Avoidance of tobacco health warnings? An eye-tracking approach.
Attention
avoidance
eye-tracking
message framing
reactance
tobacco health warnings
Journal
Addiction (Abingdon, England)
ISSN: 1360-0443
Titre abrégé: Addiction
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9304118
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
received:
02
09
2019
revised:
22
11
2019
accepted:
29
05
2020
pubmed:
9
6
2020
medline:
23
7
2021
entrez:
8
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Among three eye-tracking studies, we examined how cigarette pack features affected visual attention and self-reported avoidance of and reactance to warnings. Study 1: smoking status × warning immediacy (short-term versus long-term health consequences) × warning location (top versus bottom of pack). Study 2: smoking status × warning framing (gain-framed versus loss-framed) × warning format (text-only versus pictorial). Study 3: smoking status × warning severity (highly severe versus moderately severe consequences of smoking). University of Bristol, UK, eye-tracking laboratory. Study 1: non-smokers (n = 25), weekly smokers (n = 25) and daily smokers (n = 25). Study 2: non-smokers (n = 37), smokers contemplating quitting (n = 37) and smokers not contemplating quitting (n = 43). Study 3: non-smokers (n = 27), weekly smokers (n = 26) and daily smokers (n = 26). For all studies: visual attention, measured as the ratio of the number of fixations to the warning versus the branding, self-reported predicted avoidance of and reactance to warnings and for study 3, effect of warning on quitting motivation. Study 1: greater self-reported avoidance [mean difference (MD) = 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.94, 1.35, P < 0.001, η Subjective and objective (eye-tracking) measures of avoidance of health warnings on cigarette packs produce different results, suggesting these measure different constructs. Visual avoidance of warnings indicates low-level disengagement with warnings, while self-reported predicted avoidance reflects higher-level engagement with warnings.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
126-138Subventions
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
ID : C51287/A19332
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_12013/6
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.
Références
Hammond D. Health warning messages on tobacco products: a review. Tob Control 2011; 20: 327-337.
Noar S. M., Hall M. G., Francis D. B., Ribisl K. M., Pepper J. K., Brewer N. T. Pictorial cigarette pack warnings: a meta-analysis of experimental studies. Tob Control 2016; 25: 341-354.
Erceg-Hurn D. M., Steed L. G. Does exposure to cigarette health warnings elicit psychological reactance in smokers? J Appl Soc Psychol 2011; 41: 219-237.
Glock S., Kneer J. Are deterrent pictures effective? The impact of warning labels on cognitive dissonance in smokers. Appl Psychol Health Well-Being 2009; 1: 356-373.
Stothart G., Maynard O., Lavis R., Munafò M. Neural correlates of cigarette health warning avoidance among smokers. Drug Alcohol Depend 2016; 161: 155-162.
Kaufman A., Klein E. G., Koblitz A., Price S. A vision for eye-tracking research in tobacco regulatory science. Tob Regul Sci 2018; 4: 3-7.
Maynard O. M., McClernon F. J., Oliver J. A., Munafò M. R. Using neuroscience to inform tobacco control policy. Nicotine Tob Res 2019; 21: 739-746.
Meernik C., Jarman K., Wright S. T., Klein E. G., Goldstein A. O., Ranney L. Eye tracking outcomes in tobacco control regulation and communication: a systematic review. Tob Regul Sci 2016; 2: 377-403.
Thrasher J. F., Brewer N. T., Niederdeppe J., Peters E., Strasser A. A., Grana R. et al. Advancing tobacco product warning labels research methods and theory: a summary of a grantee meeting held by the US National Cancer Institute. Nicotine Tob Res 2019; 21: 855-862.
Maynard O. M., Attwood A., O'Brien L., Brooks S., Hedge C., Leonards U., et al. Avoidance of cigarette pack health warnings among regular cigarette smokers. Drug Alcohol Depend 2014; 136: 170-174.
Maynard O. M., Munafò M. R., Leonards U. Visual attention to health warnings on plain tobacco packaging in adolescent smokers and non-smokers. Addiction 2013; 108: 413-419.
Munafò M. R., Roberts N., Bauld L., Leonards U. Plain packaging increases visual attention to health warnings on cigarette packs in non-smokers and weekly smokers but not daily smokers. Addiction 2011; 106: 1505-1510.
Retzler C., Shiraj N., Retzler J. Eye movement data reveal increased attention to combined health warnings on cigarette packs. Drug Alcohol Depend 2019; 194: 336-340.
Posner M. I. Orienting of attention. Q J Exp Psychol 1980; 32(1), 3-25.
Brewer N. T., Parada H. Jr., Hall M. G., Boynton M. H., Noar S. M., Ribisl K. M. Understanding why pictorial cigarette pack warnings increase quit attempts. Ann Behav Med 2019; 53: 232-243.
Borland R., Yong H.-H., Wilson N., Fong G. T., Hammond D., Cummings K. M., et al. How reactions to cigarette packet health warnings influence quitting: findings from the ITC four-country survey. Addiction 2009; 104: 669-675.
Cho Y. J., Thrasher J. F., Swayampakala K., Yong H.-H., McKeever R., Hammond D. et al. Does reactance against cigarette warning labels matter? Warning label responses and downstream smoking cessation amongst adult smokers in Australia, Canada, Mexico and the United States. PLOS ONE 2016; 11; e0159245.
Krypotos A.-M., Effting M., Kindt M., Beckers T. Avoidance learning: a review of theoretical models and recent developments. Front Behav Neurosci 2015; 9: 189.
Wegner D. M. Ironic processes of mental control. Psychol Rev 1994; 101: 34-52.
Brehm S. S., Brehm J. W. Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and Control. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press; 2013, p. 447.
Hall M. G., Sheeran P., Noar S. M., Boynton M. H., Ribisl K. M., Parada H. Jr., et al. Negative affect, message reactance and perceived risk: how do pictorial cigarette pack warnings change quit intentions? Tob Control 2018; 27: e136-e142.
Chapman G. B. Temporal discounting and utility for health and money. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1996; 22: 771-791.
Bickel W. K., Odum A. L., Madden G. J. Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: delay discounting in current, never, and ex-smokers. Psychopharmacology 1999; 146: 447-454.
Hoek J., Hoek-Sims A., Gendall P. A qualitative exploration of young adult smokers’ responses to novel tobacco warnings. BMC Public Health 2013; 13: 609.
Gendall P., Eckert C., Hoek J., Louviere J. Estimating the effects of novel on-pack warnings on young adult smokers and susceptible non-smokers. Tob Control 2018; 27: 519-525.
Tversky A., Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981; 211: 453-458.
Gallagher K. M., Updegraff J. A. Health message framing effects on attitudes, intentions, and behavior: a meta-analytic review. Ann Behav Med 2012; 43: 101-116.
O'Keefe D. J., Jensen J. D. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: a meta-analytic review. J Health Commun 2007; 12: 623-644.
Floyd D. L., Prentice-Dunn S., Rogers R. W. A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. J Appl Soc Psychol 2000; 30: 407-429.
Latimer A. E., Krishnan-Sarin S., Cavallo D. A., Duhig A., Salovey P., O'Malley S. A. Targeted smoking cessation messages for adolescents. J Adolesc Health 2012; 50: 47-53.
Toll B. A., Martino S., Latimer A., Salovey P., O'Malley S., Carlin-Menter S., et al. Randomized trial: Quitline specialist training in gain-framed versus standard-care messages for smoking cessation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102: 96-106.
Fucito L. M., Latimer A. E., Salovey P., Toll B. A. Nicotine dependence as a moderator of message framing effects on smoking cessation outcomes. Ann Behav Med 2010; 39: 311-317.
Szklo A. S., Coutinho E. S. F. The influence of smokers’ degree of dependence on the effectiveness of message framing for capturing smokers for a Quitline. Addict Behav 2010; 35: 620-624.
van't Riet J., Ruiter R. A., Werrij M. Q., De Vries H. The influence of self-efficacy on the effects of framed health messages. Eur J Soc Psychol 2008; 38: 800-809.
Toll B. A., Salovey P., O'Malley S. S., Mazure C. M., Latimer A., McKee S. A. Message framing for smoking cessation: the interaction of risk perceptions and gender. Nicotine Tob Res 2008; 10: 195-200.
Latimer-Cheung A. E., Fucito L. M., Carlin-Menter S., Rodriguez J., Raymond L., Salovey P., et al. How do perceptions about cessation outcomes moderate the effectiveness of a gain-framed smoking cessation telephone counseling intervention? J Health Commun 2012; 17: 1081-1098.
Moorman M., van den Putte B. The influence of message framing, intention to quit smoking, and nicotine dependence on the persuasiveness of smoking cessation messages. Addict Behav 2008; 33: 1267-1275.
Droulers O., Gallopel-Morvan K., Lacoste-Badie S., Lajante M. The influence of threatening visual warnings on tobacco packaging: measuring the impact of threat level, image size, and type of pack through psychophysiological and self-report methods. PLOS ONE 2017; 12: e0184415.
Maynard O. M., Gove H., Skinner A. L., Munafò M. R. Severity and susceptibility: measuring the perceived effectiveness and believability of tobacco health warnings. BMC Public Health 2018; 18: 468.
Benjamin W., Merrill R. M., Lindsay G. B. Cigarette pack warning labels in Russia: how graphic should they be? Eur J Public Health 2011; 21: 366-372.
Kees J., Burton S., Andrews J. C., Kozup J. Understanding how graphic pictorial warnings work on cigarette packaging. J Public Policy Mark 2010; 29: 265-276.
Noar SM, Rohde JA, Barker JO, Hall MG, Brewer NT. Pictorial cigarette pack warnings increase some risk appraisals but not risk beliefs: a meta-analysis. Hum Commun Res. 2020; 46: 250-272 [cited 2020 Dec 2];(hqz016).
Kok G., Peters G.-J. Y., Kessels L. T., Ten Hoor G. A., Ruiter R. A. Ignoring theory and misinterpreting evidence: the false belief in fear appeals. Health Psychol Rev 2018; 12: 111-125.
Peters G.-J. Y., Ruiter R. A., Ten Hoor G. A., Kessels L. T., Kok G. Towards consensus on fear appeals: a rejoinder to the commentaries on Kok, Peters, Kessels, ten Hoor, and Ruiter (2018). Health Psychol Rev 2018; 12: 151-156.
Biener L., Abrams D. B. The contemplation ladder: validation of a measure of readiness to consider smoking cessation. Health Psychol 1991; 10: 360-365.
European Commission. Tobacco Products Directive. Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council [internet]. 2014. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/tobacco/docs/dir_201440_en.pdf. (accessed 15 June 2020).
Cohen J. E., Brown J., Washington C., Welding K., Ferguson J., Smith K. C. Do cigarette health warning labels comply with requirements: a 14-country study. Prev Med 2016; 93: 128-134.
Heatherton T. F., Kozlowski L. T., Frecker R. C., Fagerström K.-O. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence: a revision of the Fagerström Tolerance Questionnaire. Br J Addict 1991; 86: 1119-1127.
Cox L. S., Tiffany S. T., Christen A. G. Evaluation of the brief questionnaire of smoking urges (QSU-brief) in laboratory and clinical settings. Nicotine Tob Res 2001; 3: 7-16.
Hyland A., Ambrose B. K., Conway K. P., Borek N., Lambert E., Carusi C., et al. Design and methods of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study. Tob Control 2017; 26: 371-378.
Hall M. G., Sheeran P., Noar S. M., Ribisl K. M., Bach L. E., Brewer N. T. Reactance to health warnings scale: development and validation. Ann Behav Med 2016; 50: 736-750.
Fathelrahman A. I., Omar M., Awang R., Cummings K. M., Borland R., Samin A. S. B. M. Impact of the new Malaysian cigarette pack warnings on smokers’ awareness of health risks and interest in quitting smoking. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2010; 7: 4089-4099.
Sterne J. A., Smith G. D. Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests? Phys Ther 2001; 81: 1464-1469.
Anshari D., Yong H.-H., Borland R., Hammond D., Swayampakala K., Thrasher J. Which type of tobacco product warning imagery is more effective and sustainable over time? A longitudinal assessment of smokers in Canada. Australia and Mexico. BMJ Open 2018; 8: e021983.
Yong H.-H., Borland R., Hammond D., Thrasher J. F., Cummings K. M., Fong G. T. Smokers’ reactions to the new larger health warning labels on plain cigarette packs in Australia: findings from the ITC Australia project. Tob Control 2016; 25: 181-187.
Thrasher J. F., Swayampakala K., Borland R., Nagelhout G., Yong H.-H., Hammond D., et al. Influences of self-efficacy, response efficacy, and reactance on responses to cigarette health warnings: a longitudinal study of adult smokers in Australia and Canada. Health Commun 2016; 31: 1517-1526.
Osman A., Thrasher J. F., Yong H.-H., Arillo-Santillán E., Hammond D. Disparagement of health warning labels on cigarette packages and cessation attempts: results from four countries. Health Educ Res 2017; 32: 524-536.
Hoek J., Gendall P., Eckert C., Rolls K., Louviere J. A comparison of on-pack Quitline information formats. Tob Control 2016; 25: 211-217.
Thrasher J. F., Osman A., Abad-Vivero E. N., Hammond D., Bansal-Travers M., Cummings K. M., et al. The use of cigarette package inserts to supplement pictorial health warnings: an evaluation of the Canadian policy. Nicotine Tob Res 2015; 17: 870-875.
Thrasher J. F., Swayampakala K., Cummings K. M., Hammond D., Anshari D., Krugman D. M., et al. Cigarette package inserts can promote efficacy beliefs and sustained smoking cessation attempts: a longitudinal assessment of an innovative policy in Canada. Prev Med 2016; 88: 59-65.
Witte K. Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel process model. Commun Monogr 1992; 59: 329-349.
Tannenbaum M. B., Hepler J., Zimmerman R. S., Saul L., Jacobs S., Wilson K., et al. Appealing to fear: a meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. Psychol Bull 2015; 141: 1178-1204.
Dijkstra A., Bos C. The effects of repeated exposure to graphic fear appeals on cigarette packages: a field experiment. Psychol Addict Behav 2015; 29: 82-90.