Beliefs about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes and efforts to change those beliefs: An overview of early efforts and published research

Tobacco Control

Volumn 10, Issue 4 SUPPL. 1, 2001, Pages

  Kozlowski, Lynn T ^a   Pillitteri, Janine L ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PINNEY ASSOCIATES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NICOTINE; TAR;

ADVERTIZING; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SMOKE; SMOKING; TOBACCO; TOBACCO INDUSTRY; UNITED STATES;

ADVERTISING; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; NICOTINE; SMOKE; SMOKING; TARS; TOBACCO; TOBACCO INDUSTRY; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION;

EID: 0035226172     PISSN: 09644563     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Food and Drug Administration. FDA backgrounder: the food label. May, 1999. URL: http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/-dms/ fdnewlab.html
2. Henningfield JE, Kozlowski LT, Benowitz NL. A proposal to develop meaningful labeling for cigarettes. JAMA 1994; 272:312-14.
3. Wilkenfeld JD, Henningfeld JE, Slade J, et al. It's time for a change: cigarette smokers deserve meaningful information about their cigarettes. J Nat Cancer Inst 2000;92:90-2.
4. Short PL. Smoking and health item 7: the effect on marketing. Minnesota trial exhibit 10,585 (Brown & Williamson), April 14, 1977.
5. National Clearinghouse on Tobacco and Health. Canada. Selected excerpts from Imperial Tobacco Limited, Internal documents 55; 1992.
6. Creative Research Group. Project Viking, Vol. 11: An attitudinal model of smoking. Prepared for Imperial Tobacco Ltd. (Canada), February-March 1986.
7. Federal Trade Commission. Cigarette report for 1999. Washington: Federal Trade Commission; 2001.
8. Royal College of Physicians of London. Nicotine addiction in Britain. A report of the tobacco advisory group of the Royal College of Physicians. Sudbury, Suffolk, UK: The Lavenham Press Ltd; 2000.
9. US Department of Health and Human Services. The FTC cigarette test method for determining tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields of US cigarettes. Report of the NCI Expert Committee, Monograph 7. Washington: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, 1996.( NIH Publication No. 96-4028.)
10. Thun MJ, Burns DM. Health impact of "reduced yield" cigarettes: a critical assessment of the epidemiological evidence. Tobacco Control 10(suppl I):i4-11.
11. Pillsbury HC. Review of the Federal Trade Commission method for determining cigarette tar and nicotine yield. In: The FTC cigarette test method for determining tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields of US cigarettes. Report of the NCI Expert Committee. Monograph 7. Washington: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute; 1996: 9-14. (NIH Publication No. 96-4028.)
12. Djordjevic MV, Stellman SD, Zang E. Doses of nicotine and lung carcinogens delivered to cigarette smokers. J Ntl Cancer Inst 2000;92:106-11.
13. Herning RI, Jones RT, Bachman J, et al. Puff volume increases when low-nicotine cigarettes are smoked. BMJ 1981;283:187-9.
14. Zacny JP, Stitzer ML. Cigarette brand-switching: effects on smoke exposure and smoking behavior. J Pharm Exp Ther 1988;246:619-27.
15. Sweeney CT, Kozlowski LT, Parsa P. Effect of filter vent blocking on carbon monoxide exposure from selected lower tar cigarette brands. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1999; 63:167-73.
16. Kozlowski LT, O'Connor RJ. Official cigarette tar tests are misleading: use a two-stage, compensating test. Lancet 2000;355:2159-61.
17. Kozlowski LT, O'Connor RJ, Sweeney CT. Cigarette design. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph 13. Washington DC: National Cancer Institute (in press).
18. Djordjevic MV, Fan J, Ferguson S, et al. Self-regulation of smoking intensity. Smoke yields of the low-nicotine, low-"tar" cigarettes. Carcinogenesis 1995;16:2015-21.
19. Kozlowski LT. Tar and nicotine delivery of cigarettes. What a difference a puff makes. JAMA 1981;245;158-9.
20. Cohen JB. Smokers' knowledge and understanding of advertised tar numbers: Health policy implications. Am J Public Health 1996;86:18-24.
21. Kozlowski LT, Goldberg ME, Yost BA, et al. Smokers' misperceptions of light and ultra-light cigarettes may keep them smoking. Am J Prev Med 1998;15:9-16.
22. Kozlowski LT. Tar and nicotine ratings may be hazardous to your health: information for smokers who are not ready to stop. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation, 1982.
23. Low-tar cigarettes: How to use them (if you must). Harvard Medical School Health Letter 1983;8:1-2.
24. Kozlowski LT. Low tar cigarettes are hazardous to your health; advice for smokers. Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation, 1993.
25. Goldberg ME, Fishbein M, Middlestadt S, eds. Social marketing: theoretical and practical perspectives. New Jersey: Erlbaum, 1997.
26. Kozlowski LT, Sweeney CT. Low-yield, light, and ultra-light cigarettes: let's understand the product before we promote. In: Goldberg ME, Fishbein M, Middlestadt S, eds. Social marketing: theoretical and practical perspectives. New Jersey: Erlbaum, 1997.
27. Kozlowski LT, Yost BA, Stine MM, et al. Massachusetts' advertising against light cigarettes appears to change beliefs and behavior. Am J Prev Med 2000;18:339-42.
28. Kozlowski LT, Goldberg ME, Sweeney CT, et al. Smoker reactions to a 'radio message' that light cigarettes are as dangerous as regular cigarettes. Nicotine Tobacco Research 1999;1:67-76.
29. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisional Processes 1991;50:179-211.
30. Kozlowski LT, Palmer R, Stine MM, et al. Persistent effects of a message counter-marketing Light cigarettes: results of a randomized controlled trial. Addict Behav 2001;26:447-52.
31. Shiffman S, Pillitteri JL, Burton SL, et al. Effect of health messages about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes on beliefs and quitting intent. Tobacco Control 10(suppl I):i24-32.
32. Shiffman S, Burton SL, Pillitteri JL, et al. Test of "Light" cigarette counter-advertising using a standard test of advertising effectiveness. Tobacco Control 10(suppl I):i33-40.