University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston School of Public Health, Austin, Regional Campus, TX, USA.
Addict Behav. 2018 Apr;79:219-225. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.11.017. Epub 2017 Nov 20.
Measuring perceptions associated with e-cigarette use can provide valuable information to help explain why youth and adults initiate and continue to use e-cigarettes. However, given the complexity of e-cigarette devices and their continuing evolution, measures of perceptions of this product have varied greatly. Our goal, as members of the working group on e-cigarette measurement within the Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science (TCORS) network, is to provide guidance to researchers developing surveys concerning e-cigarette perceptions. We surveyed the 14 TCORS sites and received and reviewed 371 e-cigarette perception items from seven sites. We categorized the items based on types of perceptions asked, and identified measurement approaches that could enhance data validity and approaches that researchers may consider avoiding. The committee provides suggestions in four areas: (1) perceptions of benefits, (2) harm perceptions, (3) addiction perceptions, and (4) perceptions of social norms. Across these 4 areas, the most appropriate way to assess e-cigarette perceptions depends largely on study aims. The type and number of items used to examine e-cigarette perceptions will also vary depending on respondents' e-cigarette experience (i.e., user vs. non-user), level of experience (e.g., experimental vs. established), type of e-cigarette device (e.g., cig-a-like, mod), and age. Continuous formative work is critical to adequately capture perceptions in response to the rapidly changing e-cigarette landscape. Most important, it is imperative to consider the unique perceptual aspects of e-cigarettes, building on the conventional cigarette literature as appropriate, but not relying on existing conventional cigarette perception items without adjustment.
测量与电子烟使用相关的认知可以提供有价值的信息,有助于解释为什么青少年和成年人会开始使用电子烟并继续使用。然而,鉴于电子烟设备的复杂性及其持续演变,对该产品的认知测量方法差异很大。我们作为烟草监管科学中心(TCORS)网络电子烟测量工作组的成员,旨在为研究电子烟认知的研究人员提供指导。我们调查了 14 个 TCORS 站点,并从 7 个站点收到并审查了 371 个电子烟认知项目。我们根据所询问的认知类型对这些项目进行了分类,并确定了可以提高数据有效性的测量方法以及研究人员可能需要避免的方法。委员会在四个方面提出了建议:(1)对益处的认知,(2)危害认知,(3)成瘾认知,以及(4)对社会规范的认知。在这四个方面,评估电子烟认知的最合适方法在很大程度上取决于研究目的。用于检查电子烟认知的项目的类型和数量也将根据受访者的电子烟使用经验(即使用者与非使用者)、经验水平(例如,实验者与使用者)、电子烟设备类型(例如,类似香烟的设备、mod 设备)以及年龄而有所不同。持续的形成性工作对于充分捕捉对电子烟快速变化的景观的认知至关重要。最重要的是,必须考虑到电子烟独特的感知方面,在适当的情况下借鉴传统香烟文献,但在没有调整的情况下,不要依赖现有的传统香烟感知项目。