Harris Jennifer L, Pierce Melissa, Bargh John A
Department of Psychology, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Department of Psychology, Purchase College, State University of New York, New York, New York, USA.
Tob Control. 2014 Jul;23(4):285-90. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050670. Epub 2013 Jan 15.
Social marketing is commonly proposed to counteract advertising and other messages that promote unhealthy products. However, public service campaigns can also 'boomerang' or ironically increase the unhealthy behaviours they are designed to discourage. The present study examined whether antismoking public service announcements (PSAs) could increase smoking behaviour immediately following exposure.
In an experimental study, 56 smokers were randomly assigned to watch a short television segment with a commercial break that included either (1) a Philip Morris 'QuitAssist' PSA; (2) a Legacy 'truth' antismoking PSA; or (3) a control PSA. Smoking behaviour was assessed during a short break immediately following television viewing.
Participants who saw the Philip Morris antismoking PSA were significantly more likely to smoke during a break (42%) compared with participants in the control condition (11%), and participants in the 'truth' condition were marginally more likely to smoke (33%). These differences could not be explained by factors such as mood or level of addiction, and effects occurred outside of participants' conscious awareness.
These findings provide preliminary evidence that antismoking campaigns could ironically increase immediate smoking behaviours among smokers. The long-term benefits of proven public health campaigns, including 'truth,' are likely to outweigh any short-term boomerang effects. However, industry-sponsored messages in which companies have an economic incentive to increase consumption behaviours should be treated with scepticism and evaluated independently.
社会营销通常被提议用于对抗宣传不健康产品的广告及其他信息。然而，公益活动也可能产生“反效果”，或者具有讽刺意味地增加它们原本旨在劝阻的不健康行为。本研究考察了反吸烟公益广告（PSA）在播放后是否会立即增加吸烟行为。
在一项实验研究中，56名吸烟者被随机分配观看一段带有商业广告插播的简短电视片段，其中包括：（1）菲利普·莫里斯公司的“戒烟助手”公益广告；（2）遗产组织的“真相”反吸烟公益广告；或（3）一个对照公益广告。在观看电视后的短暂休息期间对吸烟行为进行评估。
与对照组参与者（11%）相比，观看菲利普·莫里斯公司反吸烟公益广告的参与者在休息期间吸烟的可能性显著更高（42%），而观看“真相”公益广告的参与者吸烟的可能性略高（33%）。这些差异无法用情绪或成瘾程度等因素来解释，且影响发生在参与者的意识之外。
这些发现提供了初步证据，表明反吸烟活动可能具有讽刺意味地增加吸烟者的即时吸烟行为。包括“真相”活动在内的已证实的公共卫生活动的长期益处可能超过任何短期的反效果。然而，对于企业出于经济利益而鼓励消费行为的行业赞助信息应持怀疑态度并进行独立评估。
