Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2022 Oct 26;24(11):1741-1747. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntac127.
Perceived message effectiveness (PME) is a common metric to understand receptivity to tobacco prevention messages, yet most measures have been developed with adults. We examined adolescents' interpretation of language within candidate items for a new youth-targeted PME measure using cognitive interviewing. We sought to understand the meaning adolescents assigned to our candidate PME items to improve item wording.
Participants were 20 adolescents, ages 13-17 years from the United States. Cognitive interviews used a structured guide to elicit feedback on comprehension, answer retrieval, and language regarding a set of Reasoned Action Approach-based survey items that assessed the PME of smoking and vaping prevention ads. We employed thematic analysis to synthesize findings from the interviews.
Interviews identified three main issues related to survey items: ambiguity of language, word choice (risk and other terminology), and survey item phrasing. Adolescents preferred direct, definitive language over more ambiguous phrasing which they saw as less serious (eg, "will" instead of "could"). For risk terminology, they preferred terms such as "harmful" and "dangerous" over "risky," which was viewed as easy to discount. The term "negative effects" was interpreted as encompassing a broader set of tobacco harms than "health effects." Adolescents said that the term "vape" was preferable to "e-cigarette," and identified ways to simplify item wording for greater clarity.
Tobacco risk terms that appear similar differ in meaning to adolescents, and more direct and unambiguous language is preferred. Our findings informed changes to the PME scale items to improve clarity and reduce measurement error.
This study adds to the literature on how adolescents interpret tobacco prevention language. Adolescents may interpret terminology differently than adults, which could lead to ambiguity in meaning and thus measurement error. Through cognitive interviewing, we identified and improved the language in a youth-focused PME measure for tobacco and vaping prevention.
感知信息有效性(PME)是一种用于了解对烟草预防信息接受程度的常用指标,但大多数此类指标都是针对成年人开发的。我们使用认知访谈法,研究了青少年对新的针对青少年的 PME 测量候选项目中语言的理解,旨在通过改善项目措辞来提高项目的有效性。
参与者是 20 名年龄在 13-17 岁的美国青少年。认知访谈使用结构化指南来收集对基于理性行动法的一系列调查项目的理解、答案检索和语言方面的反馈,这些项目评估了吸烟和电子烟预防广告的 PME。我们采用主题分析对访谈结果进行综合。
访谈确定了与调查项目相关的三个主要问题:语言歧义、用词(风险和其他术语)和调查项目措辞。青少年更喜欢直接、明确的措辞,而不是他们认为不太严肃的模棱两可的措辞(例如,“将”而不是“可能”)。对于风险术语,他们更喜欢“有害”和“危险”等术语,而不是“有风险”,因为后者很容易被忽视。术语“负面效应”被解释为包含更广泛的烟草危害,而不仅仅是“健康影响”。青少年表示,“vape”比“e-cigarette”更受欢迎,并提出了简化项目措辞以提高清晰度的方法。
对青少年来说,看似相似的烟草风险术语在含义上存在差异,他们更喜欢更直接和明确的语言。我们的研究结果为改善 PME 量表项目的清晰度和减少测量误差提供了依据。
这项研究增加了关于青少年如何解释烟草预防语言的文献。青少年对术语的理解可能与成年人不同,这可能导致意义上的模糊性,从而导致测量误差。通过认知访谈,我们确定并改进了针对青少年的烟草和电子烟预防的 PME 重点测量的语言。