Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Affect, risk perception, and the use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes: a population study of U.S. adults

Authors: Lucy Popova, Daniel Owusu, Scott R. Weaver, Catherine B. Kemp, C. K. Mertz, Terry F. Pechacek, Paul Slovic

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Tobacco companies argue that the decision to smoke is made by well-informed rational adults who have considered all the risks and benefits of smoking. Yet in promoting their products, the tobacco industry frequently relies on affect, portraying their products as part of a desirable lifestyle. Research examining the roles of affect and perceived risks in smoking has been scant and non-existent for novel tobacco products, such as electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).

Methods

We examined the relationship between affect, perceived risk, and current use for cigarettes and e-cigarettes in 2015 in a nationally representative sample of 5398 U.S. adults who were aware of e-cigarettes.

Results

Participants held various affective associations with tobacco products, and affect towards cigarettes was more negative than affect towards e-cigarettes. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), affect towards cigarettes and e-cigarettes was associated with cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use respectively, and these associations were both direct and partially mediated by risk perceptions towards smoking and e-cigarette use. More positive affect towards cigarettes or e-cigarettes was associated with lower perceived risks, which in turn was associated with higher odds of being a current cigarette or e-cigarette user.

Conclusions

In developing models explaining tobacco use behavior, or in creating public communication campaigns aimed at curbing tobacco use, it is useful to focus not only on the reason based predictors, such as perceptions of risks and benefits, but also on affective predictors. Educational efforts aimed at further smoking reductions should highlight and reinforce negative images and associations with cigarettes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
United States Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking—50 years of progress: a report of the surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Smoking and Health; 2014.
2.
Jha P, Peto R. Global effects of smoking, of quitting, and of taxing tobacco. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(1):60–8.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Jamal A. Current cigarette smoking among adults—United States, 2005–2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(44):1205–11.
4.
Slovic P. Smoking: risk, perception, and policy. Sage publications; 2001.
5.
6.
Bandura A. Social cognitive theory and exercise of control over HIV infection. In: DiClemente RJ, Peterson JL, editors. Preventing AIDS: Theories and methods of behavioral interventions. Edn. New York: Plenum Press; 1994. p. 25–59.CrossRef
7.
Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Rational actors or rational fools: implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics. J Socio-Econ. 2002;31(4):329–42.CrossRef
8.
Sloan FA, Wang Y. Economic theory and evidence on smoking behavior of adults. Addiction. 2008;103(11):1777–85.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Viscusi WK. Smoking: making the risky decision. Oxford university press on demand; 1992.
10.
Henningfield JE, Rose CA, Zeller M. Tobacco industry litigation position on addiction: continued dependence on past views. Tob Control. 2006;15(suppl 4):iv27–36.PubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Mather L. Theorizing about trial courts: lawyers, policymaking, and tobacco litigation. Law & Social Inquiry. 1998;23(4):897–940.CrossRef
12.
United States v. Philip Morris, 449 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2006).
13.
14.
Anderson SJ, Pollay RW, Ling PM. Taking ad-vantage of lax advertising regulation in the USA and Canada: reassuring and distracting health-concerned smokers. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63(8):1973–85.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Pollay RW, Dewhirst T. The dark side of marketing seemingly "light" cigarettes: successful images and failed fact. Tob Control. 2002;11(Suppl 1):I18–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994;49(8):709.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Slovic P. The ‘value’of smoking: an editorial. Health, risk & society. 2012;14(5):409–14.CrossRef
18.
19.
Anderson SJ, Dewhirst T, Ling PM. Every document and picture tells a story: using internal corporate document reviews, semiotics, and content analysis to assess tobacco advertising. Tob Control. 2006;15(3):254–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
21.
Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. Eur J Oper Res. 2007;177(3):1333–52.CrossRef
22.
Damasio AR. Descartes' error: emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Grosset/Putnam; 1994.
23.
Trafimow D, Sheeran P, Lombardo B, Finlay KA, Brown J, Armitage CJ. Affective and cognitive control of persons and behaviours. Br J Soc Psychol. 2004;43(2):207–24.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Lawton R, Conner M, McEachan R. Desire or reason: predicting health behaviors from affective and cognitive attitudes. Health Psychol. 2009;28(1):56.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zajonc RB. Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. Am Psychol. 1980;35(2):151.CrossRef
26.
Finucane ML, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson SM. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Decis Mak. 2000;13(1):1–17.
27.
Marks AD, O'Neill G, Hine DW. Role of affect, expectancies and dual processes of cognition in predicting adult cigarette smoking. Aust J Psychol. 2008;60(3):160–7.
28.
Schutte NS, Marks AD. Smoking status and intention to quit: the role of affective associations and expectancies. J Drug Educ. 2013;43(4):321–9.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Abrams DB. Promise and peril of e-cigarettes: can disruptive technology make cigarettes obsolete? JAMA. 2014;311(2):135–6.CrossRefPubMed
30.
31.
Stimson GV, Thom B, Uhl A. Disruptive innovations: the rise of the e-cigarette. International Journal of Drug Policy. 2014;25(4):653–5.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Pechacek TF, Nayak P, Gregory KR, Weaver SR, Eriksen MP. The potential that electronic nicotine delivery systems can be a disruptive technology: results from a national survey. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;18(10):1989–97.
33.
Fairchild AL, Bayer R, Colgrove J. The renormalization of smoking? E-cigarettes and the tobacco “endgame”. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(4):293–5.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Kalkhoran S, Glantz SA. E-cigarettes and smoking cessation in real-world and clinical settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(2):116–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Dutra LM, Grana R, Glantz SA. Philip Morris research on precursors to the modern e-cigarette since 1990. Tob Control; 2017;26:e97–e105.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Cooper M, Case KR, Loukas A, Creamer MR, Perry CL. E-cigarette dual users, exclusive users and perceptions of tobacco products. Am J Health Behav. 2016;40(1):108–16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Wackowski OA, Delnevo CD. Young Adults’ Risk Perceptions of Various Tobacco Products Relative to Cigarettes Results From the National Young Adult Health Survey. Health Educ Behav. 2015;43(3):328–36.
41.
Piñeiro B, Correa JB, Simmons VN, Harrell PT, Menzie NS, Unrod M, Meltzer LR, Brandon TH. Gender differences in use and expectancies of e-cigarettes: online survey results. Addict Behav. 2016;52:91–7.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Popova L, So J, Sangalang A, Neilands TB, Ling P. Do emotions spark interest in alternative tobacco products? Health Educ Behav. 2017;44(2):598-612.
43.
Peters E, Slovic P. The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1996;26(16):1427–53.
44.
45.
Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User's Guide: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables: User'ss Guide: Muthén & Muthén; 2010.
46.
Flora DB, Curran PJ. An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychol Methods. 2004;9(4):466.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
47.
Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef
48.
Enders CK. Applied missing data analysis. Guilford press; 2010.
49.
Weaver SR, Kemp CB, Heath JW, Pechacek TF, Eriksen MP. Use of nicotine in electronic nicotine and non-nicotine delivery systems by U.S. adults, 2015. Public Health Rep. 2017;132(5):545–8.
50.
Krippendorff K. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Sage; 2004.
51.
Byron MJ, Baig SA, Moracco KE, Brewer NT. Adolescents’ and adults’ perceptions of ‘natural’,‘organic’and ‘additive-free’cigarettes, and the required disclaimers. Tob Control. 2016;25:517–20.
52.
Majeed BA, Weaver SR, Gregory KR, Whitney CF, Slovic P, Pechacek TF, Eriksen MP. Changing perceptions of harm of E-cigarettes among U.S. adults, 2012-2015. Am J Prev Med. 2017;52(3):331–8.
53.
Fong GT, Hammond D, Laux FL, Zanna MP, Cummings KM, Borland R, Ross H. The near-universal experience of regret among smokers in four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey. Nicotine Tob Res 2004, 6(Suppl 3):S341-S351.
54.
O'Connor RJ, Thrasher JF, Bansal-Travers M. Exploring relationships among experience of regret, delay discounting, and worries about future effects of smoking among current smokers. Substance use & misuse. 2016;51(9):1245–50.
55.
56.
McAfee T, Davis KC, Alexander RL, Pechacek TF, Bunnell R. Effect of the first federally funded US antismoking national media campaign. Lancet. 2013;382(9909):2003–11.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Huang L-L, Thrasher JF, Abad EN, Cummings KM, Bansal-Travers M, Brown A, Nagelhout GE. The US National tips from former smokers antismoking campaign promoting awareness of smoking-related risks, cessation resources, and cessation behaviors. Health Educ Behav. 2015;42(4):480–6.
58.
59.
Canadian Cancer Society. Cigarette package health warnings: international status report. 5th ed; 2016.
60.
61.
Noar SM, Hall MG, Francis DB, Ribisl KM, Pepper JK, Brewer NT. Pictorial cigarette pack warnings: a meta-analysis of experimental studies. Tob Control. 2016;25:341–54.
62.
Noar SM, Francis DB, Bridges C, Sontag J, Ribisl KM, Brewer NT. The impact of strengthening cigarette pack warnings: Systematic review of longitudinal observational studies. Soc Sci Med. 2016;164:118–29.
63.
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. FDA, 696 F.3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
64.
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission, 447 US 557 (1980).
65.
King BA, Patel R, Nguyen KH, Dube SR. Trends in awareness and use of electronic cigarettes among US adults, 2010–2013. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015;17(2):219–27.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Weaver SR, Majeed BA, Pechacek TF, Nyman AL, Gregory KR, Eriksen MP. Use of electronic nicotine delivery systems and other tobacco products among USA adults, 2014: results from a national survey. International journal of public health. 2016;61(2):177–88.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Rosenstock I. Health belief model and preventive health behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2(4):354–86.CrossRef
68.
Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl J, Beckman J, editors. Control: From cognition to behaviors. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1985. p. 11–39.
69.
Johnston LD, O'Malley PM, Miech RA, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use: 1975–2014: overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan; 2015.
70.
Bachman JG, Johnson LD, O'Malley PM. Explaining recent increases in students' marijuana use: impacts of perceived risks and disapproval, 1976 through 1996. Am J Public Health. 1998;88(6):887–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
71.
Slovic P, Layman M, Kraus N, Flynn J, Chalmers J, Gesell G. Perceived risk, stigma, and potential economic impacts of a high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada. Risk Anal. 1991;11(4):683–96.CrossRefPubMed
72.
Caraballo RS, Giovino GA, Pechacek TF. Self-reported cigarette smoking vs. serum cotinine among US adolescents. Nicotine Tob Res. 2004;6(1):19–25.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Affect, risk perception, and the use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes: a population study of U.S. adults
Authors
Lucy Popova
Daniel Owusu
Scott R. Weaver
Catherine B. Kemp
C. K. Mertz
Terry F. Pechacek
Paul Slovic
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5306-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Public Health 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research article

A qualitative study of community perception and acceptance of biological larviciding for malaria mosquito control in rural Burkina Faso

Research article

A postpartum vaccination promotion intervention using motivational interviewing techniques improves short-term vaccine coverage: PromoVac study

Research article

Subjective and objective assessment of sedentary behavior among college employees

Debate

Are we doing enough to prevent poor-quality antimalarial medicines in the developing world?

Research article

The use of advanced medical technologies at home: a systematic review of the literature

Research article

The challenge of maintaining microscopist capacity at basic levels for malaria elimination in Jiangsu Province, China