Balbach Edith D, Smith Elizabeth A, Malone Ruth E
Community Health Program, Tufts University, 112 Packard Avenue, Medford, MA 02155, USA.
Tob Control. 2006 Dec;15 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):iv37-43. doi: 10.1136/tc.2005.012997.
To analyse trial and deposition testimony of tobacco industry executives to determine how they use the concepts of "information" and "choice" and consider how these concepts are related to theoretical models of health behaviour change.
We coded and analysed transcripts of trial and deposition testimony of 14 high-level executives representing six companies plus the Tobacco Institute. We conducted an interpretive analysis of industry executives' characterisation of the industry's role as information provider and the agency of tobacco consumers in making "choices".
Tobacco industry executives deployed the concept of "information" as a mechanism that shifted to consumers full moral responsibility for the harms caused by tobacco products. The industry's role was characterised as that of impartial supplier of value-free "information", without regard to its quality, accuracy and truthfulness. Tobacco industry legal defences rely on assumptions congruent with and supported by individual rational choice theories, particularly those that emphasise individual, autonomous decision-makers.
Tobacco control advocates and health educators must challenge the industry's preferred framing, pointing out that "information" is not value-free. Multi-level, multi-sectoral interventions are critical to tobacco use prevention. Over-reliance on individual and interpersonal rational choice models may have the effect of validating the industry's model of smoking and cessation behaviour, absolving it of responsibility and rendering invisible the "choices" the industry has made and continues to make in promoting the most deadly consumer product ever made.
分析烟草行业高管的庭审和证词,以确定他们如何运用“信息”和“选择”的概念,并思考这些概念与健康行为改变理论模型之间的关系。
我们对代表六家公司以及烟草协会的14位高级管理人员的庭审和证词记录进行了编码和分析。我们对行业高管将烟草行业描述为信息提供者以及烟草消费者做出“选择”的主体进行了解释性分析。
烟草行业高管将“信息”概念作为一种机制,将烟草制品造成的危害的全部道德责任转移给消费者。该行业的角色被描述为无价值“信息”的公正提供者,而不考虑其质量、准确性和真实性。烟草行业的法律辩护依赖于与个体理性选择理论一致并得到其支持的假设,尤其是那些强调个体自主决策者的理论。
烟草控制倡导者和健康教育工作者必须挑战该行业偏好的框架,指出“信息”并非无价值。多层次、多部门的干预措施对于预防烟草使用至关重要。过度依赖个体和人际理性选择模型可能会起到认可该行业吸烟和戒烟行为模式的作用,免除其责任,并使该行业在推广有史以来最致命的消费品方面所做出并仍在做出的“选择”变得不可见。