Search

Introduction: Many people incorrectly think that very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes are less carcinogenic than current cigarettes. This risk misperception by people who smoke could reduce motivation to quit under a nicotine reduction policy. We qualitatively examined perspectives on campaign messages designed to reduce misperceptions.Aims and Methods: Adults who smoke from North Carolina participated in online interviews. After being introduced to the idea of a VLNC policy, participants were shown VLNC messages and asked about their perceptions on the clarity, understandability, persuasiveness, and meaning of the messages. We conducted a thematic content analysis of the transcripts.Results: Thirty adults who smoke cigarettes participated (15 females, 13 males, 2 nonbinary) with a mean age of 43 years. Central themes that emerged were: (1) Confusion about the proposed VLNC cigarette policy affected how messages were interpreted; (2) Messages that promote self-efficacy for quitting rather than guilt or fear were better received; and (3) Direct and succinct messages were seen as more able to grab attention and inform people who smoke. Some participant concerns focused on whether VLNC cigarettes would relieve their nicotine cravings and whether they would need to smoke more VLNC cigarettes to feel satisfied.Conclusion: Campaign messages to educate the public about the harmful effects of smoking VLNC cigarettes may be more effective if people who smoke are informed about the policy's rationale to understand why nicotine is removed rather than the other harmful chemicals. Messages should also acknowledge the difficulty of quitting and be short and direct to capture attention.Implications: Adults who smoke have some confusion about nicotine reduction in cigarettes and this affects how they perceive potential communication campaign messages about the risk of smoking VLNC cigarettes. In our qualitative research, we found that adults who smoke prefer messages about VLNC cigarettes that acknowledge the challenge of quitting and that are direct and succinct. With further development, campaign messages may be able to reduce misperceptions about VLNC cigarettes and maximize the public health benefit of a nicotine reduction policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Little systematic evidence exists about the effectiveness of cigar warnings. This study examined the perceived message effectiveness (PME) of warning statements about different health consequences caused by cigars. PME is a validated self-report scale of how effectively a health message discourages smoking.Aims and Methods: We conducted an online study from April to May 2020 with adults in the United States who used cigars in the past 30 days (n = 777). Participants were randomly assigned to view and rate PME (three items, range 1-5) for seven out of 37 text warning statements about different health consequences from cigar use. Linear mixed effects models evaluated the most effective warning characteristics (eg, type of health consequence), controlling for repeated measures and participant demographics.Results: Analyses showed that health consequences about the cardiovascular system (B = 0.38), mouth (B = 0.40), other digestive (B = 0.45), respiratory system (B = 0.36), and early death (B = 0.36) were associated with higher PME scores than reproductive health consequences (all p values <.001). Similar results were found for these health consequences compared with addiction (all p values p < .001). We also observed that awareness of the health consequence was associated with higher PME scores (B = 0.19, p < .001) and length of the warning message (number of characters) was associated with lower PME scores (B = -0.007, p = .03). No differences were observed between cancer and noncancer health consequences (p = .27) or health consequences that used plain language versus medical jargon (p = .94).Conclusions: Our study provides new evidence about the perceived effectiveness of different cigar health warning statements and identifies features that may strengthen statements.Implications: Our study with cigar smokers from across the United States provides much-needed evidence concerning the perceived effectiveness of different cigar health warning statements and features that may strengthen such statements. Mandated cigar warnings in the United States could be strengthened by including health consequences that were perceived as more effective in our study (eg, early death), using health consequences that participants were aware of, and using short warning statements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is required under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act to communicate the risks of tobacco use to the public. Little research exists about methods to communicate the constituents of tobacco in a media campaign. This research examines specific strategies to increase effectiveness of a media campaign for cigarette smoking adults about tobacco constituents by including engagement text about smoking cessation and FDA as the source of the campaign. Methods: In an eye tracking study of 211 current cigarette smokers, participants randomly viewed 4 cigarette constituent messages that varied engagement text for quitting (benefits of quitting and quitline number, presence, absence) and by FDA source (presence, absence). After the eye tracking session, participants were asked about recall of the national quitline number and the source of message. Results: Participants in conditions with engagement text were significantly more likely than those in the no engagement conditions to recall the national quitline number. Few participants saw or recalled the FDA source. Conclusions: Engagement text for smoking cessation on constituent communication campaign messages significantly increases recall of the quitline, an important resource for smokers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was granted regulatory authority over tobacco products in 2009, few studies have examined perceived credibility of the FDA in this role. The current study assessed knowledge and credibility of the FDA as a regulator of tobacco products.Methods: In a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults (N = 4758), we assessed knowledge that the FDA regulates the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of cigarettes, and credibility of the FDA as a tobacco regulator. We examined demographic differences in knowledge and credibility, and associations of knowledge and trust in government with credibility perceptions.Results: Less than half of respondents reported knowing the FDA regulates how cigarettes are sold (46.8%) and advertised (49.7%), and only 36.0% knew the FDA regulates how cigarettes are made, with few demographic differences. Respondents reported that the FDA was moderately credible in regulating tobacco. Knowledge of the FDA as a tobacco regulator and trust in government were the strongest predictors of credibility. Being of younger age, being White (compared to African American), and being male were associated with higher credibility ratings of the FDA.Conclusions: Much of the public still does not know that the FDA regulates tobacco products, and credibility perceptions are moderate. Greater knowledge of the FDA's regulatory role was associated with higher credibility; efforts that increase the public's understanding of the FDA's role as a tobacco regulator may positively impact views of the agency's credibility. This may in turn improve public reception to the FDA's messages and regulations.Implications: This study is the first to show nationally representative estimates of both knowledge and credibility of the FDA as a tobacco regulator. Our research shows further that knowledge of the FDA's tobacco regulatory roles is likely to be an important factor related to perceived credibility of the FDA. Increasing the public's knowledge of the FDA's roles may enhance the agency's credibility, which can improve public reception to messages and regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now has regulatory authority over all tobacco products. Little is known about public awareness and perceptions of the FDA in its new role as a tobacco regulator. This research utilizes focus groups to examine perceptions of the FDA as a tobacco regulator so that the FDA can communicate better with the public about this role. Methods: We conducted 6 focus groups in 2014 in a diverse sample of smokers and non-smokers. Participants were asked if they had heard of the FDA, what they knew about the FDA, if they associated the FDA with tobacco, and their thoughts about this FDA role. Results: A total of 41 individuals participated. Although nearly all participants had heard of the FDA, most were not aware of the FDA's regulatory authority over tobacco products, did not associate the role of the FDA with tobacco, and some drew comparisons between the FDA's work in tobacco and its work regulating food and drugs. Conclusion: Data suggest that although public awareness of the FDA's regulatory authority over tobacco is low, with proper public education, the public may find the FDA to be a trustworthy source of tobacco regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction For cigars sold individually without packaging, including many premium cigars, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed that retailers display six warning statements on a sign at the point-of-sale (POS). Aims and Methods To examine the potential effectiveness of cigar warning signs, we conducted a between-subjects online experiment. Participants were 809 U.S. adults who reported using cigars (78% ever large cigar use, 49% past 30-day large cigar use) recruited from a probability-based panel. Participants viewed an image of a cigar store countertop with randomization to one of four conditions: (1) no warning sign, (2) a sign with six FDA proposed text-only warnings, (3) a sign with six novel text-only warnings, or (4) a sign with six novel text + image warnings. We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) models and post hoc Tukey tests to examine the results. Results The FDA-proposed text-only warning sign was perceived as less effective in discouraging participants from smoking cigars (M : 3.26, SD: 1.39; scale range: 1–5, where five indicates higher discouragement) compared with the novel text-only warning sign (M = 3.38, SD = 1.40) and the novel text + image warning sign (M = 3.65, SD = 1.34). The novel text + image warning sign increased discouragement from smoking cigars versus the FDA-proposed text-only warning sign (p =.02) and decreased the perceived satisfaction of smoking cigars versus no warning sign (p =.04). In a sensitivity analysis, the novel text + image warning sign decreased the perceived satisfaction of smoking cigars (p =.01), decreased cigar purchase intentions (p =.03), decreased the urge to smoke (p =.03), and increased discouragement from smoking cigars (p =.006) compared with all other study conditions. Conclusions Results provide new evidence that policymakers, such as the FDA, could use when proposing POS warning signs for cigars. Implications The US FDA proposed that retailers display a warning sign at the POS for cigars sold individually without packaging. We conducted an online experiment concerning the potential effectiveness of this regulatory policy with people who use cigars recruited from a probability-based panel. Results provide the first evidence that the FDA-proposed text-only warning sign was perceived as less effective than other types of warning signs and that adding images could potentially increase the effectiveness of warning signs. These findings are particularly relevant for premium cigars, which are often sold individually in brick-and-mortar retail settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Many people remove the tobacco leaf from cigars and replace it with cannabis (ie, blunts), but few studies have examined whether messages about the risks of cigars, like warnings on cigar packages, can affect blunt use. Methods Participants were 438 U.S. adults who reported past 30-day cigar use and ever blunt use, recruited from a probability-based national panel to take an online survey. In a 2 × 2 experiment with a between-subjects design, we manipulated two cigar warning characteristics: (1) warning type: text-only versus pictorial (ie, text + image) and (2) warning size: 30% (smaller) versus 50% (larger) of the product package. Participants then viewed six different warnings on a fictious cigarillo package, within their randomly assigned condition. After evaluating all stimuli, participants were asked the extent to which the warnings discouraged them from wanting to use cigars to smoke cannabis (ie, blunt perceived warning effectiveness). Response options ranged from "not at all" (1) to "a great deal" (5). Results We observed no main effects of warning type or size on blunt perceived warning effectiveness. However, a significant interaction existed between the two experimental manipulations (p =.009). Whereas adding images made no difference to blunt perceived warning effectiveness when warnings were smaller (simple effect: −0.22, p =.28), images mattered for larger warnings. Specifically, adding images increased blunt perceived warning effectiveness when warnings were 50% of the product package (simple effect: 0.52, p =.008). Conclusions This experiment provides preliminary evidence that larger pictorial cigar warnings may discourage blunt use relative to larger but text-only warnings. Implications Blunts, which are hollowed out cigars with tobacco leaf wrappers that are filled with cannabis leaf, are one of the most common ways in which tobacco and cannabis are used simultaneously, yet few studies have examined whether messages about the risks of cigars can affect blunt use. We conducted an online experiment concerning the perceived effectiveness of cigar warnings among people who use blunts recruited from a probability-based panel. Results provide novel, preliminary evidence that larger pictorial cigar warnings may discourage blunt use, relative to larger but text-only warnings. More research evaluating cigar warnings on blunt use is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Communication campaigns are incorporating tobacco constituent messaging to reach smokers, yet there is a dearth of research on how such messages should be constructed or will be received by smokers.Methods: In a 2 × 2 × 2 experiment, we manipulated three cigarette constituent message components: (1) the toxic constituent of tobacco (arsenic vs. lead) with a corresponding health effect, (2) the presence or absence of an evocative image, and (3) the source of the message (FDA vs. no source). We recruited smokers (N = 1669, 55.4% women) via an online platform and randomized them to one of the eight message conditions. Participants viewed the message and rated its believability and perceived effectiveness, the credibility of the message source, and action expectancies (ie, likelihood of seeking additional information and help with quitting as a result of seeing the message).Results: We found significant main effects of image, constituent, and source on outcomes. The use of arsenic as the constituent, the presence of an evocative image, and the FDA as the source increased the believability, source credibility, and perceived effectiveness of the tobacco constituent health message.Conclusions: Multiple elements of a constituent message, including type of constituent, imagery, and message source, impact their reception among smokers. Specifically, communication campaigns targeting smokers that utilize arsenic as the tobacco constituent, visual imagery, and the FDA logo may be particularly effective in changing key outcomes that are associated with subsequent attitude and behavioral changes.Implications: This article describes how components of communication campaigns about cigarette constituents are perceived. Multiple elements of a tobacco constituent message, including type of constituent, image, and message source may influence the reception of messages among current smokers. Communication campaigns targeting smokers that utilize arsenic as the tobacco constituent, visual imagery, and the FDA logo may be particularly effective in changing key outcomes among smokers. The effects of such campaigns should be examined, as well as the mechanisms through which such campaigns affect change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While tobacco and alcohol co-use is highly prevalent across the United States, little experimental research has examined ways to counter such dual use. We developed and tested messages about the risks of co-using tobacco and alcohol among adults who used a combustible tobacco product and drank alcohol within the 30 days.Methods: In an online experiment, 1,300 participants were randomly assigned to read different messages about tobacco and alcohol co-use (e.g., Alcohol and tobacco cause throat cancer). Three between-subjects experiments manipulated the presence of: 1) a marker word (e.g., Warning), 2) text describing the symptoms of health effects and a quitting self-efficacy cue, and 3) an image depicting the health effect. Participants rated each message using a validated Perceived Message Effectiveness (PME) scale. We used independent samples t-tests to examine differences between experimental conditions. Results include effect sizes (Cohen's d) to compare standardized mean differences.Results: Our sample was 64% male, 70% white, 23% Black, and 17% Hispanic/Latino with a mean age of 42.4 (SD = 16.4) years. Messages that described the symptoms of the health effect (d = 0.17, p = 0.002) and included an image (d = 0.11, p = 0.04) were rated significantly higher in PME compared with messages that did not describe symptoms and were text-only. We found no significant effects of a marker word or self-efficacy cue on PME.Conclusions: Messages that describe the symptoms of health effects and include text and images may be particularly effective for communicating the risks of tobacco and alcohol co-use and decreasing adverse health effects from co-use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: As cannabis increasingly becomes a consumer product in the U.S., its product packaging has become critically important to regulators. This study examined the influence of recreational cannabis packaging characteristics.Methods: Five online between-subjects experiments were conducted in April 2021, and data were analyzed in May 2021-July 2021. Experiments randomized participants to view different (1) types of cannabis, (2) visual displays of tetrahydrocannabinol content, (3) cannabis packages designed around brand personality research, (4) health warnings, and (5) health claims. Outcomes included cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses.Results: A total of 841 adults from the U.S. (49% male, 50% young adults, 44% White, 17% Hispanic) were included in the study. Edible gummies were perceived as healthier (β=0.32, 95% CI=0.03, 0.62), less grown up (β= -0.58, 95% CI= -0.86, -0.28), and more socially acceptable to consume (β=0.30, 95% CI=0.01, 0.59) than cannabis concentrate in a medical dropper. Participants also had more interest in trying edible gummies (β=1.33, 95% CI=1.04, 1.62) and trying a free sample (β=1.30, 95% CI=1.01, 1.60) than trying cannabis concentrate. Cannabis packages with a helps-you-relax health claim elicited more happy (β=0.34, 95% CI=0.04, 0.64) and good (β=0.37, 95% CI=0.07, 0.67) feelings than cannabis packages without this claim. Minimal effects were found for visual displays of tetrahydrocannabinol content and health warnings.Conclusions: Edibles are a unique type of cannabis that should be given special consideration under state laws, and lawmakers should consider limiting and governing the use of both implicit and explicit health claims on recreational cannabis packages when implementing laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We ran an experiment examining cigar and cannabis co-marketing on packages. • Participants were US youth (ages 15–20) who used or were susceptible to cigars. • Co-marketing led youth to think that products do not contain nicotine or tobacco. • Co-marketing led to higher susceptibility to using the product shown. Cigars are sometimes marketed with cannabis references because they are often used for smoking blunts (i.e., cannabis rolled in cigar paper with or without tobacco). However, little research exists on the impact of cannabis co-marketing on cigar perceptions. Participants included 506 US youth (ages 15–20) recruited April-June 2023 through Qualtrics who reported ever using little cigars or cigarillos (LCCs), past 30-day use of LCCs, or susceptibility to using LCCs. We then conducted a between-subjects experiment, randomizing youth to view one of two cigarillo packages: 1) a package with cannabis co-marketing (i.e., the package included a cannabis-related flavor descriptor and the word "blunt" appeared in the brand name and product label) or 2) a package with no cannabis co-marketing. We assessed the effects of the packaging on perceptions of product ingredients, addictiveness and harm perceptions, product appeal, susceptibility to using the product shown, and purchase intentions. Packages with cannabis co-marketing were perceived as more likely to contain cannabis (OR : 5.56, 95 % CI: 3.73, 8.27) and less likely to contain tobacco (OR : 0.42, 95 % CI: 0.25, 0.70) or nicotine (OR : 0.57, 95 % CI: 0.40, 0.82). Cannabis co-marketing also led to higher susceptibility to using the product shown (B : 0.21, p = 0.02). We did not find evidence that cannabis co-marketing changed harm perceptions or purchase intentions. Among a sample of US youth, cannabis co-marketing on cigar packages may change perceptions of product ingredients and increase susceptibility to using such products, which could lead to the initiation of cigars and cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Flavored novel oral nicotine products are increasing in the commercial tobacco product market. • Almost 1 in 5 youth reported past month use of flavored novel oral nicotine products. • Past month use of any other tobacco product was strongly correlated with past month use of flavored novel oral nicotine products. • New products may encourage youth continued use and addiction. Flavored novel oral nicotine products (ONP), such as pouches, gum, lozenges, tablets, and gummies, have recently entered the US market but have not been authorized for smoking cessation. This study assessed the prevalence and correlates of ONPs in a national sample of youth who smoked little filtered cigars or cigarillos (LCCs) or were susceptible to LCCs. We conducted a national online survey from September-October 2022, as part of a study to develop cigar warnings among youth. Those aged 15–20 years old who reported using (ever or current) or susceptibility to little filtered cigars or cigarillos (LCCs) were eligible. Descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses assessed the prevalence of flavored ONP use and associations with other past 30-day tobacco product use and participant characteristics. Approximately one-fifth (17.1 %) of the sample (n = 680) reported past month flavored ONP use. Any past month tobacco use was correlated with past month flavored ONP use (p s < 0.001), increasing from 17.1 % in the overall sample to 26.8 % among those reporting e-cigarette use, 41.4 % (LCCs), 47.8 % (waterpipe tobacco), 61.8 % (large cigars), and 69.1 % (smokeless tobacco). The number of products used in the past month was significantly associated with higher odds of ONPs in the past month in a multivariable logistic regression model (aOR2.26; 95 % CI: 1.92, 2.65). Almost one-fifth of participants who use or are susceptible to cigar use in our national sample of youth use ONPs. Dual/poly use of other tobacco products and ONPs among youth suggests that many of these youth may be addicted to nicotine. Additional surveillance and regulation of ONPs that exhibit enticing characteristics, such as flavors, kid-friendly formulations, and targeted marketing/branding may be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Studies of tobacco product warnings have focused primarily on the reach and effectiveness of cigarette warnings for adult smokers, whereas few observational studies have examined noncigarette tobacco product warnings among youth.Methods: High school students from the 2019 National Youth Tobacco Survey (n=10,094) reported the frequency of exposure to warnings on cigar, e-cigarette, and waterpipe tobacco packages and the perceived harm of occasionally using e-cigarettes and waterpipe tobacco. In 2020, results were analyzed for the entire sample and among subgroups, including never users, ever users, youth susceptible to using tobacco, and current users.Results: Reported high exposure to warnings was highest for cigars (22.3%), followed by that for e-cigarettes (20.8%) and that for waterpipe tobacco (7.0%). Youth who were susceptible to using cigars (AOR=1.53, 95% CI=1.29, 1.82), who ever used cigars (AOR=4.32, 95% CI=3.57, 5.22), or who currently used cigars (AOR=8.90, 95% CI=6.95, 11.39) were more likely to report high exposure to cigar warnings than youth who never used cigars. Similar findings were observed for e-cigarette and waterpipe tobacco warnings. For youth who ever used e-cigarettes, high exposure to warnings was associated with higher odds of perceiving e-cigarettes as harmful for occasional product use (AOR=1.50, 95% CI=1.05, 2.15), and high exposure to waterpipe tobacco warnings was associated with higher odds of perceiving waterpipe tobacco as harmful (AOR=1.21, 95% CI=1.00, 1.45).Conclusions: Warnings on noncigarette tobacco products reach some youth at risk for using these products, but these warnings may need to be strengthened to further reduce their use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We conducted two experiments to examine the believability of three addiction-focused cigarette warnings and the influence of message source on believability among adolescents and adults in the United States.Methods: Experimental data were collected using national phone surveys of adolescents (age 13-17; n = 1125; response rate, 66%) and adults (age 18+; n = 5014; response rate, 42%). We assessed the believability of three cigarette warnings about addiction attributed to four message sources (Food and Drug Administration [FDA], Surgeon General, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], no source).Results: The majority of adolescents and adults reported the three cigarette warnings were very believable (49%-81% for adolescents; 47%-76% for adults). We found four to five times higher odds of adolescents believing a warning that cigarettes are addictive (warning 1) or that nicotine was an addictive chemical (warning 2) compared to a warning that differentiated the addictive risks of menthol versus traditional cigarettes (warning 3), warning 1 adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 4.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.10, 6.63; warning 2 aOR: 3.87, 95% CI: 2.70, 5.50. Similarly, we found three to five times higher odds of adults (including current smokers) believing the same warnings, warning 1 aOR: 3.74, 95% CI: 2.82, 4.95; warning 2 aOR: 3.24, 95% CI: 2.45, 4.28. Message source had no overall impact on the believability of warnings for either population.Conclusions: Our findings support the implementation of FDA's required warnings that cigarettes are addictive and that nicotine is an addictive chemical. These believable warnings may deter adolescents from initiating smoking and encourage adults to quit smoking.Implications: This article describes, for the first time, the believability of different cigarette warnings about addiction. We now know that the majority of adolescents and adults believe cigarette warnings that highlight cigarettes as addictive and that nicotine is an addictive chemical in tobacco. However, a warning that highlighted the relative risk of addiction for menthol cigarettes compared to traditional cigarettes was not as believable among either population. Our findings support the implementation of FDA's required warnings that cigarettes are addictive and that nicotine is an addictive chemical that may deter adolescents from initiating smoking and encourage adults to quit smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death globally. The 2014 Surgeon General's Report included new diseases linked to smoking, including liver and colon cancer, diabetes and tuberculosis. As more diseases are linked to smoking, which diseases should we communicate to the public and what message source has the most impact?Methods: Data were collected through a nationally representative phone survey of US adults (N=5014), conducted from September 2014 through May 2015. We experimentally randomized participants to a 2 (new smoking disease messages - liver and colon cancers compared to diabetes and tuberculosis) by 4 (message sources - CDC, FDA, Surgeon General, and none) experiment. The outcome was message believability.Results: About half the sample was female (51.5%) and 17.8% were a current smoker. Overall, 56% of participants said the messages were very believable. Cancer messages (liver and colon cancer) were significantly more believable than messages about chronic disease (tuberculosis and diabetes), 61% vs. 52%. Smokers were less likely to report both sets of new disease messages as very believable compared to non-smokers. Significantly more smokers intending to quit (44.5%) found the messages to be very believable compared to smokers not intending to quit (22.6%). Believability did not differ by message source.Conclusion: Important differences exist in believability of disease messages about new tobacco-related information. Messages emphasizing the causal link between smoking and new diseases should be considered for use in mass media campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]