Department of Advertising and Public Relations, Hanyang University, Ansan, South Korea.
Department of Marketing and Consumer Studies, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2020 May 26;22(6):990-996. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntz016.
Despite regulations that forbid cigarette packages from displaying messages such as "mild," "low-tar," and "light," many smokers still have misperceptions about "light" or "low-tar" cigarettes. One reason may be that tar amount displays continue to be permitted. This study examines whether removing tar delivery information from packaging reduces consumer misperceptions about "low-tar" cigarettes.
An online experiment was conducted in South Korea among 531 smokers who were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: with and without tar information on cigarette packages. Participants evaluated which type of cigarette was mildest, least harmful, easiest for nonsmokers to start smoking, and easiest for smokers to quit.
Ten out of 12 chi-square tests showed that people judged the lowest reported tar delivery cigarette to be the mildest (p < .01), least harmful (p < .05), easiest to start (p < .05), and easiest to quit (p < .05)-less so in the "no-tar" condition than the "tar" condition. A higher level of misbeliefs about supposed low-tar cigarettes were found in the "tar" condition compared to the "no-tar" condition for all three brands (t = 5.85, 4.07, 3.82, respectively, p < .001). Regression analyses showed that the "no-tar" condition negatively predicted the level of misbeliefs after controlling for demographic and smoking-related variables (B [SE] = -.72 (.12), -.50 (.12), -.48 (.13), respectively, p < .001).
Banning reported tar deliveries from cigarette packages is likely to reduce smokers' misconceptions about "low-tar" cigarettes. When reported tar deliveries are absent, smokers have inconsistent judgments about differently packaged cigarettes.
When cigarette packages depict lower reported tar number deliveries, participants erroneously perceive them to be less harmful than packages displaying higher tar numbers. These misperceptions of harm may prompt smokers who might otherwise attempt to quit smoking to instead consume cigarettes with lower tar deliveries due to the mistaken belief that they will reduce their risk.
尽管法规禁止香烟包装显示“温和”、“低焦油”和“淡味”等信息,但许多吸烟者仍然对“淡味”或“低焦油”香烟存在误解。原因之一可能是焦油含量的显示仍被允许。本研究旨在检验从包装上移除焦油含量信息是否会减少消费者对“低焦油”香烟的误解。
本研究在韩国进行了一项在线实验,共招募了 531 名吸烟者,他们被随机分配到两种条件之一:有焦油信息和无焦油信息的香烟包装。参与者评估哪种类型的香烟最温和、危害最小、最容易让非吸烟者开始吸烟、最容易让吸烟者戒烟。
12 个卡方检验中有 10 个表明,人们认为报告的焦油含量最低的香烟最温和(p<.01)、危害最小(p<.05)、最容易让非吸烟者开始吸烟(p<.05)、最容易让吸烟者戒烟(p<.05)——在“无焦油”条件下比在“有焦油”条件下更明显。在三种品牌中,与“有焦油”条件相比,“无焦油”条件下发现对所谓低焦油香烟的误解程度更高(t=5.85、4.07、3.82,分别,p<.001)。回归分析表明,在控制人口统计学和吸烟相关变量后,“无焦油”条件对误解程度有负向预测作用(B[SE]=-.72(.12)、-.50(.12)、-.48(.13),分别,p<.001)。
禁止从香烟包装上显示报告的焦油含量可能会降低吸烟者对“低焦油”香烟的误解。当报告的焦油含量不存在时,吸烟者对不同包装的香烟会有不一致的判断。
当香烟包装显示较低的报告焦油数量时,参与者错误地认为它们比显示较高焦油数量的包装危害更小。这些对危害的误解可能会促使那些原本可能试图戒烟的吸烟者转而吸食焦油含量较低的香烟,因为他们误以为这样会降低他们的风险。