Reactions to tobacco warning labels: predictors and outcomes of adaptive and maladaptive responses

Daniel Owusu, Jiyeon So, Lucy Popova

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: The Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) responses that emerge from spontaneous reactions to cigarette warning labels remain understudied. We identified the EPPM responses in reactions to cigarette warning labels and evaluated their predictors and relationship with warning perceptions. Methods: U.S. adult current smokers, transitioning smokers (quit in the past two years or currently quitting) and never smokers (n = 1838) saw nine of 81 cigarette warning labels. Participants freely wrote their thoughts after viewing the first label and reported perceived informativeness, negative emotions, and denial for this label. Responses were coded for the presence of the EPPM response categories. Multivariable logistic regression models described adaptive and maladaptive respondent characteristics, and linear regression models assessed the relationship between the response categories and label perceptions. Results: Participants’ responses contained adaptive (65.4%), maladaptive (16.5%), no response (14.7%), and mixed responses (both adaptive and maladaptive; 3.4%). Current smokers had decreased odds of adaptive response compared to never and transitioning smokers. Compared to text warnings, pictorial warnings were associated with increased odds of adaptive and decreased odds of maladaptive responses. Adaptive response was associated with increased odds of intentions to quit smoking. Adaptive respondents reported the highest levels of informativeness and negative emotions among the four response categories. Conclusions: The finding demonstrating predominantly adaptive (and few maladaptive) responses to warning labels supports the continued use of fear appeals in warning label design. The greater adaptive and lower maladaptive responses to pictorial warnings could serve as additional evidence for FDA to implement pictorial warning labels.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAddiction Research and Theory
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2018 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Tobacco Products
Tobacco
Linear Models
Emotions
Logistic Models
Fear
Smoking
Surveys and Questionnaires
Denial (Psychology)

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)

Cite this

@article{ef4f973d1f6046f89a4af1a69bf3ad97,
title = "Reactions to tobacco warning labels: predictors and outcomes of adaptive and maladaptive responses",
abstract = "Background: The Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) responses that emerge from spontaneous reactions to cigarette warning labels remain understudied. We identified the EPPM responses in reactions to cigarette warning labels and evaluated their predictors and relationship with warning perceptions. Methods: U.S. adult current smokers, transitioning smokers (quit in the past two years or currently quitting) and never smokers (n = 1838) saw nine of 81 cigarette warning labels. Participants freely wrote their thoughts after viewing the first label and reported perceived informativeness, negative emotions, and denial for this label. Responses were coded for the presence of the EPPM response categories. Multivariable logistic regression models described adaptive and maladaptive respondent characteristics, and linear regression models assessed the relationship between the response categories and label perceptions. Results: Participants’ responses contained adaptive (65.4{\%}), maladaptive (16.5{\%}), no response (14.7{\%}), and mixed responses (both adaptive and maladaptive; 3.4{\%}). Current smokers had decreased odds of adaptive response compared to never and transitioning smokers. Compared to text warnings, pictorial warnings were associated with increased odds of adaptive and decreased odds of maladaptive responses. Adaptive response was associated with increased odds of intentions to quit smoking. Adaptive respondents reported the highest levels of informativeness and negative emotions among the four response categories. Conclusions: The finding demonstrating predominantly adaptive (and few maladaptive) responses to warning labels supports the continued use of fear appeals in warning label design. The greater adaptive and lower maladaptive responses to pictorial warnings could serve as additional evidence for FDA to implement pictorial warning labels.",
author = "Daniel Owusu and Jiyeon So and Lucy Popova",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/16066359.2018.1531127",
language = "English",
journal = "Addiction Research and Theory",
issn = "1606-6359",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",

}

Reactions to tobacco warning labels : predictors and outcomes of adaptive and maladaptive responses. / Owusu, Daniel; So, Jiyeon; Popova, Lucy.

In: Addiction Research and Theory, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reactions to tobacco warning labels

T2 - predictors and outcomes of adaptive and maladaptive responses

AU - Owusu, Daniel

AU - So, Jiyeon

AU - Popova, Lucy

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background: The Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) responses that emerge from spontaneous reactions to cigarette warning labels remain understudied. We identified the EPPM responses in reactions to cigarette warning labels and evaluated their predictors and relationship with warning perceptions. Methods: U.S. adult current smokers, transitioning smokers (quit in the past two years or currently quitting) and never smokers (n = 1838) saw nine of 81 cigarette warning labels. Participants freely wrote their thoughts after viewing the first label and reported perceived informativeness, negative emotions, and denial for this label. Responses were coded for the presence of the EPPM response categories. Multivariable logistic regression models described adaptive and maladaptive respondent characteristics, and linear regression models assessed the relationship between the response categories and label perceptions. Results: Participants’ responses contained adaptive (65.4%), maladaptive (16.5%), no response (14.7%), and mixed responses (both adaptive and maladaptive; 3.4%). Current smokers had decreased odds of adaptive response compared to never and transitioning smokers. Compared to text warnings, pictorial warnings were associated with increased odds of adaptive and decreased odds of maladaptive responses. Adaptive response was associated with increased odds of intentions to quit smoking. Adaptive respondents reported the highest levels of informativeness and negative emotions among the four response categories. Conclusions: The finding demonstrating predominantly adaptive (and few maladaptive) responses to warning labels supports the continued use of fear appeals in warning label design. The greater adaptive and lower maladaptive responses to pictorial warnings could serve as additional evidence for FDA to implement pictorial warning labels.

AB - Background: The Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) responses that emerge from spontaneous reactions to cigarette warning labels remain understudied. We identified the EPPM responses in reactions to cigarette warning labels and evaluated their predictors and relationship with warning perceptions. Methods: U.S. adult current smokers, transitioning smokers (quit in the past two years or currently quitting) and never smokers (n = 1838) saw nine of 81 cigarette warning labels. Participants freely wrote their thoughts after viewing the first label and reported perceived informativeness, negative emotions, and denial for this label. Responses were coded for the presence of the EPPM response categories. Multivariable logistic regression models described adaptive and maladaptive respondent characteristics, and linear regression models assessed the relationship between the response categories and label perceptions. Results: Participants’ responses contained adaptive (65.4%), maladaptive (16.5%), no response (14.7%), and mixed responses (both adaptive and maladaptive; 3.4%). Current smokers had decreased odds of adaptive response compared to never and transitioning smokers. Compared to text warnings, pictorial warnings were associated with increased odds of adaptive and decreased odds of maladaptive responses. Adaptive response was associated with increased odds of intentions to quit smoking. Adaptive respondents reported the highest levels of informativeness and negative emotions among the four response categories. Conclusions: The finding demonstrating predominantly adaptive (and few maladaptive) responses to warning labels supports the continued use of fear appeals in warning label design. The greater adaptive and lower maladaptive responses to pictorial warnings could serve as additional evidence for FDA to implement pictorial warning labels.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062353469&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062353469&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/16066359.2018.1531127

DO - 10.1080/16066359.2018.1531127

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85062353469

JO - Addiction Research and Theory

JF - Addiction Research and Theory

SN - 1606-6359

ER -