↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Pictorial Warning Labels for Cigarettes and Quit-Efficacy on Emotional Responses, Smoking Satisfaction, and Cigarette Consumption

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Behavioral Medicine, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
Title
Effects of Pictorial Warning Labels for Cigarettes and Quit-Efficacy on Emotional Responses, Smoking Satisfaction, and Cigarette Consumption
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12160-017-9916-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Romer, Stuart G Ferguson, Andrew A Strasser, Abigail T Evans, Mary Kate Tompkins, Joseph Macisco, Michael Fardal, Martin Tusler, Peters Ellen

Abstract

Experimental research on pictorial warning labels for cigarettes has primarily examined immediate intentions to quit. Here, we present the results of a clinical trial testing the impact on smoking during and after a 28-day period of naturalistic exposure to pictorial versus text-only warnings. Daily cigarette smokers (N = 244) at two sites in the USA were randomly assigned to receive their regular brand of cigarettes for 4 weeks with one of three warnings: (a) text-only, (b) pictures and text as proposed by FDA, or (c) the warnings proposed by FDA with additional text that elaborated on the risks of smoking. Analyses examined the effects of pictorial versus text-only warnings and self-efficacy for quitting on cigarette consumption during and 1 month after the trial as mediated by emotional and cognitive responses as well as satisfaction with smoking. Stronger emotional responses to pictorial than text-only warnings predicted reduced satisfaction with smoking during the trial and lower cigarette consumption at follow-up among the majority of smokers who continued to smoke. Consistent with the efficacy-desire model, those with moderate efficacy reported the greatest reduction in consumption at follow-up. However, a small proportion of smokers (7%) who reported 7-day abstinence at follow-up did not exhibit a significant relation with self-efficacy. Pictorial warning labels proposed by FDA create unfavorable emotional reactions to smoking that predict reduced cigarette use compared to text alone, with even smokers low in self-efficacy exhibiting some reduction. Predictions that low self-efficacy smokers will respond unfavorably to warnings were not supported.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 16%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Professor 3 4%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 27 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 29 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 March 2020.
All research outputs
#4,398,286
of 24,846,849 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#424
of 1,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,297
of 450,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#22
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,846,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,475 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.