Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non-Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?
This research considers how tobacco warnings, plain packaging, and interactions between these measures affect behavioral intentions. While existing literature shows the superiority of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) vs. text-only tobacco warnings, few studies have examined the interaction effects of...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of consumer affairs 2018-03, Vol.52 (1), p.5-34 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 34 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 5 |
| container_title | The Journal of consumer affairs |
| container_volume | 52 |
| creator | GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE HOEK, JANET RIEUNIER, SOPHIE |
| description | This research considers how tobacco warnings, plain packaging, and interactions between these measures affect behavioral intentions. While existing literature shows the superiority of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) vs. text-only tobacco warnings, few studies have examined the interaction effects of warnings and plain packaging on smoking intentions. Nor has earlier work examined the influence of smoking status (smoker vs. non-smoker) on both warning and plain packaging effectiveness. Our experimental study addressed this gap by surveying 338 individuals using a factorial design with two manipulated factors (PWLs vs. text-only warnings; plain pack vs. current branded tobacco pack). Results show that the plain pack and warnings work independently and in unison to influence smokers' and non-smokers' behavioral intentions. The findings are particularly relevant to the many countries currently considering plain packaging and facing opposition from tobacco companies. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/joca.12145 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01430744v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A550492855</galeid><jstor_id>26627421</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A550492855</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6385-97e505637a88e381fbc63a86f95c76d9cdd5b68f29c7e6a26c6c5f89f024b0fe3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0u-L0zAYB_AiCs7TN74XCr6QEzuTtEnTV0edejcZt8EpvgxZ9qTLrkvOpLsf_73Z9ZwOxmELLXz5fNu0eZLkNUZDHI-PK6fkEBNc0CfJAJcFzRhD7GkyQIiQDKGSP09ehLBCCBNUokEiP7t01kpj05lUl7IxtkmlXaQzozrnjWzTn9LbmIa01hpUl16s3SX48O6enTub7YJPsJTXxvlYGtsObGecDScvk2datgFePdyPkh9fv3wfnWWT6el4VE8yxXJOs6oEiijLS8k55BzrecwlZ7qiqmSLSi0WdM64JpUqgUnCFFNU80ojUsyRhvwoOe6fu5StuPJmLf2dcNKIs3oithnCRY7KorjG0b7t7ZV3vzYQOrFyG2_j8gRBOMc5qvLyr2pkC8JY7Tov1doEJWpKUVERTmlU2QHVgIX4I5wFbWK854cHfDwXsDbqYOF4rxBNB7ddIzchiPHF-X9bfjp5bOEPVrm2hQZE3JzRdN9_-MfPN8FYCPESTLPsQv-KPf6-58q7EDzo3aZgJLbDKrbDKu6HNWLc45v48XePSPFtOqr_dN70nVWIo7rrEMZIWRCc_wamO-6D</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2013130937</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non-Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE ; HOEK, JANET ; RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</creator><creatorcontrib>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE ; HOEK, JANET ; RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</creatorcontrib><description>This research considers how tobacco warnings, plain packaging, and interactions between these measures affect behavioral intentions. While existing literature shows the superiority of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) vs. text-only tobacco warnings, few studies have examined the interaction effects of warnings and plain packaging on smoking intentions. Nor has earlier work examined the influence of smoking status (smoker vs. non-smoker) on both warning and plain packaging effectiveness. Our experimental study addressed this gap by surveying 338 individuals using a factorial design with two manipulated factors (PWLs vs. text-only warnings; plain pack vs. current branded tobacco pack). Results show that the plain pack and warnings work independently and in unison to influence smokers' and non-smokers' behavioral intentions. The findings are particularly relevant to the many countries currently considering plain packaging and facing opposition from tobacco companies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0078</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1745-6606</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/joca.12145</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Wiley Periodicals, Inc</publisher><subject>Business administration ; Companies ; Company marketing practices ; Effectiveness ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Labeling ; Marketing ; Packaging ; Smokers ; Smoking ; Surveys ; Tobacco ; Tobacco industry</subject><ispartof>The Journal of consumer affairs, 2018-03, Vol.52 (1), p.5-34</ispartof><rights>2018 The American Council on Consumer Interests</rights><rights>Copyright 2017 by The American Council on Consumer Interests</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Blackwell Publishers Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright 2018 by The American Council on Consumer Interests</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6385-97e505637a88e381fbc63a86f95c76d9cdd5b68f29c7e6a26c6c5f89f024b0fe3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6385-97e505637a88e381fbc63a86f95c76d9cdd5b68f29c7e6a26c6c5f89f024b0fe3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0152-4079</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26627421$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26627421$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,799,881,1411,27845,27903,27904,45553,45554,57996,58229</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-01430744$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HOEK, JANET</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</creatorcontrib><title>Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non-Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?</title><title>The Journal of consumer affairs</title><addtitle>Journal of Consumer Affairs</addtitle><description>This research considers how tobacco warnings, plain packaging, and interactions between these measures affect behavioral intentions. While existing literature shows the superiority of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) vs. text-only tobacco warnings, few studies have examined the interaction effects of warnings and plain packaging on smoking intentions. Nor has earlier work examined the influence of smoking status (smoker vs. non-smoker) on both warning and plain packaging effectiveness. Our experimental study addressed this gap by surveying 338 individuals using a factorial design with two manipulated factors (PWLs vs. text-only warnings; plain pack vs. current branded tobacco pack). Results show that the plain pack and warnings work independently and in unison to influence smokers' and non-smokers' behavioral intentions. The findings are particularly relevant to the many countries currently considering plain packaging and facing opposition from tobacco companies.</description><subject>Business administration</subject><subject>Companies</subject><subject>Company marketing practices</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Labeling</subject><subject>Marketing</subject><subject>Packaging</subject><subject>Smokers</subject><subject>Smoking</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Tobacco</subject><subject>Tobacco industry</subject><issn>0022-0078</issn><issn>1745-6606</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqN0u-L0zAYB_AiCs7TN74XCr6QEzuTtEnTV0edejcZt8EpvgxZ9qTLrkvOpLsf_73Z9ZwOxmELLXz5fNu0eZLkNUZDHI-PK6fkEBNc0CfJAJcFzRhD7GkyQIiQDKGSP09ehLBCCBNUokEiP7t01kpj05lUl7IxtkmlXaQzozrnjWzTn9LbmIa01hpUl16s3SX48O6enTub7YJPsJTXxvlYGtsObGecDScvk2datgFePdyPkh9fv3wfnWWT6el4VE8yxXJOs6oEiijLS8k55BzrecwlZ7qiqmSLSi0WdM64JpUqgUnCFFNU80ojUsyRhvwoOe6fu5StuPJmLf2dcNKIs3oithnCRY7KorjG0b7t7ZV3vzYQOrFyG2_j8gRBOMc5qvLyr2pkC8JY7Tov1doEJWpKUVERTmlU2QHVgIX4I5wFbWK854cHfDwXsDbqYOF4rxBNB7ddIzchiPHF-X9bfjp5bOEPVrm2hQZE3JzRdN9_-MfPN8FYCPESTLPsQv-KPf6-58q7EDzo3aZgJLbDKrbDKu6HNWLc45v48XePSPFtOqr_dN70nVWIo7rrEMZIWRCc_wamO-6D</recordid><startdate>20180322</startdate><enddate>20180322</enddate><creator>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE</creator><creator>HOEK, JANET</creator><creator>RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</creator><general>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishers Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0152-4079</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180322</creationdate><title>Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non-Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?</title><author>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE ; HOEK, JANET ; RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c6385-97e505637a88e381fbc63a86f95c76d9cdd5b68f29c7e6a26c6c5f89f024b0fe3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Business administration</topic><topic>Companies</topic><topic>Company marketing practices</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Labeling</topic><topic>Marketing</topic><topic>Packaging</topic><topic>Smokers</topic><topic>Smoking</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Tobacco</topic><topic>Tobacco industry</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HOEK, JANET</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><jtitle>The Journal of consumer affairs</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>GALLOPEL-MORVAN, KARINE</au><au>HOEK, JANET</au><au>RIEUNIER, SOPHIE</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non-Smokers' Behavioral Intentions?</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of consumer affairs</jtitle><addtitle>Journal of Consumer Affairs</addtitle><date>2018-03-22</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>5</spage><epage>34</epage><pages>5-34</pages><issn>0022-0078</issn><eissn>1745-6606</eissn><abstract>This research considers how tobacco warnings, plain packaging, and interactions between these measures affect behavioral intentions. While existing literature shows the superiority of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) vs. text-only tobacco warnings, few studies have examined the interaction effects of warnings and plain packaging on smoking intentions. Nor has earlier work examined the influence of smoking status (smoker vs. non-smoker) on both warning and plain packaging effectiveness. Our experimental study addressed this gap by surveying 338 individuals using a factorial design with two manipulated factors (PWLs vs. text-only warnings; plain pack vs. current branded tobacco pack). Results show that the plain pack and warnings work independently and in unison to influence smokers' and non-smokers' behavioral intentions. The findings are particularly relevant to the many countries currently considering plain packaging and facing opposition from tobacco companies.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/joca.12145</doi><tpages>30</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0152-4079</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-0078 |
| ispartof | The Journal of consumer affairs, 2018-03, Vol.52 (1), p.5-34 |
| issn | 0022-0078 1745-6606 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01430744v1 |
| source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; PAIS Index; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Business administration Companies Company marketing practices Effectiveness Humanities and Social Sciences Labeling Marketing Packaging Smokers Smoking Surveys Tobacco Tobacco industry |
| title | Do Plain Packaging and Pictorial Warnings Affect Smokers' and Non-Smokers' Behavioral Intentions? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T23%3A04%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Do%20Plain%20Packaging%20and%20Pictorial%20Warnings%20Affect%20Smokers'%20and%20Non-Smokers'%20Behavioral%20Intentions?&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20consumer%20affairs&rft.au=GALLOPEL-MORVAN,%20KARINE&rft.date=2018-03-22&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=5&rft.epage=34&rft.pages=5-34&rft.issn=0022-0078&rft.eissn=1745-6606&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/joca.12145&rft_dat=%3Cgale_hal_p%3EA550492855%3C/gale_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2013130937&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A550492855&rft_jstor_id=26627421&rfr_iscdi=true |