Is disgust the driver behind the selection of images for UK tobacco packets?

Health Education Journal

Volumn 73, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 522-529

  Humphris, Gerry ^a   Williams, Brian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Disgust; emotions; health promotion; persuasion; tobacco cessation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84993811611     PISSN: 00178969     EISSN: 17488176     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0017896913496399     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Canadian Cancer Society. Cigarette package health warnings: International status report (3rd edition). Toronto: Framework Convention Alliance, 2012.
2. Bradley MM, Lang PJ. Fearfulness and affective evaluations of pictures. Motivation and Emotion, 1999: 23(1): 1–13.
3. Ito TA, Cacioppo JT, Lang PJ. Eliciting affect using the international affective picture system: Trajectories through evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1998: 24(8): 855–80.
4. Hammond D, Fong GT, McDonald PW, et al. Impact of graphic Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behaviour. Tobacco Control, 2003: 12: 391–5.
5. Hammond D, Fong G, McDonald PW, et al. The impact of cigarette warning labels and smoke-free bylaws on smoking cessation. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 2004: 95(3): 201–4.
6. Hammond D, Fong GT, Borland R, et al. Text and graphic warnings on cigarette packages: Findings from the international tobacco control four country study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2007: 32(3): 202–9.
7. Hammond D. Evidence review. In: HammondD,(ed.) Tobacco labelling and packaging toolkit (pp. 1–46). Waterloo: University of Waterloo, 2008.
8. Cancer Research UK. Cancer Research UK response to the Department of Health consultation on the introduction of picture warnings on tobacco packs. London: Cancer Research UK, 2006.
9. Hammond D, Fong GT, McDonald P, et al. Graphic Canadian cigarette warning labels and adverse outcomes: Evidence from Canadian smokers. American Journal of Public Health, 2004: 94(8): 1442–5.
10. Mudur G. Move to weaken picture warnings on tobacco packets in India causes outcry. British Medical Journal, 2007: 335: 366.
11. Department of Health. Consultation on the introduction of picture warnings on tobacco packs: Report on Consultation. London: Department of Health, 2007.
12. 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: 1–9.
13. Styles M, Williams B, Humphris G. Is the effectiveness of tobacco image-based warning labels likely to vary by socio-demographic variable? Findings from an online survey of 19,000 members of the UK Public. Health Education Journal, 2013: 72(3): 351–62.
14. Witte K, Allen M. A meta-anslysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education and Behavior, 2000: 27: 608–32.
15. Hastings G, MacFayden L. The limitations of fear messages. Tobacco Control, 2002: 11: 73–5.
16. Ten Hoor GA, Peters GJ, Kalagi J, et al. Reactions to threatening health messages. BMC Public Health, 2012: 12: 1011.
17. Keller PA. Converting the unconverted: The effect of inclination and opportunity to discount health-related fear appeals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1999: 84(3): 403–15.
18. Cameron LD, Chan CKY. Designing health communications: Harnessing the power of affect, imagery and self-regulation. Social and Personality Compass, 2008: 2(1): 262–82.
19. Marzillier SL, Davey GCL. The emotional profiling of disgust-eliciting stimuli: Evidence for primary and complex disgusts. Cognition and Emotion, 2004: 18: 313–36.
20. Lee TJ, Cameron LD, Wunsche B, et al. A randomized trial of computer-based communications using imagery and text information to alter representations of heart disease risk and motivate protective behaviour. British Journal Health Psychology, 2011: 16(1): 72–91.
21. Bomyea J, Amir N. Disgust propensity as a predictor of intrusive cognitions following a distressing film. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2012: 36(3): 190–8.
22. Curtis V. Science and nature, human body and mind, emotions and instincts. 2008. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/mind/surveys/smiles/(accessed 3 May 2013).
23. Hammond D, Wakefield M, Durkin S, et al. Tobacco packaging and mass media campaigns: Research needs for articles 11 and 12 of the WHO framework convention on tobacco Control. Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 2013: 15(4): 817–31.
24. Hammond D. Health warning messages on tobacco products: A review. Tobacco Control 2011: 20: 327–37.
25. Pechmann C, Reibling ET. Antismoking advertisements for youths: An independent evaluation of health, counter-industry, and industry approaches. American Journal of Public Health, 2006: 96: 906–13.
26. Mogg K, Bradley BP, Field M, et al. Eye movements to smoking-related pictures in smokers: Relationship between attentional biases and implicit and explicit measures of stimulus valence. Addiction, 2003: 98(6): 825–36.
27. Kessels LT, Ruiter RA. Eye movement responses to health messages on cigarette packages. BMC Public Health, 2012: 12(1): 352.
28. van Hooff JC, Devue C, Vieweg PE, et al. Disgust- and not fear-evoking images hold our attention. Acta Psychologica (Amsterdam), 2013: 143(1): 1–6.
29. European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_determinants/life_style/tobacco/documents/uk_pictures.pdf.Permission to publish, see: http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_determinants/life_style/Tobacco/Documents/com_1452_en.pdf (accessed 13 May 2013).