Berg Carla J, Henriksen Lisa, Cavazos-Rehg Patricia, Schauer Gillian L, Freisthler Bridget
Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.
Stanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3300 Hillview Ave, suite 120, Palo Alto, CA 94304, United States.
Prev Med Rep. 2018 May 17;11:37-41. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.05.010. eCollection 2018 Sep.
As recreational marijuana expands, standardized surveillance measures examining the retail environment are critical for informing policy and enforcement. We conducted a reliability and generalizability study using a previously developed tool involving assessment of a sample of 25 randomly selected Seattle recreational marijuana retailers (20 recreational; 5 recreational/medical) in 2017. The tool assessed: 1) contextual/neighborhood features (i.e., facilities nearby); 2) compliance/security (e.g., age-of-sale signage, age verification); and 3) marketing (i.e., promotions, product availability, price). We found that retailers were commonly within two blocks of restaurants (n = 23), grocery stores (n = 17), liquor stores (n = 13), and bars/clubs (n = 11). Additionally, two were within two blocks of schools, and four were within two blocks of parks. Almost all (n = 23) had exterior signage indicating the minimum age requirement, and 23 verified age. Two retailers had exterior ads for marijuana, and 24 had interior ads. Overall, there were 76 interior ads (M = 3.04; SD = 1.84), most commonly for edibles (n = 28). At least one price promotion/discount was recorded in 17 retailers, most commonly in the form of loyalty membership programs (n = 10) or daily/weekly deals (n = 10). One retailer displayed potential health harms/warnings, while three posted some health claim. Products available across product categories were similar; we also noted instances of selling retailer-branded apparel/ paraphernalia (which is prohibited). Lowest price/unit across product categories demonstrated low variability across retailers. This study documented high inter-rater reliability of the surveillance tool (Kappas = 0.73 to 1.00). In conclusion, this tool can be used in future research and practice aimed at examining retailers marketing practices and regulatory compliance.
随着休闲大麻业务的扩张,针对零售环境的标准化监测措施对于政策制定和执法工作至关重要。2017年,我们使用先前开发的工具,对25家随机抽取的西雅图休闲大麻零售商(20家休闲大麻零售商;5家休闲/医用大麻零售商)进行了可靠性和普遍性研究。该工具评估了:1)环境/邻里特征(即附近设施);2)合规/安全情况(如销售年龄标识、年龄验证);3)营销情况(即促销、产品供应、价格)。我们发现,零售商通常位于餐厅(n = 23)、杂货店(n = 17)、酒类商店(n = 13)以及酒吧/俱乐部(n = 11)的两个街区范围内。此外,有两家位于学校的两个街区范围内,四家位于公园的两个街区范围内。几乎所有零售商(n = 23)都有外部标识标明最低年龄要求,并且有23家进行了年龄验证。两家零售商有大麻的外部广告,24家有内部广告。总体而言,有76条内部广告(M = 3.04;SD = 1.84),最常见的是食品类广告(n = 28)。17家零售商记录了至少一项价格促销/折扣活动,最常见的形式是忠诚会员计划(n = 10)或每日/每周优惠(n = 10)。一家零售商展示了潜在的健康危害/警告,而三家发布了一些健康声明。各产品类别的在售产品相似;我们还注意到有销售零售商品牌服装/用具的情况(这是被禁止的)。各产品类别中最低的单价在不同零售商之间差异较小。本研究记录了监测工具的评分者间信度较高(Kappas = 0.73至1.00)。总之,该工具可用于未来旨在研究零售商营销实践和监管合规情况的研究及实践中。