Testing messages about comparative risk of electronic cigarettes and combusted cigarettes

Independent and combined effects of very low nicotine cigarette messages and e-cigarette messages: a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

USA is considering reducing nicotine in cigarettes to non-addictive levels, coupled with promoting alternative nicotine delivery products (eg, e-cigarettes). However, effective communication is needed to reduce misperceptions about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) being less harmful than regular cigarettes.

METHODS

In 2022-2023, we conducted a four-group randomised clinical trial with a national probability sample from an online panel (971 adults who smoked cigarettes exclusively, 472 adults who dual used cigarettes and e-cigarettes and 458 adults aged 18-29 who had never smoked). Participants were randomised (parallel assignment) to one message condition: (1) VLNCs as harmful but easier to quit than regular cigarettes (n=468), (2) those who are not ready to quit should consider switching to e-cigarettes as less harmful alternatives (n=484), (3) combined (VLNC and e-cigarette messages; n=476) or (4) control condition (ie, water ads), n=473. The primary outcome was perceived absolute harm of VLNCs.

RESULTS

Perceived harm of VLNCs was higher in the VLNC condition compared with the e-cigarette and control conditions, and higher in the combined condition compared with the e-cigarette condition (adjusted p<0.05). Among adults who dual used, intention to switch to e-cigarettes was higher in the VLNC condition than the e-cigarette, combined or control conditions (adjusted p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

VLNC messages reduced the misperception that VLNCs are less harmful than cigarettes, but adding messages about e-cigarettes did not enhance desired outcomes. These VLNC messages can be considered during the rollout of a reduced nicotine policy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05506046.

Testing messaging strategies to correct beliefs about nicotine and relative harm perceptions of non-cigarette tobacco products compared to cigarettes: A 2 × 2 factorial experiment of factsheets

INTRODUCTION

The misperception that nicotine is a major cause of cancer is common and may relate to inaccurate relative harm perceptions about tobacco products. To assess if messaging can correct these misperceptions, we tested factsheets that manipulated presences vs absence of (1) a causal alternative (i.e., combustion, not nicotine, causes disease) and/or (2) a reason for the misinformation (i.e., nicotine is the focus of many health messages).

METHODS

We used an online 2 × 2 factorial experiment of n = 193 adults who smoke and believe nicotine causes cancer to assess the effect of different message strategies on perceptions of tobacco products and switch intention. Pre-post differences and between-condition differences were assessed.

RESULTS

Strength of agreement with the statement that nicotine is a major cause of cancer decreased and switch intentions increased after message exposure. The proportion of participants with low relative harm perceptions increased for e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (p <.0001) and decreased for very low nicotine cigarettes compared to cigarettes. The message with both strategies decreased agreement that nicotine causes cancer more than the message with only the causal alternative. There was no significant effect of condition on relative harm beliefs or switch intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

Messages with both corrective strategies can reduce the belief that nicotine causes cancer to a greater extent than messaging that only contains a causal alternative. Belief accuracy increased after any message exposure, but these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the study design. Combined strategies should be further investigated in larger samples.

Doing more with less: A proposal to advance cigarette packaging regulations in the United States

Cigarette packages are potent marketing tools. Following guidance from the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, many countries have sought to diminish this marketing power by mandating that (1) large graphic health warnings be affixed to the packages (i.e., text warnings combined with graphic images of the health consequences of smoking) and (2) all packages be fully "plain" in their design (i.e., all packages use the same drab/bland color and font type; no brand logos, other colors, or designs are permitted). Yet, the United States lags other countries in implementing regulations designed to blunt the marketing power of cigarette packages. This is not because of a lack of effort on the part of the Food and Drug Administration, the main governmental body charged with regulating tobacco products in the United States. Rather, it is because the regulatory options that that have been advanced in the country (e.g., graphic health warnings) have not been found - yet - to be legally feasible by its courts. This commentary works through some of the conceptual, practical, and legal issues regarding packaging regulations in the United States. It considers the political and bureaucratic risks involved with issuing new regulations. The overall intent is to prompt our field to think creatively about what is realistic in this regulatory space and to offer a novel perspective that may help move the United States tobacco control community forward in its efforts to reduce the promotional power of cigarette packages.

Perceptions about levels of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes, and associations with relative e-cigarette harm perceptions, e-cigarette use and interest

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Exposure to chemicals contributes to harm from nicotine products, and e-cigarette communications often refer to chemicals. However, while e-cigarette studies commonly measure perceived harmfulness of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes, few have assessed comparative perceptions about chemicals. This study measured perceived levels of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes and associations with e-cigarette/cigarette relative harm perceptions, e-cigarette use and interest.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This was an on-line cross-sectional survey of adults/young adults from a nationally representative research panel in the United States conducted in January 2021. Participants were independent samples of 1018 adults who smoked cigarettes and 1051 young adult non-smokers (aged 18-29 years).

MEASUREMENTS

Participants were asked their perceptions of the level of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes versus cigarettes (fewer/about the same/more/do not know), perceived harmfulness of using e-cigarette versus cigarettes (less/about the same/more/do not know) and their current e-cigarette use and use interest.

FINDINGS

Approximately 20% of all participants (18.1% of adult smokers, and 21.0% of young adult non-smokers) believed e-cigarettes contain fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes, while 35.6% of adult smokers and 24.9% of young adult non-smokers responded 'do not know'. Participants more frequently reported 'do not know' to the chemicals item than the harm item. Approximately half (51.0-55.7%) of those who believed e-cigarettes contain fewer harmful chemicals also believed e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes. Both beliefs were associated with higher odds of interest in using e-cigarettes [less harmful belief, odds ratio (OR) = 5.53, 95% confidence interval (CI = 2.93-10.43); fewer chemicals belief, OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.40-4.29] and past 30-day e-cigarette use (less harmful belief, OR = 2.53, 95% CI = 1.17-5.44; fewer chemicals belief, OR = 5.09, 95% CI = 2.31-11.19) for adults who smoke, but not young adult non-smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, most adults who smoke cigarettes and young adult non-smokers do not appear to think that e-cigarettes have fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes, and many are uncertain about how these levels compare.

Association of Vaping Identity and e-Cigarette Perceptions among Young Adults Who Vape

Background: In the U.S., 9.3% of young adults currently vape. However, little is known about how vaping identity (i.e., internalizing vaping as an important part of oneself) can influence young adults' e-cigarette perceptions. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between vaping identity and e-cigarette perceptions among young adults. Methods: Young adults who vape (N = 252, Mage = 24.7) were recruited to participate in an online survey assessing a trusted source of health information, e-cigarette harm perceptions, and intentions to abstain from vaping. We estimated associations between vaping identity on outcomes and the interaction of vaping identity and combustible cigarette use on outcomes. Results: Participants with higher vaping identity reported lower trust in government health agencies and a doctor, and higher trust in the tobacco industry and e-cigarette industry (ps < 0.05). Those with higher vaping identity also reported lower e-cigarette harm perceptions and intentions to abstain from vaping (ps < 0.05). Conclusions: Findings show that higher vaping identity is associated with greater trust in the tobacco industry, lower trust in health experts, lower e-cigarette harm perceptions, and lower intentions to abstain from using e-cigarettes. This suggests that efforts to reduce vaping among young adults may need to leverage messages that reduce the credibility of the tobacco industry and prevent nonsmoking young adults from developing a vaping identity.

Effect of a hypothetical modified risk tobacco product claim on heated tobacco product use intention and perceptions in young adults

INTRODUCTION

Modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims for heated tobacco products (HTPs) that convey reduced exposure compared with conventional cigarettes may promote product initiation and transition among young people. We assessed the effects of a hypothetical MRTP claim for HTPs on young adults' intention and perceptions of using HTPs and whether these effects differed by their current cigarette and e-cigarette use.

METHODS

We embedded a randomised between-subjects experiment into a web-based survey administered among a cohort of 2354 Southern California young adults (aged 20-23) in 2020. Participants viewed depictions of HTPs with an MRTP claim (n=1190) or no claim (n=1164). HTP use intention and HTP-related harm and use perceptions relative to cigarettes and e-cigarettes were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, participants who viewed versus did not view the claim did not differ in HTP use intention (28.5% vs 28.7%) but were more likely to perceive HTPs as less harmful than cigarettes (11.4% vs 7.0%; p<0.001). The experimental effect on HTP use intention did not differ among past 30-day cigarette smokers versus non-smokers (interaction adjusted OR (AOR)=0.78, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.76) but differed among past 30-day e-cigarette users versus non-users (interaction AOR=1.67, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.68).

DISCUSSION

The hypothetical MRTP claim may lower young adults' HTP harm perceptions compared with cigarettes but may not change HTP use intention overall or differentially for cigarette smokers. The larger effect on HTP use intention among e-cigarette users than non-users raises the question of whether MRTP claims may promote HTP use or HTP and e-cigarette dual use among young e-cigarette users.

US adult smokers' perceived relative risk on ENDS and its effects on their transitions between cigarettes and ENDS

BACKGROUND

Perceived risk reduction motivates smokers to switch to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). This research examines US smokers' relative risk perceptions and their prospective association with various behavioral stages of switching to ENDS.

METHODS

Data from the nationally representative, longitudinal Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Adult survey, Waves 1 (2014) through 5 (2019), were analyzed. We assessed the association between the perceived risk of ENDS relative to cigarettes ("less harmful" vs. "equally harmful" or "more harmful") and 1) adoption of ENDS (among never-ENDS-using smokers), 2) complete switching to ENDS (i.e., stopping smoking, among ever-ENDS-using smokers), and 3) avoiding reversion to smoking (among smokers who had switched to ENDS), at the next wave.

RESULTS

The proportion of US smokers perceiving ENDS as less harmful than cigarettes continually decreased, reaching 17.4% in Wave 5 (2019). Current smokers with such belief were more likely to adopt ENDS (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.15-1.50) and switch completely to ENDS (aOR 2.24; 95% CI 1.89-2.65) in the subsequent wave. Among smokers who had switched within the past year, such beliefs predicted avoidance of resumption of smoking in the next wave (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.33-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers' beliefs about the relative risk of ENDS compared to cigarettes had a strong and consistent association with transitions between smoking and ENDS use. Addressing the growing misperception about ENDS has the potential to contribute to public health by encouraging smokers' switching to ENDS.

Effects of modified risk tobacco product claims on consumer comprehension and risk perceptions of IQOS

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco industry studies on consumers' perceptions of modified risk claims (MRCs) often had important omissions (eg, no control group, not investigating whether consumers understand what 'switching completely' means). This study examined the effects of IQOS MRCs on risk perceptions and behavioural intentions.

METHOD

Based on tobacco companies' MRCs, we manipulated three MRC language features: explanation about 'switching completely' (absent vs present), number of diseases (single vs multiple) and language certainty (hypothetical vs certain). In an online experiment, we randomised 1523 US adult current smokers and 1391 young adult non-smokers to 1 of 9 conditions following a 2×2×2+1 control design. People reported their comprehension of 'switching completely', IQOS risk perceptions and behavioural intentions after message exposure.

RESULTS

More smokers exposed to MRCs that included an explanation about 'switching completely' (22.2%) (vs explanation absent (11.2%) and control (10.7%)) mentioned that 'switching completely' meant smoking 0 cigarettes. Compared with the control, several MRCs (eg, certain language) produced lower perceived risk of IQOS, including for diseases not mentioned in the MRCs. MRCs using certain and hypothetical language did not differ on any outcomes. MRCs highlighting reduced risk for a single disease and multiple diseases did not differ on any outcomes. MRCs did not influence behavioural intentions.

CONCLUSION

The Food and Drug Administration should ensure that consumers understand what 'switching completely' means in an MRC and recognize that some language features may mislead consumers into believing that a product reduces the risk of diseases not mentioned in an MRC.

Multiple Tobacco Product Use Conceptual Framework: A 2021 Update on Evidence

INTRODUCTION

One-third of adults in the United States who use tobacco regularly use two or more types of tobacco products. As the use of e-cigarettes and other noncombusted tobacco products increases-making multiple tobacco product (MTP) use increasingly common-it is essential to evaluate the complex factors that affect product use.

AIMS AND METHODS

In this update to our 2019 conceptual framework, we review and evaluate recent literature and expand the model to include ways in which MTP use may be affected by market factors such as the introduction of new products and socioenvironmental factors like marketing and advertising.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

MTP use patterns are complex, dynamic, and multiply determined by factors at the level of individuals, products, situations or contexts, and marketplace. Substitution, or using one product with the intent of decreasing use of another, and complementarity, or using multiple products for different reasons or purposes, explain patterns in MTP use. Moreover, substitution and complementarity may inform our understanding of how market changes targeted at one product, for instance, new product standards, bans, product pricing, and taxation, affect consumption of other tobacco products. New data from natural experiments and novel laboratory-based techniques add additional data and expand the framework.

IMPLICATIONS

A substantial proportion of people who use tobacco use more than one product. This review synthesizes and evaluates recent evidence on the diverse factors that affect MTP use in addition to expanding our framework. Our review is accompanied by suggested research questions that can guide future study.

Risk perception of IQOS™ and cigarettes: Temporal and cross-country comparisons

Background

Risk perception (RP) is central to smokers’ decision to switch to smoke-free tobacco and nicotine products (TNP). This study assessed temporal trends in the health RP of a novel heated tobacco product, IQOS^TM, relative to cigarettes, among current IQOS^TM users.

Methods

The analyses included repeated cross-sectional data from online surveys in Germany (2018–19), Italy (2018–19), and Japan (2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19) among a random sample of current adult IQOS^TM users from local registers of IQOS^TM users. The health RPs of cigarettes and IQOS^TM were assessed using the ABOUT™–Perceived Risk instrument, and their difference was described as the relative RP of IQOS^TM to cigarettes (RP_Cig:IQOS^TM).

Results

After adjustment for covariates, the relative RP_Cig:IQOS^TM was higher in 2018 than in 2019 (0.93; standard error, 0.33; P = 0.005). This was driven by an increase in the RP of IQOS^TM over time in Italy (2018: 42.6 [95% CI, 41.6–43.5]; 2019: 44.4 [43.4–45.4]) and Japan (2017: 44.0 [43.1–44.9); 2018: 45.9 [45.2–46.7]; 2019: 48.6 [47.9–49.4]), while the RP of cigarettes remained stable.

Conclusions

The relative RP of IQOS^TM decreased over time, driven by an increase in the RP of IQOS^TM, in agreement with epidemiological studies indicating a temporal reduction in the relative RP of smoke-free TNPs. Continued surveillance of the RP of novel TNPs is warranted to inform effective TNP risk communication and ensure that adults smokers who would otherwise continue to smoke understand the relative risks of novel TNPs.

•

Risk perception is central to smokers' decision to switch from cigarettes.

•

Little is known of temporal changes in risk perception of novel tobacco products.

•

Risk perception of heated tobacco increased in Italy and Japan.

•

Difference in risk perception of heated tobacco relative to cigarettes declined.

Associations Between Nicotine Knowledge and Smoking Cessation Behaviors Among US Adults Who Smoke

INTRODUCTION

Misperceptions about nicotine's contribution to smoking-related health harms could complicate efforts to reduce the public health burden of smoking. Study goals were to describe nicotine knowledge among adults who smoke and investigate whether misperceiving nicotine as a source of health harm was associated with beneficial health behaviors, or lower uptake of using less harmful sources of nicotine to support smoking cessation attempts.

METHOD

This study used longitudinal data from 9140 adults who participated in four waves of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study and were current smokers during the first wave. Logistic regressions estimated odds ratios for correct responses across six aspects of nicotine knowledge assessed in Wave 4. Longitudinal models estimated associations between misperceptions and cigarette consumption, and odds of making a quit attempt; self-reported cessation; e-cigarette use; and use of NRT or e-cigarettes to support quit attempts.

RESULTS

Participants who were non-White, older, and had lower educational attainment or income tended to be least knowledgeable about nicotine. Misperceiving nicotine as harmful to health was associated with increased odds of quit attempts (AOR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.23), lower odds of cessation success (AOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.98) and e-cigarette use (AOR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72, 0.86), and lower odds of using NRT (AOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.99) or e-cigarettes to support quit attempts (AOR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.71).

CONCLUSION

Harm reduction efforts may be impeded by misperceptions about nicotine. Further work should evaluate the effects of correcting such misperceptions through public education.

IMPLICATIONS

This study provides longitudinal evidence that among adult smokers, misperceiving nicotine as a primary cause of smoking-related diseases may be associated with reduced cessation success and lower likelihood of using less harmful nicotine products. These misperceptions may therefore impede efforts to encourage smokers ready to quit to use evidence-based cessation support such as nicotine replacement during quit attempts and limit the success of policies designed to shift smokers to less harmful sources of nicotine. Further work should evaluate the longitudinal effects of correcting nicotine misperceptions through public education targeted toward adults who smoke.

A Content Analysis of U.S. Adults' Open-Ended Responses to E-Cigarette Risk Messages

To better understand the processing of e-cigarette prevention messages, we conducted a content analysis of 1,968 participants' open-ended responses to one of four messages, which focused on industry manipulation (Big tobacco), financial and psychological cost of vaping (Can't afford), harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes (Formaldehyde), or uncertainty about the ingredients of e-liquids (Top secret). Health Belief Model (HBM) and perceived message effectiveness (PME) constructs were coded and the frequency of each variable was compared across message conditions. Among the HBM constructs, perceived health threat had the most mentions overall (38.8%). Self-efficacy of staying away from vaping had the fewest mentions across all messages (0.56%). For PME, participants more frequently mentioned message perceptions (15.75% positive message perceptions, 8.38% negative) than effect perceptions (3.46% positive effect perceptions, 1.37% negative). Big tobacco received the highest number of mentions for positive message perceptions and Formaldehyde received the highest number of mentions for positive effect perceptions. Future anti-vaping messages are recommended to address the efficacy element and to combine different themes to communicate harms of e-cigarettes.

Does the content and source credibility of health and risk messages related to nicotine vaping products have an impact on harm perception and behavioural intentions? A systematic review

AIMS

To systematically review the literature on (i) whether and how various risk messages about nicotine vaping products (NVPs) alter harm perception and behavioural intentions of smokers and non-smokers and (ii) how trust in sources of NVP risk communication affects message reception and behavioural intentions.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for articles published up to April 2020. Experimental and quasi-experimental studies on message effects and cross-sectional studies on source credibility were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Evidence Project Risk of Bias Tool were used to assess the quality of observational and intervention studies, respectively. For each outcome variable, we indicated whether there was an effect (as a 'yes' or 'no') and used effect direction plots to display information on the direction of effects.

RESULTS

Nicotine addiction messages resulted in greater health and addiction risk perceptions, relative risk messages comparing the health risks of NVPs to cigarette smoking increased the perception that NVPs are less harmful than combustible cigarettes, and a nicotine fact sheet corrected misperceptions of nicotine and NVPs. Smokers' intention to purchase, try or switch to NVPs was higher when exposed to a relative risk message and lower when exposed to nicotine addiction warnings. Trust in NVP risk information from public health agencies was associated with lower odds of; (i) NVP use and (ii) perceiving NVPs as less harmful, whereas those who trusted information from NVP companies were more likely to perceive NVPs as less harmful than combustible cigarettes.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative risk messages may help improve the accuracy of harm perceptions of nicotine vaping products and increase smokers' intentions to quit smoking and/or to switch to vaping, although the literature is nascent.

Effective package warning label systems for communicating relative risks of cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and e-cigarettes: An experimental study with Korean adults

BACKGROUND

Warning labels are a fundamental public health strategy for communicating about tobacco product risks, but effective warning labels for heated tobacco products (HTPs) and e-cigarettes (ECs) are yet to be determined. We examined the effect of two warning label systems for communicating the relative risks of using cigarettes, HTPs, and ECs.

METHODS

1,280 Korean adults were recruited from an online commercial panel, including susceptible non-users of cigarettes, HTPs, or ECs aged 19 to 29 (n = 444) and current users of these tobacco products aged 19 or older (n = 836). Participants viewed packages for cigarettes, HTPs, and ECs in a 2 × 2 between-subject experiment: "dashboard" icons integrated into warnings vs. no dashboard; different-sized warnings (70% of cigarette packages, 50% of HTP packs, 30% of EC packages) vs. current equal-sized warnings (50% of cigarette/HTP/EC packages).

RESULTS

Participants exposed to the dashboard warning system were more likely than those who were not to report higher perceived harm of cigarettes than ECs, cigarettes than HTPs, and HTPs than ECs, as well as perceived benefit of switching from cigarettes to HTPs, cigarettes to ECs, and HTPs to ECs. Participants exposed to the different-sized warning system did not report differences in perceived relative harm or benefit compared to those who were not, and no interaction of dashboard warnings with warning sizes was found.

CONCLUSION

The use of dashboard icons with texts and colors representing different levels of risk may promote public understanding about the continuum of risk across tobacco products.

Social media and E-cigarette use among US youth: Longitudinal evidence on the role of online advertisement exposure and risk perception

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies revealed a link between social media use and e-cigarette use among U.S. youth, but less is known about the mechanisms through which they interconnect. This study examined how social media and e-cigarette use are connected through online advertisement exposure and risk perception of e-cigarettes among U.S. youth.

METHODS

Youth aged 12-17 from the Public Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study Waves 2-4 (2014-2018) were included (N = 6,208). This study integrated the incidental exposure framework and the risk perception framework to guide study conceptualization and variable selection. Generalized structural equation modeling was performed to investigate the sequential mediation relationship between social media and e-cigarette use through online e-cigarette advertisement exposure and risk perception of e-cigarette use.

RESULTS

Youth respondents with more social media use were more likely to be exposed to e-cigarette advertisement at Wave 2 (OR = 1.13, p < 0.001), which led to lower e-cigarette risk perception at Wave 3 (β = -0.07, p < 0.001). Higher e-cigarette risk perception at Wave 3 resulted in lower likelihood of e-cigarette use at Wave 4 (OR = 0.57, p < 0.001). High social media use at Wave 2 was directly associated with high likelihood of e-cigarette use at Wave 4 (OR = 1.11, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that social media use is associated with increased e-cigarette use through online e-cigarette advertisement exposure and subsequently decreased e-cigarette risk perception among U.S. youth. Our findings underscore the importance of regulating online e-cigarette advertisement, with the emphasis of avoiding information that could twist youth's risk perception of e-cigarettes, which may in turn curtail youth e-cigarette use.

Will E-Cigarette Modified Risk Messages with a Nicotine Warning Polarize Smokers' Beliefs about the Efficacy of Switching Completely to E-Cigarettes in Reducing Smoking-Related Risks?

In the U.S., e-cigarette companies can apply for permission to use reduced or modified risk messages (MRMs) in their marketing materials. Because e-cigarette marketing materials should have a nicotine addictiveness warning, MRMs and a nicotine warning could appear together-resulting in a conflicting message. When reading a conflicting message, individuals assimilate evidence supporting their pre-existing beliefs and eventually develop stronger beliefs, diverging more from those with different pre-existing beliefs (i.e., polarization). This study examined if exposure to e-cigarette MRMs with a nicotine warning polarizes smokers' initially opposing beliefs about the efficacy of switching completely to e-cigarettes in reducing smoking-related risks, and if this polarization depends on individuals' need for closure. An online experiment randomized 761 U.S. adult smokers to either three MRMs with a nicotine warning or three control messages. People reported their perceived efficacy of switching completely to e-cigarettes at pre- and posttest and need for closure at pretest. Linear regression showed no polarization effects. Nonetheless, need for closure and pretest efficacy beliefs influenced message response: MRMs with a nicotine warning only enhanced efficacy beliefs of smokers with low pretest efficacy beliefs and low need for closure. Evaluation of e-cigarette mixed communication should consider individuals' motivational and cognitive differences.

Tackling Smoker Misperceptions about E-cigarettes using Expert Videos

Background

The pervasive misperception that e-cigarettes are equally or more harmful than combustible cigarettes is a barrier to current smokers switching to e-cigarettes. To tackle misperceptions, public health bodies are using informational videos, although their efficacy is unknown.

Methods

In our online study, current UK smokers who do not vape (n = 382) were randomized to view either: (1) a Cancer Research UK (CRUK) text-only video; (2) a video featuring leading e-cigarette experts (expert); or (3) a no video control condition, and then completed questions regarding e-cigarette harm perceptions.

Results

Compared to the control condition, participants in the CRUK condition, and especially those in the expert condition had more accurate harm perceptions of e-cigarettes and had more accurate knowledge of e-cigarette constituents. In the expert condition, 67% of individuals reported they would try an e-cigarette in a future quit attempt, compared with 51% in the CRUK condition and 35% in the control condition.

Conclusions

Our findings are encouraging in the face of mounting evidence that e-cigarette misperceptions are increasing. Whilst misperceptions are often characterized as resistant to correction, we find that carefully designed public health information videos have the potential to promote a more accurate, informed view of e-cigarettes, and encourage intended e-cigarette use among UK smokers. Importantly, we find this among current smokers who do not vape, a group often reported as having the highest levels of misperceptions and as having the most to gain from accurate e-cigarette perceptions.

Implications

There is mounting evidence that e-cigarette misperceptions are increasing, particularly among smokers who do not vape, a group who have most to gain from accurate information about e-cigarettes. Misperceptions are often characterized as difficult to change and there is relatively little research on how to correct e-cigarette misperceptions. Our research in the UK shows that, compared to controls, e-cigarette misperceptions can be corrected among those smokers who are shown carefully constructed expert videos. This work has important implications for the development and dissemination of these important messages.

Intentions to Seek Information about E-Cigarettes: Perceived Risk, Efficacy, and Smoking Identity

While e-cigarette use increases in the US., people's knowledge about e-cigarettes is limited. Information seeking may influence people's knowledge about e-cigarettes. Using the risk perception attitude framework and the identity theory, this study examined if U.S. adult current smokers (n = 1,841) differing in perceived efficacy of switching completely to e-cigarettes, perceived risk of cigarette smoking, and smoking identity report different levels of intentions to seek information about e-cigarettes. Results revealed that smokers with high perceived risk of smoking and perceived efficacy about switching completely to e-cigarettes (responsive group) reported strongest intentions to seek information about e-cigarettes (M = 5.41 on a 1-7 scale), followed by the group having low smoking risk perceptions and high e-cigarette efficacy beliefs (proactive group; M = 4.58), the group having high smoking risk perceptions and low e-cigarette efficacy beliefs (avoidance group; M = 3.18), and the group low on both factors (indifference group; M = 2.76). The differences between responsive group and proactive, avoidance, and indifference groups were greater among smokers with high (M_diff = 6.14) vs. low (M_diff = 5.27) smoking identity. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Young Adult JUUL Users' Beliefs About JUUL

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to test beliefs (risks to individual health, tobacco industry affiliation, and harm to others) with young adult current JUUL users to prompt decreased JUUL use.

METHODS

An explanatory sequential mixed-method design was used. Undergraduates aged 18-24 years at a large southwest university who owned and used a JUUL at least once a week completed an online survey (n = 667) in March 2019. Participant reactions to 6 JUUL-specific statements (harm to lungs and brain, tobacco industry ownership, communication device inside JUUL, harm to others and the environment) were assessed. Then, 51 participants completed an in-person interview 1-2 weeks later to explain what influenced their responses.

RESULTS

Across beliefs, females were more likely and those who used other tobacco products were less likely to say they would reduce JUUL use. Beliefs about harm to the brain, others, and the environment had the most influence on interview participants. Tobacco industry affiliation with JUUL was not viewed negatively and likely would not affect participant decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Messaging developed for other tobacco products may not have the same impact with young adult JUUL users. These findings provide guidance to tobacco use regulators by informing marketing message regulations to prevent initiation or prolonged use of JUUL and other pod-based products.

Communicating risk differences between electronic and combusted cigarettes: the role of the FDA-mandated addiction warning and a nicotine fact sheet

INTRODUCTION

The US Food and Drug Administration requires e-cigarettes to carry a nicotine addiction warning. This research compared the effects of messages communicating comparative risk of electronic and combusted cigarettes (CR messages) with and without the mandated warning and tested the effects of showing a nicotine fact sheet (NFS) before exposure to CR messages with warning.

METHOD

In an online experiment, 1528 US adult smokers were randomised to one of four conditions: (1) three CR messages, (2) three CR messages in condition one with an addiction warning, (3) an NFS followed by the three messages in condition 2 and (4) control messages. Outcomes included message reactions and perceived effectiveness, e-cigarette-related and cigarette-related beliefs and behavioural intentions and nicotine-related beliefs.

RESULTS

CR messages with and without an addiction warning did not differ. The NFS condition produced higher odds of correctly understanding the risk of nicotine and stronger beliefs that switching to e-cigarettes could reduce health risks (response efficacy) than other treatments. Compared with control, all messages made it more likely for people to report e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes and increased response efficacy and switch intentions to e-cigarettes. Only NFS condition increased correct beliefs about the risk of nicotine and self-efficacy about switching to e-cigarettes.

CONCLUSION

Including an addiction warning on CR messages did not reduce intentions to switch to e-cigarettes. Communicating accurate risk of nicotine together with CR messages and addiction warning increased smokers' self-efficacy beliefs about switching completely to e-cigarettes, making it a potentially promising antitobacco communication strategy.

An experimental study of messages communicating potential harms of electronic cigarettes

There has been an upsurge of e-cigarette use in the United States in recent years. While e-cigarettes may contain lower levels of toxic chemicals than combusted cigarettes, they still pose serious health hazards, including increased risk for heart and respiratory disease. Despite these risks, public awareness of the health harms of e-cigarettes remains low. Thus, it is important to educate the public about the potential harms of e-cigarettes. This study took themes commonly found in antismoking messages and used them to develop messages about harms of e-cigarettes. A national sample of 2801 current smokers and nonsmokers (aged 18+ years) were randomized to view one of four e-cigarette messages (harmful effect of chemicals, uncertainty about ingredients, distrust of big tobacco, or cost of vaping) or a control message (bottled water ad). Participants' reactions to the messages and behavioral intentions were assessed immediately following the exposure. MANOVA examined effects of the messages on blocks of the outcome variables and univariate analyses estimated adjusted means for each experimental condition for each outcome. The message about harmful chemicals was perceived as the most informative and effective and elicited the highest levels of negative emotions (Ps<0.05). However, on measures of actual effectiveness, the other messages performed equally well. Specifically, messages with different themes (harmful chemicals, uncertainty about ingredients, anti-industry, or financial cost) increased perceived risk of e-cigarettes, support for e-cigarette control, and lowered self-exempting beliefs and intentions to use e-cigarettes (Ps<0.05). Themes commonly used in anti-smoking messages may be effective in educating the public about the potential harm of e-cigarettes. The observed differential effects of the messages suggest the need to use multiple themes in a public education campaign about e-cigarettes.

E-Cigarette Health Harm Awareness and Discouragement: Implications for Health Communication

INTRODUCTION

Evidence for the health harms of e-cigarettes is growing, yet little is known about which harms may be most impactful in health messaging. Our study sought to identify which harms tobacco product users were aware of and which most discouraged them from wanting to vape.

METHODS

Participants were a convenience sample of 1,872 U.S. adult e-cigarette-only users, cigarette-only smokers, and dual users recruited in August 2018. In an online survey, participants evaluated 40 e-cigarette harms from seven categories: chemical exposures, device explosions, addiction, cardiovascular harm, respiratory harm, e-liquid toxicity, and other harms. Outcomes were awareness of the harms ("check all that apply") and the extent to which the harms discouraged vaping (5-point scale; (1) "not at all" to (5) "very much").

RESULTS

Awareness of most e-cigarette harms was modest, being highest for harms in the device explosions category of harms (44%) and lowest for the e-liquid toxicity category (16%). The harms with the highest mean discouragement from wanting to vape were the respiratory harm (M = 3.82) and exposure to chemicals (M = 3.68) categories. Harms in the addiction category were the least discouraging (M = 2.83) compared with other harms (all p < .001). Findings were similar for e-cigarette-only users, cigarette-only smokers, and dual users.

CONCLUSIONS

Addiction was the least motivating e-cigarette harm, a notable finding given that the current FDA e-cigarette health warning communicates only about nicotine addiction. The next generation of e-cigarette health warnings and communication campaigns should highlight other harms, especially respiratory harms and the chemical exposures that may lead to health consequences.

IMPLICATIONS

E-cigarette health harms related to respiratory effects, chemical exposures, and other health areas most discouraged vaping among tobacco users. In contrast, health harms about addiction least discouraged use. Several countries have begun implementing e-cigarette health warnings, including the United States, and many others are considering adopting similar policies. To increase impact, future warnings and other health communication efforts should communicate about health harms beyond addiction, such as the effects of e-cigarette use on respiratory health. Such efforts should communicate that e-cigarette use is risky and may pose less overall risk to human health than smoking, according to current evidence.

Young Adult Identification and Perception of Hashtag-Based Vaping Claims on Instagram

Social media platforms are home to large volumes of ambiguous hashtag-based claims about the health, modified-risk, and cessation benefits of electronic cigarette products (e.g., #Vapingsavedmylife). The objective of this study was to qualitatively explore how young adults interpret these hashtags on the popular platform Instagram. Specifically, we sought to identify if they view these hashtags as making health-related claims, and if they find these claims to be credible and valid. We conducted 12 focus groups in 2018 with non-tobacco users, smokers, dual users, and vapers between the ages of 18 and 24 (n = 69). Using real Instagram posts to guide discussion, participants reflected on the meaning of potentially claims-making hashtags. Participants interpreted the majority of the hashtags as making health-related claims. However, many participants felt that the claims were too exaggerated to be entirely valid. Some participants, including dual users and vapers, argued that smoking and vaping were largely equivalent. Smokers were particularly skeptical of claims. Findings suggest that the U. S. Food and Drug Administration should consider hashtag-based claims in their regulatory efforts. However, further research is needed on how to pragmatically address claims taking the form of hashtags given legal and practical constraints.

Effects of a Nicotine Fact Sheet on Perceived Risk of Nicotine and E-Cigarettes and Intentions to Seek Information About and Use E-Cigarettes

We examined how a nicotine fact sheet influenced smokers’ beliefs about nicotine and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), a potentially less harmful alternative to conventional cigarettes. In an exploratory online experiment, 756 US adult current and recent former smokers (quit in the past 2 years) were randomized to view a nicotine fact sheet or control messages (bottled water ads). Effects of the nicotine fact sheet on perceived nicotine addictiveness, nicotine risk, comparative risk of e-cigarettes, and dual use intentions were analyzed using log-Poisson regression with robust error. Linear regression analyzed effects on perceived absolute risk and switching and information seeking intentions about e-cigarettes. Compared to control, the nicotine fact sheet doubled the probability of disagreeing that nicotine is the main cause of smoking-related disease (26.2% vs. 12.7%, RR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.51, 2.82, p < 0.001). However, nearly three quarters of participants viewing the nicotine fact sheet still thought that nicotine is the main cause of smoking-related disease. The nicotine fact sheet increased smokers’ intentions to seek information about e-cigarettes (b = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.15, 0.74, p = 0.003). We did not find evidence suggesting unintended consequences of the nicotine fact sheet on smokers’ e-cigarettes risk perceptions or use intentions (e.g., increased dual use intentions or reduced absolute e-cigarette risk perception).

'The lesser devil you don't know': a qualitative study of smokers' responses to messages communicating comparative risk of electronic and combusted cigarettes

INTRODUCTION

Communicating to smokers that e-cigarettes deliver lower levels of harmful chemicals than combusted cigarettes is a challenging issue. This study qualitatively explored smokers' interpretations of messages communicating the risk of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes (comparative risk messages).

METHOD

We developed 12 print comparative risk messages and evaluated them in 12 focus groups with 72 adult smokers (18+ years old) in Atlanta, Georgia.

RESULTS

Participants interpreted uncertainty about health effects of e-cigarettes as an indicator of significant unknown risks, which some believed to be potentially more severe than the known effects of cigarettes (such as cancer and heart disease). Also, participants were sceptical about the lower risk claims. Some participants misinterpreted what 'switching completely' or 'switching 100% of the time' means, perceiving switching from e-cigarettes to combusted cigarettes as comparable with the use of both products. When chemicals in e-cigarettes were mentioned (eg, nicotine or formaldehyde), participants viewed e-cigarettes as very harmful and had difficulty reconciling this belief with the reduced risk claim. Comparative risk messages emphasising smoking risks were perceived as effective. Participants also appreciated being given an option to switch if they cannot quit. Participants suggested the inclusion of more facts and statistics and a credible message source (eg, public health agencies) to increase message effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Comparative risk messages may be more acceptable to smokers if they show direct comparisons of the number of toxic chemicals in cigarettes and e-cigarettes, are attributed to a credible source(s), and emphasise smoking risks.

Psychological distress and responses to comparative risk messages about electronic and combusted cigarettes

BACKGROUND

People with mental illness suffer disproportionately high health burdens of smoking. Communicating to these smokers that electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are a less harmful alternative to combusted cigarettes might help them reduce their health risks by encouraging complete switching to e-cigarettes. However, such messages might also cause unintended consequences (e.g., dual use of both combusted and e-cigarettes). Our study examined how smokers with vs. without serious psychological distress (SPD) responded to messages communicating reduced harm of e-cigarettes in relation to cigarettes.

METHOD

In an online experiment, 1400 U.S. adult smokers with and without SPD viewed 1 of 6 messages about reduced harm of e-cigarettes compared to cigarettes or a control message. Then participants reported e-cigarette- and cigarette-related beliefs, and behavioral intentions.

RESULTS

Message type (comparative risk messages vs. control) did not interact with SPD status to produce differential impacts on smokers with and without SPD. Regardless of being exposed to a comparative risk message or a control message, smokers with SPD reported greater perceived absolute risk of e-cigarettes and cigarettes, greater support for tobacco control, greater intentions to switch to e-cigarettes completely and seek help with quitting, and were less likely to report e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes compared to smokers without SPD.

DISCUSSION

Smokers with SPD had greater intentions to switch to e-cigarettes completely and seek help quitting compared to smokers without SPD, which indicates that smokers with SPD may be optimistic about e-cigarettes to help them quit smoking.

Feeling Hopeful Motivates Change: Emotional Responses to Messages Communicating Comparative Risk of Electronic Cigarettes and Combusted Cigarettes

BACKGROUND

Emotions are important in smoking-related communications, but the role of discrete positive and negative emotions in comparative risk messages about combusted and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is unclear.

METHOD

In an online experiment, 1,202 U.S. adult current smokers or recent quitters were randomized to view one of six messages about comparative risk of e-cigarettes and cigarettes. Participants reported their feelings of hope, happiness, fear, guilt, disgust, and anger and risk perceptions and behavioral intentions about e-cigarettes and cigarettes.

RESULTS

Hope was associated with higher perceived absolute cigarette risk, lower perceived absolute and comparative e-cigarette risk, and stronger intentions to quit smoking, seek quit help, use nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), switch to e-cigarettes, and use e-cigarettes exclusively versus dual use. Happiness was related to stronger intentions to seek quit help, use NRT, and switch to e-cigarettes but higher perceived comparative risk of e-cigarettes. Fear was associated with stronger intentions to quit smoking, seek quit help, use NRT, and switch to e-cigarettes. Guilt was related to higher perceived absolute cigarette risk, lower perceived comparative e-cigarette risk, and stronger intentions to use NRT. Disgust was associated with higher absolute and comparative e-cigarette risk and stronger intentions to quit smoking, seek quit help, and use e-cigarettes exclusively versus dual use. Anger was related to lower perceived absolute cigarette risk, higher perceived comparative e-cigarette risk, and weaker intentions to quit smoking.

CONCLUSION

Comparative risk messages about e-cigarettes that arouse hope, fear, and guilt and avoid anger might be particularly likely to have positive impact on smokers.

Targeted Versus Nontargeted Communication About Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems in Three Smoker Groups

Background: This study used an audience segmentation and message targeting approach to identify three distinct smoker groups-Older Freedom Smokers (OFS), Reluctant Smokers (RS), and Young Enthusiasts (YE)-and examined whether an electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) message targeting each smoker group (targeted message) was associated with more health-enhancing outcomes than messages targeting other groups (nontargeted messages). Methods: An online experiment was conducted among 580 adult smokers with 180 OFS, 200 RS, and 200 YE. Each smoker group viewed a targeted message and two nontargeted messages in a random order. Following the presentation of each message, participants reported their perceived message effectiveness, message reactions, ENDS- and cigarette-related beliefs, and behavioral intentions. Results: The targeted vs. nontargeted messages mostly did not produce more health-enhancing outcomes on perceptions of absolute and comparative risks of ENDS and cigarettes, response efficacy of ENDS, and self-efficacy as well as intentions to quit smoking. Conclusions: Our targeted messages did not appear to be a better choice over nontargeted messages to communicate about ENDS to smokers. Given the increasing call to accurately inform the public of the risk differences among various tobacco products, future studies should continue to explore whether targeted messages could be employed to communicate about the comparative risks of ENDS.