Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2018
Effects of 30% and 50% Cigarette Pack Graphic Warning Labels on Visual Attention, Negative Affect, Quit Intentions, and Smoking Susceptibility among Disadvantaged Populations in the United States.
Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perceived Effectiveness of Cigar Warnings Among Young People in the U.S.American journal of preventive medicine · 2026Trial
- Combining Inserts With Warning Labels on Cigarette Packs to Promote Smoking Cessation: A 2-Week Randomized Trial.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2024Trial
- Independent or synergistic? Effects of varying size and using pictorial images in tobacco health warning labels.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2019Trial
- Plain Packaging: One of the Plain Simple Solutions for Nicotine Reduction in the Middle East.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- Defensive Reactions to Pictorial Warning Labels Featuring Narrative Versus Non-Narrative Content.Health communication · 2026Article
- A content analysis of cannabis edible product characteristics, packaging features, and online promotions.Preventive medicine · 2025Article
- The Impact of Cigarillo Text Warning Presence and Size on Young Adults' Cigarillo Risk Beliefs, Knowledge, Appeal, and Use Intentions.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- The effects of emotional distress on attentional bias toward cigarette warnings according to smokers' anxiety levels.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- How do current tobacco warnings compare to the WHO FCTC guidelines: a content analysis of combustible tobacco warnings worldwide.BMJ open · 2023Article
- The Economics of Tobacco Regulation: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of economic literature · 2022Article
- Review
- Strategies to enhance the effects of pictorial warnings for cigarettes: results from a discrete choice experiment.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2022Article
- Effect of Message Approach and Image Size on Pictorial Health Warning Effectiveness on Cigarette Pack in Indonesia: A Mixed Factorial Experiment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Responses to Graphic Warning Labels among Low-income Smokers.American journal of health behavior · 2020Article
- Assessing cigarette packaging and labelling policy effects on early adolescents: results from a discrete choice experiment.Tobacco control · 2020Article
- Adolescent Attention to Disgust Visuals in Cigarette Graphic Warning Labels.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2019Article
- Comparing in person and internet methods to recruit low-SES populations for tobacco control policy research.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2019Article
- Using graphic warning labels to counter effects of social cues and brand imagery in cigarette advertising.Health education research · 2019Article
- Does Visual Attention to Graphic Warning Labels on Cigarette Packs Predict Key Outcomes Among Youth and Low-income Smokers?Tobacco regulatory science · 2018Article
- Testing competing explanations for graphic warning label effects among adult smokers and non-smoking youth.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Though the WHO Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) calls for the implementation of large graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette boxes, the courts have blocked the implementation of 50% labels in the United States. We conducted an experiment to explore whether changing the size of GWLs is associated with changes in visual attention, negative affect, risk beliefs, and behavioral intentions. Method: We recruited adult smokers (N = 238) and middle-school youth (N = 237) throughout the state of New York in May 2016. We randomly assigned participants to one of three between-subject conditions (no GWL [control], 30% GWL, 50% GWL). Results: Adult and youth participants looked at the GWLs longer when the GWL covered 50% versus 30% of the pack's front. Increasing GWL size from 30% to 50% did not influence negative affect or risk beliefs, though both GWL sizes increased negative affect relative to the no-GWL control group. Exposure to 50% GWLs increased adult smokers' intentions to quit compared to no-GWL, but smokers exposed to 30% GWLs did not differ from control. There were no differences between 50% GWLs, 30% GWLs, and control on youth smoking susceptibility. Conclusions: Findings provide some evidence of the benefits of a 50% versus 30% GWL covering the front of the pack for adult smokers and at-risk youth from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds-though not on all outcomes. Implications: This research shows that 30% GWLs on cigarette packages increase negative affect relative to packages without front-of-package GWLs. Larger GWLs on cigarette packages (50% vs. 30%) increase visual attention to the warning and its pictorial content among low-SES smokers and at-risk youth but do not further increase negative affect. A 50% GWL increased adults' quit intention compared to no GWL at all, but we were underpowered to detect modest differences in quit intentions between a 50% and 30% GWL. Future work should thus continue to explore the boundary conditions under which relatively larger GWLs influence cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.