ArticleTobacco control2025
Impact of product-based e-cigarette marketing on the attitudes and behavioural intentions of young Australians: an experimental study.
Article in Tobacco control, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sentinel surveillance of vaping and emerging nicotine product use among university students: protocol for a longitudinal cohort study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Association of fully branded, standardized packaging and limited flavor and brand descriptors of e-liquids with interest in trying products among youths in Great Britain.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe tobacco industry has a history of using language to downplay the harms associated with cigarettes and mislead consumers and policymakers. Emerging evidence suggests similar tactics are being used in the context of e-cigarettes; however, exploration of the impact of product name on attitudes towards e-cigarettes and susceptibility to use is lacking. This experimental study explored whether attitudes towards e-cigarettes and susceptibility to use are influenced by the names used by the industry to describe and market these products.
methodAn accredited web panel provider recruited a sample of 383 Australians aged 12-29 years who had never smoked to participate in an online survey that featured an embedded experiment. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions, each of which used a different name to describe e-cigarettes (condition 1: 'e-cigarettes', condition 2: 'vapes'; condition 3: either 'IGETS', 'Puff Bars', 'HQD Cuvies' or 'Gunnpods'). The survey assessed respondents' overall opinion of the product described; attitudes towards the product; liking of the product; and curiosity, willingness and intentions to use the product.
resultsThose in the 'brand name' condition scored higher than those in the 'e-cigarettes' condition on all dependent variables. Those in the 'vapes' condition scored higher than those in the 'e-cigarettes' condition on product attitude.
conclusionFindings indicate that the use of brand names and terms such as 'vapes' instead of 'e-cigarettes' results in more favourable attitudes towards e-cigarettes and susceptibility to use among young Australians. Results highlight the problematic influence of promotional language use favoured by industry.
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.