Klein Elizabeth G, Quisenberry Amanda J, Shoben Abigail B, Cooper Sarah, Ferketich Amy K, Berman Micah, Peters Ellen, Wewers Mary Ellen
College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
College of Law, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2017 Oct 1;19(10):1172-1177. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx021.
Little research has examined the impacts of graphic health warnings on the users of smokeless tobacco products.
A convenience sample of past-month, male smokeless tobacco users (n = 142; 100% male) was randomly assigned to view a smokeless tobacco advertisement with a graphic health warning (GHW) or a text-only warning. Eye-tracking equipment measured viewing time, or dwell time, in milliseconds. Following the advertisement exposure, participants self-reported smokeless tobacco craving and recalled any content in the health warning message (unaided recall). Linear and logistic regression analyses evaluated the proportion of time viewing the GHW, craving, and GHW recall.
Participants who viewed a GHW spent a significantly greater proportion of their ad viewing time on GHWs (2.87 seconds or 30%), compared to those viewing a text-only warning (2.05 seconds or 24%). Although there were no significant differences by condition in total advertisement viewing duration, those participants viewing a GHW had increased recall of health warning messages compared to the text-only warning (76% had any warning message recall compared to 53%; p < .05). Self-reported craving after advertisement exposure was lower in the GHW compared to text-only condition, but the difference was not statistically significant (a rating of 4.4 vs. 5.3 on a 10-point scale; p = .08).
GHWs attracted greater attention and greater recall of health warning messages compared to text-only warnings among rural male smokeless tobacco users.
Among a sample of rural smokeless tobacco users, GHWs attracted more attention and recall of health warning messages compared to text-only warnings when viewed within smokeless tobacco advertising. These findings provide additional empirical support that GHWs are an effective tobacco control tool for all tobacco products and advertisements.
很少有研究探讨图形健康警示对无烟烟草产品使用者的影响。
选取过去一个月内使用无烟烟草的男性作为便利样本(n = 142;100%为男性),随机分配他们观看带有图形健康警示(GHW)的无烟烟草广告或仅带有文字警示的广告。眼动追踪设备以毫秒为单位测量观看时间,即停留时间。广告展示后,参与者自行报告对无烟烟草的渴望程度,并回忆健康警示信息中的任何内容(无提示回忆)。线性和逻辑回归分析评估观看GHW的时间比例、渴望程度以及对GHW的回忆情况。
与观看仅文字警示的参与者相比,观看GHW的参与者在GHW上花费的广告观看时间比例显著更高(2.87秒或30%),而观看仅文字警示的参与者为2.05秒或24%。尽管不同条件下的广告总观看时长没有显著差异,但与仅文字警示相比,观看GHW的参与者对健康警示信息的回忆有所增加(76%能回忆起任何警示信息,而仅文字警示组为53%;p < .05)。与仅文字警示条件相比,广告展示后GHW组的自行报告的渴望程度较低,但差异无统计学意义(10分制下评分为4.4分对5.3分;p = .08)。
在农村男性无烟烟草使用者中,与仅文字警示相比,图形健康警示吸引了更多关注以及对健康警示信息的更多回忆。
在农村无烟烟草使用者样本中,在无烟烟草广告中观看时,与仅文字警示相比,图形健康警示吸引了更多关注以及对健康警示信息的更多回忆。这些发现提供了额外的实证支持,即图形健康警示是适用于所有烟草产品和广告宣传的有效控烟工具。