Skip Navigation


Journal of Public Health Advance Access originally published online on July 27, 2009
Journal of Public Health 2009 31(3):345-353; doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdp066
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/3/345    most recent
fdp066v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hammond, D.
Right arrow Articles by Parkinson, C.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hammond, D.
Right arrow Articles by Parkinson, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009, Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved

The impact of cigarette package design on perceptions of risk



David Hammond, Assistant Professor

Carla Parkinson, Research Assistant
Department of Health Studies and Gerontology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3G1

Address correspondence to David Hammond, E-mail: dhammond{at}uwaterloo.ca


  Abstract

Background More than 40 countries have laws prohibiting misleading information from tobacco packages, including the words ‘light’, ‘mild’ and ‘low-tar’. Little is known about the extent to which other words and package designs prove misleading to consumers.

Methods A mall-intercept study was conducted with adult smokers (n = 312) and non-smokers (n = 291) in Ontario, Canada. Participants viewed pairs of cigarette packages that differed along a single attribute and completed ratings of perceived taste, tar delivery and health risk.

Results Respondents were significantly more likely to rate packages with the terms ‘light’, ‘mild’, ‘smooth’ and ‘silver’ as having a smoother taste, delivering less tar and lower health risk compared with ‘regular’ and ‘full flavor’ brands. Respondents also rated packages with lighter colors and a picture of a filter as significantly more likely to taste smooth, deliver less tar and lower risk. Smokers were significantly more likely than non-smokers to perceive brands as having a lower health risk, while smokers of light and mild cigarettes were significantly more likely than other smokers to perceive brands as smoother and reducing risk. Perceptions of taste were significantly associated with perceptions of tar level and risk.

Conclusion The findings suggest that current regulations have failed to remove misleading information from tobacco packaging.

Keywords: beliefs, smoking


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
M. Bansal-Travers, K. M. Cummings, A. Hyland, A. Brown, and P. Celestino
Educating smokers about their cigarettes and nicotine medications
Health Educ. Res., January 11, 2010; (2010) cyp069v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.