Relation between newspaper coverage of 'light' cigarette litigation and beliefs about 'lights' among american adolescents and young adults: The impact on risk perceptions and quitting intentions

Tobacco Control

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 267-273

  Dunlop, Sally M ^a   Romer, Daniel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BEHAVIOR; CHILD BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PUBLICATION; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION; TOBACCO INDUSTRY; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTENTION; MALE; NEWSPAPERS; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION; TOBACCO INDUSTRY; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77955300735     PISSN: 09644563     EISSN: 14683318     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/tc.2009.032029     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. National Cancer Institute (NCI). Risks associated with smoking cigarettes with low machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine. Washington, DC: National Cancer Institute; U.S. National Institutes of Health; 2001.
2. Cataldo JK, Malone RE. False promises: the tobacco industry, "low tar" cigarettes, and older smokers. J Am Geriatr Soc 2008;56:1716-23.
3. Anderson SJ, Pollay RW, Ling PM. Taking ad-Vantage of lax advertising regulations in the USA and Canada: Reassuring and distracting health-concerned smokers. Soc Sci Med 2006;63:1973-85.
4. Warner KE. Tobacco industry response to public health concern: a content analysis of cigarette ads. Health Educ Q 1985;12:115-27.
5. Federal Trade Commission. Federal Trade Commission Report to Congress for 1992. Washington, DC: Federal Trade Commission, 1994.
6. National Cancer Institute. The FTC cigarette test method for determining tar, nicotine, and other carbon monoxide yields of US cigarettes: report of the NCI Expert Committee. Bethesda, Maryland: National Institutes of Health, 1996: NIH Publication No 96-4028.
7. Thun MJ, Burns DM. Health impact of "reduced yield" cigarettes: a critical assessment of the epidemiological evidence. Tob Control 2001;10:4-11.
8. Sidney S, Tekawa IS, Friedman GD. A prospective study of cigarette tar yield and lung cancer. Cancer Causes Control 1993;4:3-10.
9. Harris JE, Thun MJ, Mondul AM, et al. Cigarette tar yields in relation to mortality from lung cancer in the cancer prevention study II prospective cohort, 1982-8. Br Med J 2004;328:72.
10. Benowitz NL. Compensatory smoking of low-yield cigarettes. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health, 2001. Report No.: NIH Publication No. 02-5074.
11. Gallup Organization Inc. The public's attitudes toward cigarette advertising and cigarette tax increase. Princeton, NJ: The Gallup Organization, Inc, 1993:22-4.
12. Cohen JB. Smokers' knowledge and understanding of advertised tar numbers: health policy implications. Am J Public Health 1996;86:18-24.
13. 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.
14. Kozlowski LT, Pillitteri JL. Beliefs about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes and efforts to change those beliefs: an overview of early efforts and published research. Tob Control 2001;10:i12-16.
15. Etter J-F, Kozlowski LT, Perneger TV. What smokers believe about light and ultralight cigarettes. Prev Med 2003;36:92-8.
16. Cummings KM, Hyland A, Bansal MA, et al. What do Marlboro lights smokers know about low-tar cigarettes? Nicotine Tob Res 2004;6(suppl 3):S323-32.
17. Borland R, Yong H-H, King B, et al. Use of and beliefs about light cigarettes in four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey. Nicotine Tob Res 2004;6:S311-21.
18. Shiffman S, Pillitteri JL, Burton SL, et al. Smokers' beliefs about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes. Tob Control 2001;10:i17-23.
19. Giovino GA, Tomar SL, Reddy MN, et al. Attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about low-yield cigarettes among adolescents and adults. Washington, DC: National Cancer Institute; U.S. National Institutes of Health, 1994:39-57.
20. Soresi S, Catalano F, Spatafora M, et al. "Light" smoking and dependence symtoms in high-school students. Respir Med 2005;99:996-1003.
21. Kropp RY, Halpern-Felsher BL. Adolescents' beliefs about the risks involved in smoking "light" cigarettes. Pediatrics 2004;114:e445-51.
22. 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.
23. Borland R, Fong GT, Yong H-H, et al. What happened to smokers' beliefs about light cigarettes when "light/mild" brand descriptors were banned in the UK? Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tob Control 2008;17:256-62.
24. Shiffman S, Pillitteri JL, Burton SL, et al. Effect of health messages about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes on beliefs and quitting intent. Tob Control 2001;10: i24-32.
25. Shiffman S, Burton SL, Pillitteri JL, et al. Test of "Light" cigarette counter- advertising using a standard test of advertising effectiveness. Tob Control 2001;10:133-40.
26. Chapman S. The news on tobacco control: time to bring the background into the foreground. Tob Control 1999;8:237-9.
27. Wakefield M, Clegg-Smith K, Chapman S. Framing of news coverage about the Marlene Sharp legal judgement: a tipping point for smoke-free public places in Australia? Research Paper Series, No. 28. Chicago: ImpacTeen 2003.
28. Smith K, Wakefield M, Edsall E. The good news about smoking: how are tobacco issues being covered in US press? J Public Health Policy 2006;27:166-81.
29. Long M, Slater M, Lysengen L. US news media coverage of tobacco control issues. Tob Control 2006;15:367-72.
30. Stevens C. Designing an effective counter advertising campaigndCalifornia. Cancer 1998;83:2736-41.
31. Clegg-Smith K, Terry-McElrath Y, Wakefield M, et al. Media advocacy and newspaper coverage of tobacco issues: a comparative analysis of 1 year's print news in the United States and Australia. Nicotine Tob Res 2005;7:289-99.
32. Wakefield M, Flay B, Nichter M, et al. Effects of anti-smoking advertising on youth smoking: a review. J Health Commun 2003;8:229-47.
33. Farrelly MC, Davis KC, Haviland ML, et al. Evidence of a dose-response relationship between "truth" antismoking ads and youth smoking prevalence. Am J Public Health 2005;95:425-31.
34. Niederdeppe J, Farrelly M, Thomas KY, et al. Newspaper coverage as indirect effects of a health communication intervention: the Florida Tobacco Control Program and youth smoking. Communic Res 2007;34:382-406.
35. Clegg-Smith K, Wakefield M, Terry-Mc Elrath Y, et al. Relation between newspaper coverage of tobacco issues and smoking attitudes and behaviour among American teens. Tob Control 2008;17:17-24.
36. Johnston LD, Terry-McElrath Y, O'Malley PM, et al. Trends in recall and appraisal of anti-smoking advertising among American youth: National survey results, 1997-2001. Prev Sci 2005;6:1-19.
37. Romer D. Prospects of an integrated approach to adolescent risk reduction. In: Romer D, ed. Reducing adolescent risk: toward and integrated approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Press, 2003:1-8.
38. Mokdad AH, Stroup DP, Giles WH. Public health surveillance for behavioural risk factors in a changing environment. Recommendations from the Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance Team. MMWR Recomm Rep 2003 May 23;52:1-12.
39. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Annual estimates of the resident population by sex, race, and hispanic origin for the United States: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2008.
40. Kozlowski LT, Goldberg ME, Sweeney CT, et al. Smoker reactions to a "radio message" that light cigarettes are as dangerous as regular cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res 1999;1:67-76.