Department of Marketing, College of Business, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
Department of Marketing, Sam M. Walton College of Business, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2019 Jun 21;21(7):979-984. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty177.
Research on electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) warnings has primarily focused on addiction warnings, such as the one soon to be required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States. However, reduced-risk warnings, similar to the warnings recently proposed for smokeless tobacco products, remain a future possibility for e-cigarettes. Thus, this brief report compares e-cigarette health risk perceptions based on reduced-risk warnings and the FDA addiction risk warning, and considers whether these warnings differ in believability, ease of comprehension, and perceptions about the clarity of risk communication.
A quota sample of 672 smokers, e-cigarette users, dual users, and nonusers participated in this between-subjects experiment. Study participants were randomly assigned to one of three warning conditions, including the FDA-mandated addiction warning and two reduced-risk warnings. After exposure to the warning statement, participants responded to measures of health risk perceptions, believability, ease of comprehension, and perception about the clarity of risk communication.
Results reveal that the addiction warning is perceived as more believable, easier to comprehend, and more clearly communicating the health risks of e-cigarettes use compared with the reduced-risk warnings. In addition, overall health risk perceptions and addiction risk perceptions based on the addiction warning are greater than health risk perceptions based on the reduced-risk warnings. In contrast, specific disease-related risk perceptions such as cancer, heart disease, lung disease, and harm to an unborn baby are greater for the reduced-risk warnings.
This study provides a comparison of the forthcoming FDA-mandated e-cigarette addiction warning and reduced-risk warnings that have begun to be considered in the literature on a number of critical outcomes.
This research provides a greater understanding of how variations of e-cigarette warnings, including addiction and reduced-risk warnings, are perceived by smokers, e-cigarette users, dual users, and nonusers. Specifically, findings show that overall health risk perceptions and addiction risk perceptions based on the addiction warning are greater than risk perceptions based on the reduced-risk warnings. In contrast, specific disease-related risk perceptions, such as cancer and heart disease, are greater for the reduced-risk warnings.
电子烟(e-cigarette)警告的研究主要集中在成瘾警告上,例如美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)即将要求的警告。然而,类似于最近为无烟烟草产品提出的降低风险警告,仍然是电子烟的未来可能性。因此,本简要报告比较了基于降低风险警告和 FDA 成瘾风险警告的电子烟健康风险认知,并考虑了这些警告在可信度、理解难度和对风险沟通清晰度的认知方面是否存在差异。
本研究采用配额抽样法,共招募了 672 名吸烟者、电子烟使用者、双重使用者和非使用者参与本次实验。研究参与者被随机分配到三种警告条件之一,包括 FDA 强制要求的成瘾警告和两种降低风险警告。在暴露于警告声明后,参与者回答了与健康风险认知、可信度、理解难度和对风险沟通清晰度的认知有关的问题。
结果表明,与降低风险警告相比,成瘾警告被认为更可信、更容易理解、更清晰地传达了电子烟使用的健康风险。此外,基于成瘾警告的总体健康风险认知和成瘾风险认知大于基于降低风险警告的健康风险认知。相比之下,基于降低风险警告的特定疾病相关风险认知(如癌症、心脏病、肺病和对未出生婴儿的伤害)更高。
本研究比较了即将出台的 FDA 强制要求的电子烟成瘾警告和文献中开始考虑的降低风险警告,比较了若干关键结果。
本研究更深入地了解了吸烟者、电子烟使用者、双重使用者和非使用者对电子烟警告(包括成瘾和降低风险警告)的不同看法。具体来说,研究结果表明,基于成瘾警告的总体健康风险认知和成瘾风险认知大于基于降低风险警告的风险认知。相比之下,基于降低风险警告的特定疾病相关风险认知(如癌症和心脏病)更高。