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 STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine 5/2015

01-10-2015 | Original Article

Which Images and Features in Graphic Cigarette Warnings Predict Their Perceived Effectiveness? Findings from an Online Survey of Residents in the UK

Authors: Linda D. Cameron, Ph.D, Brian Williams, Ph.D

Published in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine | Issue 5/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Many countries are implementing graphic warnings for cigarettes. Which graphic features influence their effectiveness remains unclear.

Purpose

To identify features of graphic warnings predicting their perceived effectiveness in discouraging smoking.

Method

Guided by the Common-Sense Model of responses to health threats, we content-analyzed 42 graphic warnings for attributes of illness risk representations and media features (e.g., photographs, metaphors). Using data from 15,536 survey participants, we conducted stratified logistic regressions testing which attributes predict participant selections of warnings as effective.

Results

Images of diseased body parts predicted greater perceived effectiveness; OR = 6.53–12.45 across smoking status (smoker, ex-smoker, young non-smoker) groups. Features increasing perceived effectiveness included images of dead or sick persons, children, and medical technology; focus on cancer; and photographs. Attributes decreasing perceived effectiveness included infertility/impotence, addictiveness, cigarette chemicals, cosmetic appearance, quitting self-efficacy, and metaphors.

Conclusions

These findings on representational and media attributes predicting perceived effectiveness can inform strategies for generating graphic warnings.
Literature
1.
2.
World Health Organization. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
3.
4.
Canadian Cancer Society. Cigarette Package Health Warnings: International Status Report. 3rd ed. Toronto: Framework Convention Alliance; 2012.
5.
Borland R, Yong HH, Wilson N, et al. How reactions to cigarette packet health warnings influence quitting: Findings from the ITC four-country survey. Addiction. 2009; 104: 669-675.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Hammond D, Fong GT, McDonald PW, Cameron R, Brown KS. Impact of the graphic Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behavior. Tob Control. 2003; 12: 391-395.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
8.
Hammond D, Fong G, McDonald PW, Brown S, Cameron R. Graphic Canadian cigarette warning labels and adverse outcomes: Evidence from Canadian smokers. Am J Public Health. 2004; 94: 1442-1445.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
9.
Hammond D, Reid JL, Driezen P, Boudreau C. Pictorial health warnings on cigarette packs in the United States: An experimental evaluation of the proposed FDA warnings. Nicotine Tob Res. 2013; 15: 93-102.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Peters GY, Ruiter RAC, Kok G. Threatening communication: A critical re-analysis and a revised meta-analytic test of fear appeal theory. Health Psychol Rev. 2013; 7(sup 1): S8-S31.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
12.
British American Tobacco (NZ). BAT's Submission to the Ministry of Health Consultation Paper on the Review of the Smoke-free Environments Regulations. Auckland: British American Tobacco (NZ); 2004.
13.
Chapman S, Carter SM. “Avoid health warnings on all tobacco products for just as long as we can”: A history of Australian tobacco industry efforts to avoid, delay and dilute health warnings on cigarettes. Tob Control. 2003; 12: iii13-iii22.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
14.
Ruiter RA, Kok G. Saying is not (always) doing: Cigarette warning labels are useless. Eur J Public Health. 2005; 15: 329-330.CrossRef
15.
Brown SL, Smith Z. The inhibitory effect of a distressing anti-smoking message on risk perceptions in smokers. Psychol Health. 2007; 22: 255-268.CrossRef
16.
Harris PR, Mayle K, Mabbott L, Napper L. Self-affirmation reduces smokers’ defensiveness to graphic on-rack cigarette warning labels. Health Psychol. 2007; 4: 437-446.CrossRef
17.
18.
Styles M, Williams B, Humphris G. Is the effectiveness of tobacco image-based labels likely to vary by socio-demographic variables? Findings from an online survey of 19,000 members of the UK Public. Health Educ J. 2012; 72: 351-362.
19.
Leventhal H, Brissette I, Leventhal EA. The common-sense model of self-regulation of health and illness. In: Cameron LD, Leventhal H, eds. The Self-Regulation of Health and Illness Behaviour. London: Routledge; 2003: 42-65.
20.
Cameron LD. Illness risk representations and motivations to engage in protective behavior: The case of skin cancer risk. Psychol Health. 2008; 23: 91-112.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Petrie KJ, Cameron LD, Ellis C, Buick D, Weinman J. Changing illness perceptions following myocardial infarction: An early intervention randomized controlled trial. Psychosom Med. 2002; 64: 580-586.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Cameron LD, Petrie KJ, Ellis C, Buick D, Weinman J. Trait anxiety and responses to a psychoeducational intervention for promoting adaptive illness perceptions in myocardial infarction patients. Psychol Health. 2005; 1: 1-12.CrossRef
23.
Phillips LA, Leventhal H, Leventhal E. Physicians’ communication of the common-sense self-regulation model results in greater reported adherence than physicians’ use of interpersonal skills. British J Health Psychol. 2012; 17: 224-257.CrossRef
24.
Lee TJ, Cameron LD, Wünsche B, Stevens C. A randomized trial of computer-based communications using imagery and text information to alter representations of heart disease risk and motivate protective behaviours. British J Health Psychol. 2011; 16: 72-91.CrossRef
25.
Cameron LD, Chan CKY. Designing health communications: Harnessing the power of affect, imagery, and self-regulation. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2008; 2: 262-282.CrossRef
26.
Witte K, Allen M. A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Educ Behav. 2000; 27: 608-632.CrossRef
27.
Emery L, Romer D, Sheerin KM, Jamieson KH, Peters E. Affective and cognitive mediators of the impact of cigarette warning labels. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014; 16: 263-269.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
28.
29.
McCaul KD, Mullens AB, Romanek KM, Erickson SC, Gatheridge BJ. The motivational effects of thinking and worrying about the effects of smoking cigarettes. Cogn Emot. 2007; 21: 1580-1798.CrossRef
30.
European Union. Directive 2001/37/EC of the European parliament and of the council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products. Article 5 Labelling. 2001; 1:1–9.
31.
Department of Health. Consultation on the Introduction of Picture Warnings on Tobacco Packs: Report on Consultation. London: Department of Health; 2007.
32.
33.
34.
Cameron LD, Moss-Morris R. Illness-related cognitions and behaviour. In: French D, Vedhara K, Kaptein AA, Weinman JA, eds. Health Psychology. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 2010: 84-110.
35.
Chandler D. Semiotics: The Basics. London: Routledge; 2007.
36.
37.
SAS Institute Inc. SAS Software Version 9.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.; 2012.
38.
Nonnemaker J, Farrelly M, Kamyab K, Busey A, Mann N. Experimental study of graphic cigarette warning labels. Rockville, MD: Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration; 2010. Contract No. HHSF-223-2009-10135G.
39.
Williams B, Cameron L. Images in health care: Potential and problems. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2009; 14: 251-254.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Hammond D, Thrasher J, Reid JL. Perceived effectiveness of pictorial health warnings among Mexican youth and adults: A population-level intervention with potential to reduce tobacco-related inequities. Cancer Causes Control. 2012; 23: 57-67.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Cameron L, Leventhal H, Leventhal E. Symptom representations and affect as determinants of care seeking in a community-dwelling, adult sample population. Health Psychol. 1993; 12: 171-179.CrossRefPubMed
42.
43.
Clarke JN, Everest MM. Cancer in the mass print media: Fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Soc Sci Med. 2006; 62: 2591-2600.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Durkin SJ, Biener L, Wakefield MA. Effects of different types of antismoking ads on reducing disparities in smoking cessation among socioeconomic subgroups. Am J Public Health. 2009; 99: 2217-2223.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
45.
Dunlop S, Wakefield M, Kashima Y. ‘Can you feel it?’ Negative emotion, risk, and narrative in health communication. Media Psychol. 2008; 11: 52-75.
46.
Kreuter MW, Green MC, Cappella JN, et al. Narrative communication in cancer prevention and control: A framework to guide research and application. Ann Behav Med. 2007; 33: 221-235.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Thrasher JF, Arillo-Santillan E, Villalobos V, et al. Can pictorial warning labels on cigarette papckages address smoking-related health disparities? Field experiments in Mexico to assess pictorial warning label content. Cancer Causes Control. 2012; 23: 69-80.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
48.
Wilson N, Peace J, Li J, Edwards R, et al. Distribution of new graphic warning labels: Are tobacco companies following regulations? Tob Induc Dis. 2009; 5: 14.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
49.
White V, Webster B, Wakefield M. Do graphic health warning labels have an impact on adolescents’ smoking-related beliefs and behaviors? Addiction. 2008; 103: 1562-1571.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Yong H, Borland R, Thrasher JF, et al. Mediational pathways of the impact of cigarette warning labels on quit attempts. Health Psychol. 2014; 11: 1410-1420.CrossRef
51.
Weinstein ND, Slovic P, Gibson G. Accuracy and optimism in smokers’ beliefs about quitting. Nicotine Tob Res. 2004; 6: S375-S380.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Pbert L, Flint AJ, Young MH, Druker S, DiFranza JR. Effects of a pediatric practice-based smoking prevention and cessation intervention for adolescents: A randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2008; 121: 738-747.CrossRef
53.
Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, et al. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013; 46(1): 81-95.CrossRefPubMed
54.
55.
Luciani A, Urma D, Marliere S, Chevrier J. PRESENCE: The sense of believability of inaccessible words. Comput Graph. 2004; 1: 509-517.CrossRef
56.
Rooke S, Malouff J, Copeland J. Effects of repeated exposure to a graphic smoking warning image. Curr Psychol. 2012; 31: 282-290.CrossRef
57.
Magnan R, Cameron LD. Do young adults perceive that cigarette graphic warnings provide new knowledge about the harms of smoking? Ann Behav Med. 2014. (in press).
58.
Nonnemaker JM, Choiniere CJ, Farrelly MC, Kamyab K, Davis KC. Reactions to graphic health warnings in the United States. Health Educ Res. 2014;Advance Online Publication.
59.
Borland R. Tobacco health warnings and smoking-related cognitions and behaviours. Addiction. 1997; 92: 1427-1435.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Metadata
Title
Which Images and Features in Graphic Cigarette Warnings Predict Their Perceived Effectiveness? Findings from an Online Survey of Residents in the UK
Authors
Linda D. Cameron, Ph.D
Brian Williams, Ph.D
Publication date
01-10-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine / Issue 5/2015
Print ISSN: 0883-6612
Electronic ISSN: 1532-4796
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-015-9693-4

Other articles of this Issue 5/2015

Annals of Behavioral Medicine 5/2015 Go to the issue

Original Article

Cardiovascular Management Self-efficacy: Psychometric Properties of a New Scale and Its Usefulness in a Rehabilitation Context

Original Article

Predicting Avoidance of Skin Damage Feedback Among College Students

Original Article

It’s Complicated: Marital Ambivalence on Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Daily Interpersonal Functioning

Letter to the Editor

A case for leveraging integrated regulation strategies to optimize health benefits from self-determined exercise behavior

Original Article

Evaluating Approaches for Communication About Genomic Influences on Body Weight

Brief Report

The Strength of Family Ties: Perceptions of Network Relationship Quality and Levels of C-Reactive Proteins in the North Texas Heart Study