 25% of Ultra-light smokers in the state sample, said they would be likely to quit smoking if they learned one Light/Ultra-light equaled one Regular.

Conclusion: Many Light and Ultra-light smokers are smoking these cigarettes to reduce the risks of smoking and/or as a step toward quitting. However, these smokers are unaware that one Ultra-light/Light cigarette can give them the same amount of tar and nicotine as one Regular cigarette. Many of the Ultra-light/Light smokers sampled in this study stated that they would be likely to quit if they knew this information. Mistaken beliefs about low-yield brands are reducing intentions to quit smoking.

Citing Articles

Smokers Awareness and Risk Perceptions of Filter Ventilation.

Caruso R, Fix B, Ingabire M, Bansal-Travers M, Rees V, Cummings K Tob Regul Sci. 2024; 6(3):213-223.

PMID: 38957357 PMC: 11218909. DOI: 10.18001/trs.6.3.6.


Believability of messaging concerning a hypothetical product standard to lower a constituent in cigarettes or smokeless tobacco among U.S. Adults who use tobacco.

Venrick S, Margolis K, Bernat J, Donaldson E, Pepper J, Eggers M Prev Med Rep. 2024; 37:102544.

PMID: 38169982 PMC: 10758972. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102544.


Organic, Earth-Friendly Tobacco With a Charcoal Filter and Smooth Taste: A Randomized Experiment Testing Effects of Natural American Spirit's "Sky" Cigarette Advertising on Consumer Perceptions.

Gratale S, Pearson J, Mercincavage M, Wackowski O Nicotine Tob Res. 2023; 26(2):161-168.

PMID: 37349148 PMC: 10803116. DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntad099.


Is a cigarette brand with fewer chemicals safer? Public perceptions in two national US experiments.

Byron M, Lazard A, Brewer N J Behav Med. 2022; 45(5):812-817.

PMID: 35688959 PMC: 10990283. DOI: 10.1007/s10865-022-00329-y.


Smokers' awareness of filter ventilation, and how they believe it affects them: findings from the ITC Four Country Survey.

King B, Borland R, Le Grande M, OConnor R, Fong G, McNeill A Tob Control. 2021; .

PMID: 34131073 PMC: 8717261. DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-056134.