Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30932154›Full record

ArticleHealth education research2019

Do graphic health warning labels on cigarette packages deter purchases at point-of-sale? An experiment with adult smokers.

William G Shadel, Steven C Martino, Claude M Setodji, Michael Dunbar, Deborah Scharf, Kasey G Creswell

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health education research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The benefits and dangers of anthropomorphic conversational agents.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Measuring susceptibility to use tobacco in an increasingly complex consumer marketplace: How many questions do we really need?Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Be Happy: Navigating Normative Issues in Behavioral and Well-Being Public Policy.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2022
    Article
  17. Lifestyle medicine: A positive approach to stemming the tide of non-communicable diseases in South Africa.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

William G ShadelRAND Corporation, 4570 Fifth Ave., Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Steven C MartinoRAND Corporation, 4570 Fifth Ave., Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Claude M SetodjiRAND Corporation, 4570 Fifth Ave., Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Michael DunbarRAND Corporation, 4570 Fifth Ave., Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Deborah ScharfDepartment of Psychology, Lakehead University, 955 Oliver Rd., Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Kasey G CreswellDepartment of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave.,Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
RAND Corporation · USCarnegie Mellon University · USLakehead University · CA

Funding

Testing the Impact of Tobacco Product Graphic Warning Labels at Retail Point-of-SaleR01CA196759 · NCI · RAND CORPORATION · PI SHADEL, WILLIAM G · 2015 to 2018
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA196759
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This experiment tested whether the presence of graphic health warning labels on cigarette packages deterred adult smokers from purchasing cigarettes at retail point-of-sale (POS), and whether individual difference variables moderated this relationship. The study was conducted in the RAND StoreLab (RSL), a life-sized replica of a convenience store that was developed to evaluate how changing POS tobacco advertising influences tobacco use outcomes during simulated shopping experiences. Adult smokers (n = 294; 65% female; 59% African-American; 35% White) were assigned randomly to shop in the RSL under one of two experimental conditions: graphic health warning labels present on cigarette packages versus absent on cigarette packages. Cigarette packages in both conditions were displayed on a tobacco power wall, which was located behind the RSL cashier counter. Results revealed that the presence of graphic health warning labels did not influence participants' purchase of cigarettes as a main effect. However, nicotine dependence acted as a significant moderator of experimental condition. Graphic health warning labels reduced the chances of cigarette purchases for smokers lower in nicotine dependence but had no effect on smokers higher in dependence.

Indexed as

Tobacco ProductsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProduct LabelingSmokersSmoking CessationTobacco Use Disorder

Identifiers

PMID30932154
PMCPMC6510016
OpenAlexW2930877620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.