Priming effect of antismoking PSAs on smoking behaviour: A pilot study

Tobacco Control

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 285-290

  Harris, Jennifer L ^a   Pierce, Melissa ^b   Bargh, John A ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADDICTION; ADULT; ADVERTIZING; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; MIDDLE AGED; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PILOT STUDY; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SELF CONCEPT; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION;

ADULT; ADVERTISING AS TOPIC; BEHAVIOR, ADDICTIVE; FEMALE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; MALE; MASS MEDIA; MIDDLE AGED; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PILOT PROJECTS; SELF EFFICACY; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION;

EID: 84902483415     PISSN: 09644563     EISSN: 14683318     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050670     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Petrova PK, Cialdini RB. New approaches towards resistance to persuasion. In: Hastings G, Angus K, Bryant C, eds. Handbook of social marketing. London, UK: Sage Publications Ltd, 2012.
2. Ringold DJ. Boomerang effect: in response to public health interventions: some unintended consequences in the alcoholic beverage market. J Consumer Policy 2002; 25: 27-63.
3. Robinson TN, Killen JD. Do cigarette warning labels reduce smoking? Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1997; 151: 267-72.
4. White V, Webster B, Wakefield M. Do graphic warning labels have an impact on adolescents' smoking-related beliefs and behaviors? Addiction 2008; 103: 1562-71.
5. Kang Y, Cappella JN, Strasser AA, et al. The effect of smoking cues in antismoking advertisements on smoking urge and psychophysiological reactions. Nicotine Tob Res 2009; 11: 254-61.
6. Wakefield M, Terry-McElrath Y, Emery S, et al. Effect of televised, tobacco company-funded smoking prevention advertising on youth smoking-related beliefs, intentions, and behavior. Am J Public Health 2006; 96: 2154-60.
7. Farrelly MC, Healton CG, Davis KC, et al. Getting to the truth: evaluating national tobacco countermarketing campaigns. Am J Public Health 2002; 92: 901-7.
8. Philip Morris. Consumer Connection-Philip Morris USA. 2010. http://www. pmusa. com/en/cm/Responsibility/Supporting_Cessation/default. aspx?src=top_nav (accessed 1 Jan 2010).
9. Szczypka G, Wakefield MA, Emery S, et al. Working to make an image: an analysis of three Philip Morris corporate image media campaigns. Tob Control 2007; 16: 344-50.
10. Bargh JA, Ferguson MJ. Beyond behaviorism: the automaticity of higher mental processes. Psychol Bull 2000; 126: 925-45.
11. Dijksterhuis A, Bargh JA. The perception-behavior expressway: automatic effects of social perception on social behavior. In: Zanna M, eds. Advances in experimental social psychology. 2001: 33: 1-40.
12. Dijksterhuis A, Chartrand TL, Aarts H. Automatic behavior. In: Bargh JA, eds. Social psychology and the unconscious: the automaticity of higher mental processes. Philadelphia: Psychology Press, 2007.
13. Harris J, Bargh J, Brownell K. Priming effects of television food advertising on eating behavior. Health Psychol 2009; 28: 404-13.
14. Harris JL, Speers SE, Schwartz MB, et al. U. S. food company branded advergames on the internet: children's exposure and effects on snack consumption. J Children Media 2012; 6: 51-68.
15. Roerich L, Goldman MS. Implicit priming of alcohol expectancy memory processes and subsequent drinking behavior. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 1995; 3: 402-10.
16. Deutsch R, Gawronski B, Strack F. At the boundaries of automaticity: negation as reflective operation. J Pers Soc Psychol 2006; 91: 385-405.
17. Mayo R, Schul Y, Burnstein E. "I am not guilty" vs "I aminnocent": successful negation may depend on the schema used for its encoding. J Exp Soc Psychol 2004; 40: 433-49.
18. Morewedge CK, Kahneman D. Associative processes in intuitive judgment. Trends Cogn Sci 2010; 14: 435-550.
19. Earp BD, Dill B, Harris JL, et al. No sign of quitting: incidental exposure to no-smoking signs ironically boosts cigarette-approach tendencies in smokers. J Applied Soc Psychol 2012; in press.
20. Wilson TD, Brekke N. Mental contamination and mental correction: unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. Psychol Bull 1994; 116: 117-42.
21. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 1988; 54: 1063-70.
22. American Legacy Foundation. Getting to the truth: assessing youths' reactions to the truth and "Think. Don't Smoke" tobacco countermarketing campaigns. 2002. http://www. legacyforhealth. org/PDFPublications/fl_9. pdf (accessed 4 Feb 2010).
23. Bargh JA, Chartrand TL. The mind in the middle: a practical guide to priming and automaticity research. In: Reis HT, Judd CM, eds. Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000: 253-85.
24. Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, et al. The Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence: a revision of the Fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire. Br J Addict 1991; 86: 1119-27.
25. 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.
26. Hersey JC, Niederdeppe J, Evans DW, et al. The theory of "truth": how counter industry media campaigns affect smoking behavior among teens. Health Psychol 2005; 24: 22-31.
27. Sly DF, Hopkins RS, Trapido E, et al. Influence of a counter advertising media campaign on initiation of smoking: The Florida "truth" campaign. Am J Public Health 2001; 91: 233-8.
28. Emery S, Kim Y, Choi YK, et al. The effects of smoking-related television advertising on smoking and intentions to quit among adults in the US: 1999-2007. Am J Public Health 2012; 102: 751-7.
29. Durkin SJ, Brennan E, Wakefield MA. Mass media campaigns to promote smoking cessation among adults: an integrative review. Tob Control 2012; 21: 127-38.
30. Terry-McElrath YM, Emery S, Wakefield MA, et al. Effects of tobacco-related media campaigns on smoking among 20-30-year-old adults: longitudinal data from the USA. Tob Control 2013; 22: 38-45.