1
|
Schmidt AM, Kowitt SD, Myers AE, Goldstein AO. Attitudes towards Potential New Tobacco Control Regulations among U.S. Adults. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2018; 15:E72. [PMID: 29303963 PMCID: PMC5800171 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15010072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2017] [Revised: 12/21/2017] [Accepted: 12/25/2017] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
Favorable attitudes towards tobacco control policies can facilitate their implementation and success. We examined attitudes toward four potential U.S. Federal tobacco regulations (banning menthol from cigarettes, reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes, banning candy and fruit flavored electronic cigarettes, and banning candy and fruit flavored little cigars and cigarillos) and associations with individual and state variables. A nationally representative phone survey of 4337 adults assessed attitudes toward potential policies. Weighted logistic regression was used to assess relationships between attitudes and demographic factors, smoking behavior, beliefs about the government (knowledge, trust, and credibility), exposure to tobacco control campaigns, and state variables from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System. Most respondents supported three out of four policies. Respondents that were female, non-white, Latino, living below the poverty line, had less than high school education, were of older age, did not smoke, had higher trust in government, and were exposed to national tobacco control campaigns had higher odds of expressing favorable attitudes toward potential new tobacco regulations than did their counterparts. No state-level effects were found. While differences in attitudes were observed by individual demographic characteristics, behaviors, and beliefs, a majority of participants supported most of the potential new tobacco regulations surveyed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison M Schmidt
- Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
| | - Sarah D Kowitt
- Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
| | - Allison E Myers
- Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
- Counter Tools, Carrboro, NC 27510, USA.
| | - Adam O Goldstein
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
- Department of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
Objectives We used eye-tracking to examine smokers' visual attention in one of 4 antismoking ad contexts (alone, next to cigarette ad, tobacco display, or cooler). Participants viewed 4 ad types (graphic, intended emotive, and benefits of quitting-graphic ads, and benefits of quitting-informational ads), each with 3 areas of interest (AOI) (anti-ad image, anti-ad text, and other text). Methods Current smokers (N = 153) viewed ads for 10 seconds each. Multivariable random effect linear regressions with post-test comparisons (with sidak-adjusted p-values) were used to test for differences in fixations and dwell time by ad context and type while adjusting for covariates. Visual attention was adjusted by percentage of anti-ad area taken up by each AOI. Results Adjusting for covariates, there were no differences by ad context (p > .05). Fixations and dwell time were greatest for the image of the benefits of quitting-graphic ad, the text of the graphic ad, and the other text of the intended emotive ad (all ps < .005). Conclusions: Visual attention to antismoking ads did not vary by ad context but varied significantly by ad type.
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
Objective To examine how smokers perceive FDA oversight of e-cigarettes, hookah, and cigars. Methods Current US smokers (N = 1,520) participating in a randomized clinical trial of pictorial cigarette pack warnings completed a survey that included questions about attitudes toward new FDA regulations covering newly deemed tobacco products (ie, regulation of e-cigarettes, nicotine gels or liquids used in e-cigarettes, hookah, and cigars). Results Between 47% and 56% of current smokers viewed these new FDA regulations favorably and between 17% - 24% opposed them. Favorable attitudes toward the regulations were more common among smokers with higher quit intentions (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.33) and more negative beliefs about smokers (aOR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.33). Participants with higher education, higher income, and previous exposure to e-cigarette advertisements had higher odds of expressing positive attitudes toward the new FDA regulations (p < .05). Conclusions Almost half of current smokers viewed FDA regulation of newly deemed tobacco products favorably. Local and state policy-makers and tobacco control advocates can build on this support to enact and strengthen tobacco control provisions for e-cigarettes, cigars, and hookah.
Collapse
|
4
|
Niederdeppe J, Kellogg M, Skurka C, Avery RJ. Market-level exposure to state antismoking media campaigns and public support for tobacco control policy in the United States, 2001-2002. Tob Control 2017; 27:tobaccocontrol-2016-053506. [PMID: 28315843 DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053506] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2016] [Revised: 02/06/2017] [Accepted: 02/14/2017] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study tests whether exposure to state antismoking media campaigns is associated with increased support for comprehensive bans on smoking indoors and cigarette advertising. METHODS We combine commercially available data on market-level state-sponsored antismoking advertisements with three waves of the Current Population Survey's Tobacco Use Supplement to test the relationship between market-level volume of state antismoking advertising exposure and support for tobacco control policy between 2001 and 2002. We use logistic regression to assess which message themes employed in the advertisements are associated with increased support for tobacco control policy. RESULTS The overall market-level volume of exposure to state antismoking ads targeted to adults or the general population was associated with significant increases in support for comprehensive indoor smoking bans. These effects were driven by exposure to ads emphasising the health consequences of smoking to others, anti-industry appeals and irrationality/addiction appeals. Evidence of campaign impact on support for tobacco advertising bans was less clear and, when statistically significant, small in magnitude relative to the impact of the state economic and tobacco control policy environment. CONCLUSIONS This study shows that that large-scale antismoking media campaigns can have a meaningful secondary impact on support for comprehensive indoor smoking bans. Future research should identify the conditions under which mass media campaigns primarily targeting smoking behaviour may influence public support for a variety of other tobacco control policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeff Niederdeppe
- Department of Communication, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
| | - Maxwell Kellogg
- Department of Policy Analysis and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
| | - Christofer Skurka
- Department of Communication, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
| | - Rosemary J Avery
- Department of Policy Analysis and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rose SW, Emery SL, Ennett S, McNaughton Reyes HL, Scott JC, Ribisl KM. Public Support for Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act Point-of-Sale Provisions: Results of a National Study. Am J Public Health 2015; 105:e60-7. [PMID: 26270303 DOI: 10.2105/ajph.2015.302751] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We assessed public and smoker support for enacted and potential point-of-sale (POS) tobacco-control policies under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. METHODS We surveyed a US nationally representative sample of 17, 507 respondents (6595 smokers) in January through February 2013, and used linear regression to calculate weighted point estimates and identify factors associated with support for POS policies among adults and smokers. RESULTS Overall, nonsmokers were more supportive than were smokers. Regardless of smoking status, African Americans, Hispanics, women, and those of older ages were more supportive than White, male, and younger respondents, respectively. Policy support varied by provision. More than 80% of respondents supported minors' access restrictions and more than 45% supported graphic warnings. Support was lowest for plain packaging (23%), black-and-white advertising (26%), and a ban on menthol cigarettes (36%). CONCLUSIONS Public support for marketing and POS provisions is low relative to other areas of tobacco control. Tobacco-control advocates and the Food and Drug Administration should build on existing levels of public support to promote and maintain evidence-based, but controversial, policy changes in the retail environment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shyanika W Rose
- At the time of the study, Shyanika W. Rose, Susan Ennett, and Kurt M. Ribisl were with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes was with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health. Sherry L. Emery was with the Health Media Collaboratory, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. John C. Scott was with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
| | - Sherry L Emery
- At the time of the study, Shyanika W. Rose, Susan Ennett, and Kurt M. Ribisl were with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes was with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health. Sherry L. Emery was with the Health Media Collaboratory, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. John C. Scott was with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
| | - Susan Ennett
- At the time of the study, Shyanika W. Rose, Susan Ennett, and Kurt M. Ribisl were with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes was with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health. Sherry L. Emery was with the Health Media Collaboratory, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. John C. Scott was with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
| | - Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes
- At the time of the study, Shyanika W. Rose, Susan Ennett, and Kurt M. Ribisl were with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes was with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health. Sherry L. Emery was with the Health Media Collaboratory, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. John C. Scott was with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
| | - John C Scott
- At the time of the study, Shyanika W. Rose, Susan Ennett, and Kurt M. Ribisl were with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes was with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health. Sherry L. Emery was with the Health Media Collaboratory, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. John C. Scott was with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
| | - Kurt M Ribisl
- At the time of the study, Shyanika W. Rose, Susan Ennett, and Kurt M. Ribisl were with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Heath Luz McNaughton Reyes was with the Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health. Sherry L. Emery was with the Health Media Collaboratory, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. John C. Scott was with the Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
| |
Collapse
|