ArticleSubstance use & addiction journal2026
Perceptions of Cannabis Vaping Advertising Messages and Warnings Among US Young Adults.
Article in Substance use & addiction journal, 2026. 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.
- Impact of Simple Versus Complex Cannabis Advertising Messages and Warnings on US Young Adults' Product Perceptions.Substance use & addiction journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCannabis vaping prevalence and marketing has increased, but limited research has assessed effects of specific advertising messages, warnings, or their combinations on young adults' perceptions. This study aimed to advance this research.
methodsIn 2024, 3581 US young adults aged 18 to 34 (40.8% reporting past-month use) participated in an online survey-based experiment using a 2 × 4 factorial design (advertising message: psychological effects vs flavors; warning: none, adult-use, intoxication, vape-specific) and then reported on 5 perception outcomes: addictiveness, harm, cautiousness, appeal, and interest (0 = not at all to 7 = extremely). Multivariable regression assessed advertising message, warning, and message-by-warning interactions in relation to outcomes, overall and by past-month use status.
resultsAmong the total sample and among participants reporting no cannabis use, there were no main or interaction effects of advertising message or warning conditions. Among participants reporting use, adult-use (vs no) warning exposure was associated with lower addictiveness and cautiousness; intoxication (vs no) warning exposure was associated with lower harm. A significant interaction indicated that participants reporting use who were exposed to both psychological effects (vs flavors) advertising messages and intoxication (vs no) warnings reported greater appeal, whereas those exposed to both flavors (vs effects) advertising messages and intoxication (vs no) warnings reported lower appeal.
conclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of understanding how advertising messages may affect how warnings are interpreted (or vice versa), strengthening the evidence base informing advertising restrictions and warning requirements, and elucidating the mechanisms driving the differences among young adults who use versus do not use cannabis.
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.