Trial reportJournal of health communication2024
How Do Behavioral Framing, Linguistic Certainty, and Target Specification Impact Responses to Vaping Prevention Messages?
Trial report in Journal of health communication, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Warning label messages about the cancer risk associated with alcohol: Effects of causal language.Addictive behaviors · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While research on youth vaping prevention has begun to grow, little work has examined language choice in vaping prevention messages. This study examined adolescents' responses to vaping prevention statements that varied on three features: behavioral framing, linguistic certainty, and target specification. We conducted a 2 (behavioral framing) by 2 (linguistic certainty) by 2 (target specification) by 3 (risk type) plus control condition between-subjects experiment using a national probability sample. Adolescents (N = 1,603) were randomly assigned to one of 25 conditions in which they viewed a vaping prevention statement (or a control statement about vape litter) followed by measures of perceived message effectiveness (PME), perceived severity and susceptibility of vaping risks, message trustworthiness, message relevance, and intentions to seek more information about vaping risks. Results showed main effects of behavioral framing, such that a declarative frame ("Vaping can … ") led to higher PME, higher perceived severity, and greater information seeking intentions than a contingent frame ("If you vape, it can…"), while an interaction revealed that most declarative frame effects were driven by adolescents who were susceptible to vaping. There were also main effects of linguistic certainty, such that the word "can" ("Vaping can … ") led to higher PME, higher perceived susceptibility and severity, and greater information seeking intentions than the word "could" ("Vaping could … "). No main effect of target specification ("you" vs. "teens") was observed. Overall, findings suggest that vaping prevention messages that communicate greater certainty have greater behavior change potential.
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.