Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29566752›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

Affect, risk perception, and the use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes: a population study of U.S. adults.

Lucy Popova, Daniel Owusu, Scott R Weaver, Catherine B Kemp, C K Mertz, Terry F Pechacek, Paul Slovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Feeling Hopeful Motivates Change: Emotional Responses to Messages Communicating Comparative Risk of Electronic Cigarettes and Combusted Cigarettes.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2019
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Ethnicity and the mechanisms of point-of-sale e-cigarette marketing's influence on behavior: A longitudinal study.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lucy PopovaSchool of Public Health and Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA. lpopova1@gsu.edu.
Daniel OwusuSchool of Public Health and Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA.
Scott R WeaverSchool of Public Health and Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA.
Catherine B KempSchool of Public Health and Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA.
C K MertzDecision Research, 1201 Oak Street, Suite 200, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA.
Terry F PechacekSchool of Public Health and Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA.
Paul SlovicDecision Research, 1201 Oak Street, Suite 200, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA.

Funding

The Science of Decision Making: Connecting People and PolicyP50DA036128 · NIDA · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ERIKSEN, MICHAEL PAUL · 2013 to 2018
$19.4M
Communicating harm of new tobacco productsR00CA187460 · NCI · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI POPOVA, LYUDMILA · 2016 to 2018
$738k
National Institute on Drug Abuse (US) P50DA036128NCI NIH HHS R00 CA187460NCI NIH HHS R00CA187460NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA036128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTobacco companies argue that the decision to smoke is made by well-informed rational adults who have considered all the risks and benefits of smoking. Yet in promoting their products, the tobacco industry frequently relies on affect, portraying their products as part of a desirable lifestyle. Research examining the roles of affect and perceived risks in smoking has been scant and non-existent for novel tobacco products, such as electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).

methodsWe examined the relationship between affect, perceived risk, and current use for cigarettes and e-cigarettes in 2015 in a nationally representative sample of 5398 U.S. adults who were aware of e-cigarettes.

resultsParticipants held various affective associations with tobacco products, and affect towards cigarettes was more negative than affect towards e-cigarettes. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), affect towards cigarettes and e-cigarettes was associated with cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use respectively, and these associations were both direct and partially mediated by risk perceptions towards smoking and e-cigarette use. More positive affect towards cigarettes or e-cigarettes was associated with lower perceived risks, which in turn was associated with higher odds of being a current cigarette or e-cigarette user.

conclusionsIn developing models explaining tobacco use behavior, or in creating public communication campaigns aimed at curbing tobacco use, it is useful to focus not only on the reason based predictors, such as perceptions of risks and benefits, but also on affective predictors. Educational efforts aimed at further smoking reductions should highlight and reinforce negative images and associations with cigarettes.

Indexed as

AffectAdultElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentSmokingTobacco ProductsUnited StatesAffectCigarettesElectronic cigarettesRisk perceptionSmokingTobacco

Identifiers

PMID29566752
PMCPMC5863900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.