Observational studyAddiction (Abingdon, England)2023
Effects of emotional arousal on the neural impact and behavioral efficacy of cigarette graphic warning labels.
Observational study in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Campaign messages to support pictorial health warning labels for little cigars and cigarillos: an online survey-based experiment.BMJ open · 2025Trial
- A Thematic Analysis Exploring Bowel Cancer Screening Promotional Visuals in the United Kingdom and India.Health literacy research and practice · 2026Article
- Emotional arousal of graphic cigarette warning labels loses its beneficial effects on craving reduction after repeated exposure - A longitudinal neuroimaging study.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2026Article
- Pain-Related Fear Modulates Attentional Bias for Threat Processing in Chronic Pain: An ERP Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Global, regional, and national trends in the epidemiology of aortic aneurysms among women of childbearing age, 1990-2021, with predictions through 2036.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsGraphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette packs have been adopted by many jurisdictions world-wide. In the United States, the introduction of GWLs has been delayed by claims that their high level of negative emotional arousal unnecessarily infringed upon the tobacco manufacturers' free speech. This study aimed to provide experimental data on the contribution of emotional arousal to GWL efficacy.
designObservational study using long-term naturalistic exposure and functional magnetic resonance imaging.
settingResearch university in Philadelphia, PA, USA.
participantsA total of 168 adult smokers. MEASUREMENTS: For 4 weeks, participants received cigarettes in packs that carried either high-arousal or low-arousal GWLs (n = 84 versus 84). Smoking behavior, quitting-related cognitions and GWL-induced brain response were measured before and after the 4-week exposure. The amygdala and medial prefrontal cortex served as regions of interest.
findingsCompared with the high-arousal group, the low-arousal group smoked fewer cigarettes [log
conclusionsHigh-arousal cigarette graphic warning labels (GWLs) appear to be less efficacious than low-arousal GWLs. The high emotional reaction that high-arousal GWLs elicit wanes over time. Baseline amygdala response negatively predicts efficacy of high-arousal GWLs and positively predicts efficacy of low-arousal GWLs. High emotional arousal may not be required for sustained GWL efficacy.
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.