1 / 36

Impact of Antitobacco Mass Media on Youth Smoking Initiation

Impact of Antitobacco Mass Media on Youth Smoking Initiation. Lois Biener, PhD. Center for Survey Research UMass Boston. Presented at National Conference on Tobacco Or Health, Boston, Dec. 10 th 2003. Massachusetts Media Campaign. Average annual expenditure $13 million 1994 through 2001

beth
Download Presentation

Impact of Antitobacco Mass Media on Youth Smoking Initiation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Impact of Antitobacco Mass Media on Youth Smoking Initiation Lois Biener, PhD Center for Survey Research UMass Boston Presented at National Conference on Tobacco Or Health, Boston, Dec. 10th 2003

  2. Massachusetts Media Campaign • Average annual expenditure $13 million 1994 through 2001 • Multiple Channels • Television • Radio Adult • Transit • Billboards

  3. Multiple Strategies • The truth about the industry • Rebel against industry manipulation • Real people, real stories • Not smoking is cool, smoking is not. • Addiction • Preserve independence by avoiding addiction • Smoking harms the family

  4. Research Goals • Investigate impact on behavior • Investigate effectiveness of various strategies for different target audiences.

  5. I. Impact on youth behavior • Compare the rate of smoking initiation between youths who recalled or failed to recall exposure to television, radio, and outdoor anti-smoking advertisements at baseline • Over a four-year follow-up period • Control for exposure to anti-smoking messages from other sources

  6. 1993 Baseline: 1,069 youths Ages 12-15 1997 Follow-up: 618 youths 57.8% overall response rate Methods: Sample Cohort: 592 youths who hadn’t yet smoked 100 cigarettes baseline

  7. Methods:Measures of Exposure • In past month, seen any anti-tobacco messages... • On television ? • On radio? • On billboards?

  8. Methods:Measures of Outcome(1997) • Smoked at least 100 cigarettes in lifetime ? • (Yes/No)

  9. Covariates (1993) • Age, race, gender • Baseline susceptibility to smoking • Smoking by parents and friends • Hours of TV viewing • Exposure to other anti-smoking messages • (posters, newspapers, school, sporting events) • Interactions

  10. Results:Exposure to Media Campaign

  11. Results:Established Smokers in 1997 Age 12-13 in 1993 Percent Overall Yes No Saw TV Ads

  12. Results:Established Smokers in 1997 Age 14-15 in 1993 Percent Overall Yes No Saw TV Ads

  13. Results:Multivariate Analysis • Effect of exposure to anti-smoking messages on television: • Youths ages 12-13 at baseline OR = 0.49 95% CI = 0.26, 0.93 • Youths ages 14-15 at baseline OR = 0.94 95% CI = 0.48, 1.83

  14. Discussion • Exposure measure is really high vs. low exposure, not any vs. none • Cannot conclude that all anti-smoking media campaigns are likely to be effective • Cannot necessarily conclude that radio and outdoor advertisements are not effective • Possibility of unknown confounder

  15. Conclusion • Strong evidence for a significant effect of statewide anti-smoking media campaign on youth smoking initiation • Effect restricted to younger adolescents

  16. II. Effectiveness by type of TV advertisement • Adult ’93 to ’96 • Youth ’93 to ’97 • Youth ’99 • Youth 2001/2 • Hispanic vs non-Hispanic 2001/2

  17. Research Tools • Independent judges (youth and adults) • To establish characteristics of advertisements • Population-based telephone surveys • To assess how adults and youth in Massachusetts have reacted to the campaign

  18. Independent Judges • View TV spots and rate characteristics • “How well do each of following describe the advertisement?” • 1 = Not at all • 7 = Very much

  19. Sad Frightening Funny Emotionally moving Believable Interesting Phony Annoying Entertaining Reassuring Helpful Offensive Important Silly Judges’ Rating Scales(1 to 7)

  20. Advertising parameters • Negative Emotion: Sad, frightening, disturbing • Positive Emotion: Happy, funny, entertaining • Level of Emotion: Powerful, emotionally moving • Cognitive quality: Makes you think, interesting

  21. Message Identification • What was the main message of the ad? (Check one only). “ Cigarettes and cigarette smoke are bad for people’s health (Illness) “ Tobacco companies are bad (Anti- industry) “Teenagers shouldn’t smoke cigarettes (Norms)

  22. Relationships between message and affect • Illness message: High negative affect, high emotion • Norms message: Varies – usually high positive affect, low emotion • Anti-industry message: Varies with execution

  23. Population Survey Approach • Select subset of ads for theoretical/conceptual purpose • Assess recall • Assess perceived effectiveness

  24. Measurement of recall • Aided: Gives brief description • Confirmed recall: Requests details • Unaided: Asks for free recall and description of ad seen recently

  25. Measurement of perceived effectiveness • How good an anti-tobacco ad? (0 to 10) • How it affects feelings about cigarettes (feel worse, feel better, no change) • How much affects smokers’ motivation to quit (0 to 10)

  26. How Good an Ad by Emotion Level (Adults 1993 to 1996) Very Good Low Emotion Hi Emotion

  27. Mean Effectiveness Ratings by Ad Type (youth 1999) Very Good P <.001 Not Good

  28. Youth 2001/2 Illness: Ronaldo, Rick, (Mass.) Illness + Anti-industry: Body bags, Daily Dose (truth) Baby monitor (Mass.) Anti-industry: I know you (Mass.) Norms: My reasons (Philip Morris) Piercing parlor (Lorillard)

  29. How Good an Ad by Ad Type

  30. Feel Worse about Cigarettes due to Ad %

  31. Youth smokers:Motivation to Quit by Ad Type High

  32. Conclusions: Features of Effective Anti-tobacco Ads • Evoke strong negative emotion • Portray serious harm done by tobacco use in authentic way

  33. Ads youth perceived as effective... • Target adult smoking • Portray harm done to family by second-hand smoke • Reveal industry responsibility for serious harm in an evocative way • Avoid use of humor

  34. Theoretical basis for emotional advertising • Cognitive consistency • Negative emotion -> Increased risk, decreased benefit • Positive emotion -> Decreased risk, increased benefit • Learning theory • High emotion ->greater recall

  35. Published articles on media Siegel, M. and L. Biener. 2000. The impact of an antismoking media campaign on progression to established smoking: Results of a longitudinal youth study. American Journal of Public Health 90:380-386. Biener, L., McCallum-Keeler, G., & Nyman, A. L. 2000. Adults' response to Massachusetts Antitobacco Television Advertisements: Impact of viewer and ad characteristics. Tobacco Control 9:401-407. Biener, L. 2002. Adult and youth response to the Massachusetts anti-tobacco television campaign. J Public Health Management & Practice 3:40-44.

  36. Biener, L. 2002. Anti-tobacco advertisements by Massachusetts and Philip Morris: What teenagers think. Tobacco Control 11:ii43-ii46. • Biener, L., and Taylor, T.M. 2002. The continuing importance of emotion in tobacco control media campaigns: a response to Hastings and MacFadyen. Tobacco Control 11:76-77. • Biener, L. Ji, M., Gilpin, E and Albers, A.B. (In press). The impact of emotional tone, message and broadcast parameters in youth anti-smoking advertisements. Journal of Health Communication.

More Related