Dissuasive cigarette sticks: The next step in standardised (‘plain’) packaging?

Tobacco Control

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 699-705

  Hoek, Janet ^a   Gendall, Philip ^a   Eckert, Christine ^b   Louviere, Jordan ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTAL MODEL; LAW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NEW ZEALAND; SMOKING; STIMULUS; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PACKAGING; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; SMOKING PREVENTION; TOBACCO; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW ZEALAND; PRODUCT LABELING; PRODUCT PACKAGING; SMOKERS; SMOKING; SMOKING PREVENTION; TOBACCO PRODUCTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84994516253     PISSN: 09644563     EISSN: 14683318     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2015-052533     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Wakefield M, Morley C, Horan J, et al. The cigarette pack as image: new evidence from tobacco industry documents. Tob Control 2002; 11(Suppl 1): i73-80.
2. Wakefield M, Germain D, Durkin S. How does increasingly plainer cigarette packaging influence adult smokers’ perceptions about brand image? An experimental study. Tob Control 2008; 17: 416-21.
3. Hoek J, Gendall P, Gifford H, et al. Tobacco branding, plain packaging, pictorial warnings, and symbolic consumption. Qual Health Res 2012; 22: 630-9.
4. Gendall P, Hoek J, Thomson G, et al. Young adults’ interpretations of tobacco brands: implications for tobacco control. Nicotine Tob Res 2011; 13: 911-18.
5. Abrams D, Hogg M. Social identity theory: constructive and critical advances. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1990.
6. Scheffels J. A difference that makes a difference: young adult smokers’ accounts of cigarette brands and package design. Tob Control 2008; 17: 118-22.
7. Mitchell AD, Studdert DM. Plain packaging of tobacco products in Australia: a novel regulation faces legal challenge. JAMA 2012; 307: 261-2.
8. Cook BL, Wayne GF, Keithly L, et al. One size does not fit all: how the tobacco industry has altered cigarette design to target consumer groups with specific psychological and psychosocial needs. Addiction 2003; 98: 1547-61.
9. Carpenter CM, Wayne GF, Connolly GN. Designing cigarettes for women: new findings from the tobacco industry documents. Addiction 2005; 100: 837-51.
10. Ford A, Moodie C, MacKintosh A, et al. Adolescent perceptions of cigarette appearance. Eur J Public Health 2014; 24: 464-8.
11. Hassan LM, Shiu E. No place to hide: two pilot studies assessing the effectiveness of adding a health warning to the cigarette stick. Tob Control 2015; 24: e3-5.
12. Borland R, Savvas S. Effects of stick design features on perceptions of characteristics of cigarettes. Tob Control 2012; 22: 331-7.
13. Doxey J, Hammond D. Deadly in pink: the impact of cigarette packaging among young women. Tob Control 2011; 20: 353-560.
14. Hoek J, Robertson C. How do young adult female smokers interpret dissuasive cigarette sticks? A qualitative analysis. J Soc Mark 2015; 5: 21-39.
15. Weinstein H. How an agency builds a brand- The Virginia Slims story. Papers from the 1969 AAAA Region Conventions Bates Number 1002430029-1002430059.
16. Moodie C, Purves R, McKell J, et al. Novel means of using cigarette packaging and cigarettes to communicate health risk and cessation messages: a qualitative study. Int J Ment Health Addict 2015; 13: 333-44.
17. Festinger L. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, 1975.
18. Hoegg J, Alba JW. Taste perception: more than meets the tongue. J Consum Res 2007; 33: 490-8.
19. Cheskin L. How to predict what people will buy. New York: Liveright, 1957.
20. Aslam MM. Are you selling the right colour? A cross-cultural review of colour as a marketing cue. J Mark Commun 2006; 12: 15-30.
21. Fong G, Hammond D, Laux F, et al. The near-universal experience of regret among smokers in four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: S341-51.
22. Gallopel-Morvan K, Gabriel P, Le Gall-Ely M, et al. Plain packaging and public health: the case of tobacco. J Bus Res 2013; 66: 133-6.
23. Hammond D, Fong G, McDonald P, et al. Impact of the graphic Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behaviour. Tob Control 2003; 12: 391-5.
24. Hoek J, Maubach N, Stevenson R, et al. Social smokers’ management of conflicted identities. Tob Control 2013; 22: 261-5.
25. Wakefield M, Hayes L, Durkin S, et al. Introduction effects of the Australian plain packaging policy on adult smokers: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2013; 3: e003175.
26. Auger P, Devinney T, Louviere J. Consumer social beliefs: an international investigation using best-worst scaling methodology. 2004 Date;Volume. http:// www2.agsm.edu.au/agsm/web.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/TD_Paper_UsingBest-WorstScaling/$FILE/JBE+BW.pdf (accessed 18 Jun 2007).
27. Flynn TN, Louviere JJ, Peters TJ, et al. Best-worst scaling: what it can do for health care research and how to do it. J Health Econ 2007; 26: 171-89.
28. Hoek J, Wong C, Gendall P, et al. Effects of dissuasive packaging on young adult smokers. Tob Control 2011; 20: 183-8.
29. Scheffels J, Lund I. The impact of cigarette branding and plain packaging on perceptions of product appeal and risk among young adults in Norway: a between-subjects experimental survey. BMJ Open 2013; 3: e003732.
30. Germain D, Wakefield M, Durkin S. Adolescents’ perceptions of cigarette brand image: does plain packaging make a difference? J Adolesc Health 2010; 46: 385-92.
31. Hoek J, Gendall P, Eckert C, et al. A comparison of on-pack Quitline information formats. Tob Control 2014; Published online First: 5 Sept 2014. doi: 10.1136/ tobaccocontrol-2014-051793
32. Moodie C, Mackintosh A, Hastings G, et al. Young adult smokers’ perceptions of plain packaging: a pilot naturalistic study. Tob Control 2011; 20: 367-73.
33. Freijy T, Kothe EJ. Dissonance-based interventions for health behaviour change: a systematic review. Br J Health Psychol 2013; 18: 310-37.