Trial reportPreventive medicine2020
Reactions to graphic and text health warnings for cigarettes, sugar-sweetened beverages, and alcohol: An online randomized experiment of US adults.
Trial report in Preventive medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Designing Social Media Health Warnings for Teenagers and Young Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA health forum · 2026Trial
- The role of sympathy in motivating behaviour change: a discrete emotions approach to examining responses to cancer warning labels for alcohol.Health education research · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Effects of narrative versus non-narrative pictorial warning labels on visual attention and alcohol-related cancer risk perceptions: An eye-tracking study.Addictive behaviors · 2025Trial
- Optimising messages and images for e-cigarette warnings.Tobacco control · 2025Trial
- Effects of pictorial warnings on parents' purchases and perceptions of sugar-sweetened beverage categories.Pediatric obesity · 2023Trial
- Effects of Sugary Beverage Text and Pictorial Warnings: A Randomized Trial.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023Trial
- Designing Effective Alcohol Warnings: Consumer Reactions to Icons and Health Topics.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023Trial
- Front-of-Package Labels on Unhealthy Packaged Foods in India: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment.Nutrients · 2022Trial
- Perceived effectiveness of added-sugar warning label designs for U.S. restaurant menus: An online randomized controlled trial.Preventive medicine · 2022Trial
- The impact of pictorial health warnings on purchases of sugary drinks for children: A randomized controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2022Trial
- Designing warnings for sugary drinks: A randomized experiment with Latino parents and non-Latino parents.Preventive medicine · 2021Trial
- Developing Tobacco Risk Communications for Young Adults Susceptible to Dual Use of Combustible Cigarettes and Nicotine Vapes: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Consumers' Attitudes and Preferences Towards Ingredients List, Nutrition Information and Health Warning Labelling on Alcohol Products: A Scoping Review.Current nutrition reports · 2026Article
- Defensive Reactions to Pictorial Warning Labels Featuring Narrative Versus Non-Narrative Content.Health communication · 2026Article
- Support for Alcohol Control Policies Among US Alcohol Consumers.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Indonesian Adolescents' Perceptions of Front-of-Package Labels on Packaged Food and Drinks.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Article
- Consumer reactions to multiple and single health warnings on static alcohol ads: A factorial survey experiment with a convenience sample of adults in Ireland.Drug and alcohol review · 2025Article
- Reframing cigarettes as social currency: A randomized survey experiment on the role of warning images and pricing.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Is evoking fear effective? Exploratory findings from a randomised experiment on the impacts of health warning labels on sugar-sweetened beverages.Public health nutrition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We aimed to examine reactions to graphic versus text-only warnings for cigarettes, SSBs, and alcohol. A convenience sample of US adults completed an online survey in 2018 (n = 1352 in the analytic sample). We randomly assigned participants to view a: 1) text-only warning without efficacy information (i.e., message intended to increase consumers' confidence in their ability to stop using the product), 2) text-only warning with efficacy information, 3) graphic warning without efficacy information, or 4) graphic warning with efficacy information. Participants viewed their assigned warning on cigarettes, SSBs, and alcohol, in a random order. Across product types, graphic warnings were perceived as more effective than text-only warnings (p < .001) and led to lower believability, greater reactance (i.e., resistance), more thinking about harms, and lower product appeal (all p < .05); policy support did not differ. Compared to SSB and alcohol warnings, cigarette warnings led to higher perceived message effectiveness, believability, fear, thinking about harms, policy support, and greater reductions in product appeal (all p < .05). The efficacy information did not influence any outcomes. Graphic warnings out-performed text-only warnings on key predictors of behavior despite causing more reactance.
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.