Examining the effects of brand and licensed characters on parents' perceptions of Children's breakfast cereals.

Brand and licensed characters frequently appear on children's breakfast cereal boxes and are known to affect children's product perceptions, selection, and consumption. However, less is known about their impact on parents' perceptions of foods they purchase for their child. The present study assessed the impact of brand and licensed characters featured on three children's breakfast cereal packages on parents' intentions and perceptions in an online experiment. Parents of children aged 2-12 years (n = 1013) were randomized into one of two conditions: breakfast cereals containing brand and licensed characters or breakfast cereals without any characters. Within each condition, participants viewed three breakfast cereal brands in random order per their assigned condition and reported their purchase intentions, healthfulness perceptions, and perceptions of appeal to children using 5-point Likert scales. No significant differences in purchase intentions (p = 0.91), perceived healthfulness (p = 0.52) or perceived child appeal (p = 0.59) were observed between the experimental and control groups. However, exploratory moderation analyses revealed that educational attainment moderated the impact of experimental condition on purchase intentions (p for interaction = 0.002) such that participants with a bachelor's degree in the character condition reported 0.36 points lower purchase intentions compared to the control with no difference between conditions for those with an associate's degree/trade school or high school degree or less. This study did not find an impact of brand and licensed characters on children's breakfast cereals, suggesting that their primary appeal is directly to children. Parents with higher educational attainment may be skeptical of characters on cereal brands. Additional research on the impact of brand and licensed characters on other products, in real-world settings, is needed.

Impact of taxes and warning labels on red meat purchases among US consumers: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Policies to reduce red meat intake are important for mitigating climate change and improving public health. We tested the impact of taxes and warning labels on red meat purchases in the United States. The main study question was, will taxes and warning labels reduce red meat purchases? METHODS AND FINDINGS: We recruited 3,518 US adults to participate in a shopping task in a naturalistic online grocery store from October 18, 2021 to October 28, 2021. Participants were randomized to one of 4 conditions: control (no tax or warning labels, n = 887), warning labels (health and environmental warning labels appeared next to products containing red meat, n = 891), tax (products containing red meat were subject to a 30% price increase, n = 874), or combined warning labels + tax (n = 866). We used fractional probit and Poisson regression models to assess the co-primary outcomes, percent, and count of red meat purchases, and linear regression to assess the secondary outcomes of nutrients purchased. Most participants identified as women, consumed red meat 2 or more times per week, and reported doing all of their household's grocery shopping. The warning, tax, and combined conditions led to lower percent of red meat-containing items purchased, with 39% (95% confidence interval (CI) [38%, 40%]) of control participants' purchases containing red meat, compared to 36% (95% CI [35%, 37%], p = 0.001) of warning participants, 34% (95% CI [33%, 35%], p < 0.001) of tax participants, and 31% (95% CI [30%, 32%], p < 0.001) of combined participants. A similar pattern was observed for count of red meat items. Compared to the control, the combined condition reduced calories purchased (-312.0 kcals, 95% CI [-590.3 kcals, -33.6 kcals], p = 0.027), while the tax (-10.4 g, 95% CI [-18.2 g, -2.5 g], p = 0.01) and combined (-12.8 g, 95% CI [-20.7 g, -4.9 g], p = 0.001) conditions reduced saturated fat purchases; no condition affected sodium purchases. Warning labels decreased the perceived healthfulness and environmental sustainability of red meat, while taxes increased perceived cost. The main limitations were that the study differed in sociodemographic characteristics from the US population, and only about 30% to 40% of the US population shops for groceries online. CONCLUSIONS: Warning labels and taxes reduced red meat purchases in a naturalistic online grocery store. Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ NCT04716010.

How pictorial warnings change parents' purchases of sugar-sweetened beverage for their children: mechanisms of impact.

BACKGROUND: Pictorial health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are a promising policy for preventing diet-related disease in children. A recent study found that pictorial warnings reduced parents' purchases of SSBs for their children by 17%. However, the psychological mechanisms through which warnings affect parental behavior remain unknown. We aimed to identify the mechanisms that explain how pictorial warnings affect parents' SSB purchasing behavior for their children using secondary data from a randomized trial. METHODS: In 2020-2021, parents of children ages 2 to 12 years (n = 325) completed a shopping task in a convenience store laboratory in North Carolina, USA. Participants were randomly assigned to a pictorial warnings arm (SSBs displayed pictorial health warnings about type 2 diabetes and heart damage) or a control arm (SSBs displayed a barcode label). Parents then bought a beverage for their child and took a survey measuring 11 potential psychological mediators, selected based on health behavior theories and a model explaining the impact of tobacco warnings. We conducted simple mediation analyses to identify which of the 11 mechanisms mediated the impact of exposure to pictorial warnings on purchasing any SSBs for their children. RESULTS: Two of the 11 constructs were statistically significant mediators. First, the impact of pictorial warnings on the likelihood of purchasing any SSB was mediated by parents' perceptions that SSBs were healthier for their child (mediated effect= -0.17; 95% CI = - 0.33, - 0.05). Second, parents' intentions to serve SSBs to their children also mediated the effect of warnings on likelihood of purchasing any SSB (mediated effect= -0.07, 95% CI=-0.21, - 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Pictorial warnings reduced parents' purchases of SSBs for their children by making parents think SSBs are less healthful for their children and reducing their intentions to serve SSBs to their children. Communication approaches that target healthfulness perceptions and intentions to serve SSBs may motivate parents to buy fewer SSBs for their children.

Should messages discourage sugary drinks, encourage water, or both? A randomized experiment with U.S. parents.

Campaigns to improve beverage consumption typically focus on discouraging unhealthy beverages (e.g., soda), encouraging healthy beverages (e.g., water), or both. It remains unclear which of these strategies is most effective. We recruited a national convenience sample of U.S. parents of children ages 2-12 (n = 1078, 48% Latino[a]) to complete an online survey in 2019. We randomly assigned participants to view: 1) a control message, 2) a soda discouragement message, 3) a water encouragement message, or 4) both soda discouragement and water encouragement messages shown side-by-side in random arrangement. Intervention messages mimicked New York City's "Pouring on the Pounds" campaign. Participants rated messages on perceived effectiveness for discouraging soda consumption and encouraging water consumption (1-5 response scales) and reported feelings and intentions about drinking soda and water (1-7 scales). Compared to those with no exposure, participants who viewed the soda discouragement message reported higher perceived discouragement from drinking soda (Average Differential Effect [ADE] = 1.18), more negative feelings toward drinking soda (ADE = 0.83) and stronger intentions to avoid drinking soda (ADE = 0.45) (ps < 0.001). The soda discouragement message also exerted beneficial effects on perceived effectiveness, feelings, and intentions related to water consumption (ADEs = 0.33-0.68; ps < 0.001). Exposure to the water encouragement message had beneficial effects on outcomes related to water consumption (ADEs = 0.28-0.81, ps < 0.001), but limited impact on outcomes related to soda consumption. Across outcomes, results indicated diminishing returns from exposure to both message types. Messaging campaigns discouraging unhealthy beverages may be more promising for improving beverage consumption than messages only promoting healthier beverages.

The Impact of The Real Cost Vaping and Smoking Ads across Tobacco Products.

INTRODUCTION: Little research has examined the spillover effects of tobacco communication campaigns, such as how anti-smoking ads affect vaping. AIMS AND METHODS: Participants were a national sample of 623 U.S. adolescents (ages 13-17 years) from a probability-based panel. In a between-subjects experiment, we randomly assigned adolescents to view one of four videos online: (1) a smoking prevention video ad from the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) The Real Cost campaign, (2) a neutral control video about smoking, (3) a vaping prevention video ad from The Real Cost campaign, or (4) a neutral control video about vaping. We present effect sizes as Cohen's d, standardized mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads led to more negative attitudes toward vaping compared with control (d = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.53), while exposure to The Real Cost smoking prevention ads did not affect smoking-related outcomes compared with control (p-values > .05). Turning to spillover effects, exposure to The Real Cost smoking prevention ads led to less susceptibility to vaping (d = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.56, -0.12), more negative attitudes toward vaping (d = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.65) and higher perceived likelihood of harm from vaping (d = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.48), compared with control. Exposure to The Real Cost vaping prevention ads did not affect smoking-related outcomes compared with control (p-values > .05). CONCLUSIONS: This experiment found evidence of beneficial spillover effects of smoking prevention ads on vaping outcomes and found no detrimental effects of vaping prevention ads on smoking outcomes. IMPLICATIONS: Little research has examined the spillover effects of tobacco communication campaigns, such as how anti-smoking ads affect vaping. Using a national sample of 623 U.S. adolescents, we found beneficial evidence of spillover effects of smoking prevention ads on vaping outcomes, which is promising since it suggests that smoking prevention campaigns may have the additional benefit of reducing both smoking and vaping among adolescents. Additionally, we found that vaping prevention campaigns did not elicit unintended consequences on smoking-related outcomes, an important finding given concerns that vaping prevention campaigns could drive youth to increase or switch to using combustible cigarettes instead of vaping.

Development of the UNC Perceived Message Effectiveness Scale for Youth.

PURPOSE: Tobacco prevention media campaigns are an important tool to address youth tobacco use. We developed a theory-based perceived message effectiveness (PME) Scale to use when vetting messages for campaigns. METHODS: Participants were a national sample of N=623 US adolescents (ages 13-17 years) recruited from a national probability-based panel. In an online experiment, we randomised adolescents to view tobacco prevention ads. All participants viewed an ad on smoking or vaping from the US Food and Drug Administration's The Real Cost campaign and a control video, in a random order. After ad exposure, we assessed PME using nine candidate items and constructs for convergent and criterion validity analyses. We used confirmatory factor analysis and examined information curves to select the scale items. RESULTS: A brief PME scale with three items (α=0.95) worked equally well for demographically diverse adolescents with different patterns of tobacco use. The Real Cost ads generated higher PME scores than the control videos for both vaping and smoking (convergent validity; p<0.05). Higher PME scores were associated with greater attention, fear, cognitive elaboration and anticipated social interactions (convergent validity; r=0.31-0.66), as well as more negative attitudes toward and lower susceptibility to vaping and smoking (criterion validity; r=-0.14 to -0.37). A single-item PME measure performed similarly to the three-item version. CONCLUSIONS: The University of North Carolina PME Scale for Youth is a reliable and valid measure of the potential effectiveness of vaping and smoking prevention ads. Employing PME scales during message development and selection may help youth tobacco prevention campaigns deploy more effective ads.

Optimising messages and images for e-cigarette warnings.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to have a single addiction warning, but many other health harms are associated with vaping and warnings grow stale over time. We aimed to develop new warning messages and images to discourage e-cigarette use. METHODS: Participants were 1629 US adults who vaped or smoked. We randomised each participant to evaluate 7 of 28 messages on newly developed warning themes (metals exposure, DNA mutation, cardiovascular problems, chemical exposure, lung damage, impaired immunity, addiction), and the current FDA-required warning (total of 8 messages). Then, participants evaluated images of hazards (eg, metal), internal harms (eg, organ damage) or people experiencing harms. RESULTS: Regarding intended effects, new warning themes all discouraged vaping more than the current FDA-required warning (all p<0.001), led to greater negative affect (all p<0.001) and led to more anticipated social interactions (all p<0.001). The most discouraging warnings were about toxic metals exposure. Regarding unintended effects, the new themes led to more stigma against people who vape (6 of 7 themes, p<0.001) and led to a greater likelihood of thinking vaping is more harmful than smoking (all 7 themes, p<0.001), although unintended effects were smaller than intended effects. Images of harms (internal or people experiencing) discouraged vaping more than images of hazards (all p<0.001). DISCUSSION: Vaping warning policies should communicate a broader range of hazards and harms, beyond addiction, to potentially increase awareness of health harms. Images of internal harm or people experiencing harms may be particularly effective at discouraging vaping.

Patterns and correlates of nutrition knowledge across five countries in the 2018 international food policy study.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition knowledge is an important determinant of diet-related behaviour; however, the use of disparate assessment tools creates challenges for comparing nutrition knowledge levels and correlates across studies, geographic contexts, and populations. Using the Food Processing Knowledge (FoodProK) score - a measure of nutrition knowledge based on consumers' ability to understand and apply the concept of food processing in a functional task - nutrition knowledge levels and associated correlates were assessed in five countries. METHODS: Adults, aged ≥18 years, were recruited through the Nielsen Consumer Insights Global Panel in Australia (n = 3997), Canada (n = 4170), Mexico (n = 4044), the United Kingdom (UK) (n = 5363), and the United States (US) (n = 4527). Respondents completed web-based surveys in November-December 2018. Functional nutrition knowledge was measured using the FoodProK score. Linear regression models examined associations between FoodProK score and sociodemographic, dietary behaviours, and knowledge-related characteristics. RESULTS: FoodProK scores (maximum, 8 points) were highest in Canada (mean: 5.1) and Australia (5.0), followed by the UK (4.8), Mexico (4.7), and the US (4.6). Health literacy and self-rated nutrition knowledge were positively associated with FoodProK scores (p < .001). FoodProK scores were higher among those who reported vegetarian/other dietary practices (p < .001); made efforts to consume less sodium, trans fats, or sugars (p < .001); ≥60 years (p = 0.002), female (p < .001), and 'majority' ethnic group respondents in their respective countries (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study found differences in consumers' ability to distinguish levels of food processing for common foods, with somewhat lower levels of nutrition knowledge in countries with the highest intake of highly processed foods. Nutrition knowledge differences based on consumer characteristics highlight the need for accessible policy interventions that support uptake of healthy eating efforts across populations to avoid exacerbating nutrition-related disparities. Tools such as the FoodProK can be used to evaluate the impact of policies targeting nutrition knowledge across contexts.

Sociodemographic disparities in purchases of fruit drinks with policy relevant front-of-package nutrition claims.

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to describe sociodemographic characteristics associated with the purchase of (1) any fruit drinks and (2) fruit drinks with specific front-of-package (FOP) nutrition claims. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: USA. PARTICIPANTS: We merged fruit drink purchasing data from 60 712 household-months from 5233 households with children 0-5 years participating in Nielsen Homescan in 2017 with nutrition claims data. We examined differences in predicted probabilities of purchasing any fruit drinks by race/ethnicity, income and education. We constructed inverse probability (IP) weights based on likelihood of purchasing any fruit drinks. We used IP-weighted multivariable logistic regression models to examine predicted probabilities of purchasing fruit drinks with specific FOP claims. RESULTS: One-third of households with young children purchased any fruit drinks. Non-Hispanic (NH) Black (51·6 %), Hispanic (36·3 %), lower-income (39·3 %) and lower-educated households (40·9 %) were more likely to purchase any fruit drinks than NH White (31·3 %), higher-income (25·8 %) and higher-educated households (30·3 %) (all P < 0·001). In IP-weighted analyses, NH Black households were more likely to purchase fruit drinks with 'Natural' and fruit or fruit flavour claims (6·8 % and 3·7 %) than NH White households (4·5 % and 2·7 %) (both P < 0·01). Lower- and middle-income (15·0 % and 13·8 %) and lower- and middle-educated households (15·4 % and 14·5 %) were more likely to purchase fruit drinks with '100 % Vitamin C' claims than higher-income (10·8 %) and higher-educated households (12·9 %) (all P < 0·025). CONCLUSIONS: We found a higher likelihood of fruit drink purchases in lower-income, lower-educated, NH Black and Hispanic households. Experimental studies should determine if nutrition claims may be contributing to disparities in fruit drink consumption.

A five-country study of front- and back-of-package nutrition label awareness and use: patterns and correlates from the 2018 International Food Policy Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify correlates of nutrition label awareness and use, particularly subgroup differences among consumers. Two label types were assessed: (1) nutrition facts tables (NFt) in Australia, Canada, Mexico, UK, and USA and (2) front-of-package (FOP) labels, including mandatory Guideline Daily Amounts (Mexico), voluntary Health Star Ratings (Australia) and voluntary Traffic Lights (UK). DESIGN: Respondents were recruited using Nielsen Consumer Insights Global Panel (n 21 586) and completed online surveys in November-December 2018. Linear regression and generalised linear mixed models examined differences in label use and awareness between countries and label type based on sociodemographic, knowledge-related and dietary characteristics. SETTING: Australia, Canada, Mexico, UK and USA. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥18 years). RESULTS: Respondents from the USA, Canada and Australia reported significantly higher NFt use and awareness than those in Mexico and the UK. Mexican respondents reported the highest level of FOP label awareness, whereas UK respondents reported the highest FOP label use. NFt use was higher among females, 'minority' ethnic groups, those with higher nutrition knowledge and respondents with 'adequate literacy' compared with those with 'high likelihood of limited literacy'. FOP label use was higher among those with a 'high likelihood of limited literacy' compared with 'adequate literacy' across countries. CONCLUSIONS: Lower use of mandatory Guideline Daily Amount labels compared with voluntary FOP labelling systems provides support for Mexico's decision to switch to mandatory 'high-in' warning symbols. The patterns of consumer label use and awareness across sociodemographic and knowledge-related characteristics suggest that simple FOP labels may encourage broader use across countries.

Examining the Longitudinal Relationship Between Perceived and Actual Message Effectiveness: A Randomized Trial.

We sought to examine the relationship between perceived message effectiveness (PME) and actual message effectiveness (AME) in a 3-week randomized trial of vaping prevention advertisements. Participants were US adolescents (n = 1,514) recruited in 2021. We randomly assigned them to view The Real Cost vaping prevention ads or control videos online. Participants viewed three videos at Visit 1, again at Visits 2 and 3, and completed a survey at each visit that assessed AME (susceptibility to vaping) and two types of PME - effects perceptions (potential for behavioral impact) and message perceptions (potential for message processing). At Visit 4, AME was measured. Compared to control, The Real Cost ads led to improved AME (lower susceptibility to vaping at Visit 4, p < .001). This was anticipated by The Real Cost ads eliciting higher PME ratings (higher effects and message perceptions at Visit 1, both p < .001). Furthermore, PME (both effects and message perceptions) at Visit 1 predicted susceptibility to vaping at Visits 1, 2, 3, and 4 (all p < .001). Finally, effects perceptions fully mediated the impact of The Real Cost ads on susceptibility to vaping (ß = -.30; p < .001), while message perceptions only partially mediated the effect (ß = -.04; p = .001). Our findings indicate a relationship between PME and AME, especially effects perceptions, and suggest that PME may be useful in message pre-testing to select messages with greater behavior change potential.

Institutional Reform to Promote Antiracism: A Tool for Developing an Organizational Equity Action and Accountability Plan.

Racism is a public health problem. Systems, structures, policies, and practices perpetuate a culture built on racism. Institutional reform is needed to promote antiracism. This article describes 1) a tool used to develop an equity action and accountability plan (EAAP) that promotes antiracism in the Department of Health Behavior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Gillings School of Global Public Health, 2) strategies that were developed, and 3) short-term outcomes and lessons learned. A study coordinator, not affiliated with the Department of Health Behavior, was hired to collect qualitative data that documented the lived experiences of students and alumni of color (ie, racial and ethnic minority students) over time in the department. Seeking action from faculty and departmental leadership, students engaged in collective organizing covered the department chair's office door with notes describing microaggressions, and visited faculty one-on-one to demand action. In response, 6 faculty members volunteered to form the Equity Task Force (ETF) to explicitly address students' concerns. The ETF identified priority areas for action based on 2 student-led reports, gathered resources from other institutions and the public health literature, and examined departmental policies and procedures. The ETF drafted the EAAP, solicited feedback, and revised it according to 6 priority strategies with actionable steps: 1) transform culture and climate, 2) enhance teaching, mentoring, and training, 3) revisit performance and evaluation of faculty and staff, 4) strengthen recruitment and retention of faculty of color, 5) increase transparency in student hiring practices and financial resources, and 6) improve equity-oriented research practices. This planning tool and process can be used by other institutions to achieve antiracist reform.

The impact of pictorial health warnings on purchases of sugary drinks for children: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pictorial warnings on tobacco products are promising for motivating behavior change, but few studies have examined pictorial warnings for sugary drinks, especially in naturalistic environments. This study aimed to examine the impact of pictorial warnings on parents' purchases of sugary drinks for their children in a naturalistic store laboratory. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Parents of children ages 2 to 12 (n = 325, 25% identifying as Black, 20% Hispanic) completed a shopping task in a naturalistic store laboratory in North Carolina. Participants were randomly assigned to a pictorial warnings arm (sugary drinks displayed pictorial health warnings about type 2 diabetes and heart damage) or a control arm (sugary drinks displayed a barcode label). Parents selected 1 beverage and 1 snack for their child, as well as 1 household good; one of these items was selected for them to purchase and take home. The primary outcome was whether parents purchased a sugary drink for their child. Secondary outcomes included reactions to the trial labels, attitudes toward sugary drinks, and intentions to serve their child sugary drinks. Pictorial warnings led to a 17-percentage point reduction in purchases of sugary drinks (95% CI for reduction: 7% to 27%), with 45% of parents in the control arm buying a sugary drink for their child compared to 28% in the pictorial warning arm (p = 0.002). The impact of pictorial warnings on purchases did not differ by any of the 13 participant characteristics examined (e.g., race/ethnicity, income, education, and age of child). Pictorial warnings also led to lower calories (kcal), purchased from sugary drinks (82 kcal in the control arm versus 52 kcal in the pictorial warnings arm, p = 0.003). Moreover, pictorial warnings led to lower intentions to serve sugary drinks to their child, feeling more in control of healthy eating decisions, greater thinking about the harms of sugary drinks, stronger negative emotional reactions, greater anticipated social interactions, lower perceived healthfulness of sugary drinks for their child, and greater injunctive norms to limit sugary drinks for their child (all p < 0.05). There was no evidence of difference between trial arms on noticing of the labels, appeal of sugary drinks, perceived amount of added sugar in sugary drinks, risk perceptions, or perceived tastiness of sugary drinks (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pictorial warnings reduced parents' purchases of sugary drinks for their children in this naturalistic trial. Warnings on sugary drinks are a promising policy approach to reduce sugary drink purchasing in the US. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial design, measures, power calculation, and analytic plan were registered before data collection at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT04223687.

Correlates of Self-Reported and Functional Understanding of Nutrition Labels across 5 Countries in the 2018 International Food Policy Study.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition labels on prepackaged foods are an important source of nutrition information; however, differences in comprehension of varying label formats can limit their use and effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: This study examined levels and correlates of consumers' self-reported understanding of Nutrition Facts tables (NFts) and front-of-package (FOP) labels, as well as functional NFt understanding. METHODS: Adults (≥18 y) in Australia (n = 3901), Canada (n = 4107), Mexico (n = 4012), the United Kingdom (n = 5121), and the United States (n = 4445) completed online surveys in November/December 2018. Descriptive statistics summarized sample profiles by country. Linear regression models examined the association between label understanding (self-reported NFt and FOP, functional NFt) and consumer dietary behaviors, functional nutrition knowledge, and sociodemographic characteristics. NFt understanding was measured in all countries, with FOP labeling assessed only in Mexico, Australia, and the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Self-reported and functional NFt understanding was significantly higher in the United States and Canada (P < 0.0001). In adjusted analyses, functional NFt understanding was significantly higher among women compared to men (P < 0.0001); respondents from the "majority" ethnic group in their respective countries compared with minority ethnic groups (P < 0.0001); those with higher education levels (P < 0.0001) and functional nutrition knowledge compared with their lower education and nutrition knowledge counterparts (P < 0.0001), respectively; and those making efforts to consume less sodium, sugar, or fat compared with those not reporting dietary efforts (P < 0.0001). Self-reported FOP label understanding was significantly higher for interpretive labeling systems in Australia (health star ratings) and the United Kingdom (traffic lights) compared with Mexico's Guideline Daily Amounts (GDAs) (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition labels requiring greater numeracy skills (i.e., NFts, GDAs) were more difficult for consumers to understand than interpretive FOP labels (i.e., traffic lights). Differences in NFt and FOP label understanding by income adequacy and education suggest potential disparities in labeling policy effects among vulnerable subgroups.

Perceived Message Effectiveness of the Meatless Monday Campaign: An Experiment With US Adults.

Given the negative health and environmental impacts of red meat consumption, reducing red meat intake in the United States is important for both human and planetary well-being. To experimentally evaluate the impact of health-focused and environment-focused messages from the Meatless Monday campaign, we conducted an online randomized experiment among US adults aged 18 years or older (n = 1244). Compared with control messages, health-focused and environment-focused Meatless Monday messages led to significantly higher perceived message effectiveness and increased intention to reduce meat consumption. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):724-727. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306766).

Perceived effectiveness of added-sugar warning label designs for U.S. restaurant menus: An online randomized controlled trial.

Added-sugar consumption in the U.S. exceeds recommended limits. Policymakers are considering requiring restaurants to use menu warning labels to indicate items high in added sugar. We sought to determine whether icon-only and icon-plus-text added-sugar menu labels were (1) perceived as more effective at potentially reducing consumption of items high in added sugar and (2) increased knowledge of menu items' added-sugar content relative to control labels, and if effects differed by label design. A national sample of U.S. adults (n = 1327) participated in an online randomized experiment. Participants viewed menu items with either a control label, 1 of 6 icon-only labels, or 1 of 18 icon-plus-text labels with 3 text variations. For their assigned label, participants provided ratings of perceived message effectiveness (a validated scale of a message's potential to change behavior). Participants were also asked to classify menu items by their added-sugar content. The icon-only and icon-plus-text labels were perceived as more effective than the control label (means: 3.7 and 3.7 vs. 3.1, respectively, on a 5-point scale; p < 0.001). The icon-only and icon-plus-text groups each correctly classified 71% of menu items by added-sugar content vs. 56% in the control group (p < 0.001). All icons and text variations were perceived as similarly effective. In conclusion, relative to a control label, icon-only and icon-plus-text added-sugar menu labels were perceived as effective and helped consumers identify items high in added sugar. Menu warning labels may be a promising strategy for reducing added-sugar consumption from restaurants, but research on behavioral effects in real-world settings is needed. Clinical Trials Identifier:NCT04637412.

Identifying Promising Themes for Adolescent Vaping Warnings: A National Experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Adolescent vaping remains a problem in the United States, yet little is known about what health warning themes most discourage vaping among adolescents. We sought to identify the most compelling themes for vaping warnings for US adolescents. METHODS: Participants were a national probability sample of 623 US adolescents aged 13-17 years, recruited in the summer of 2020. Adolescents were randomized to one of the five warning message themes about the potential health effects of vaping: 1. chemical harms, 2. lung harms, 3. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) harms, 4. nicotine addiction, or 5. control (messages about vape litter). The primary outcome was perceived message effectiveness (PME; 3-item scale). Secondary outcomes were negative affect (fear), attention, anticipated social interactions, and message novelty. RESULTS: Adolescents rated the chemical, lung, and COVID-19 harms warning messages higher on PME than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05), while nicotine addiction was rated higher than control (p < .05). The chemical, lung, and COVID-19 harms warning themes also elicited greater negative affect than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05). For all other secondary outcomes, the COVID-19 harms warning message theme was rated higher than nicotine addiction and control (all p < .05). CONCLUSION: Adolescents perceived warning message themes about lung, chemical and COVID-19 health effects of vaping as more effective than nicotine addiction. To discourage vaping, the FDA and others should communicate to youth about the health effects of vaping beyond nicotine addiction. IMPLICATIONS: Adolescents rated warning message themes about the lung, chemical, and COVID-19 health effects of vaping as more effective than nicotine addiction, while nicotine addiction was rated as more effective than control themes about vaping litter. To discourage vaping among adolescents, health messaging should expand message themes to communicate about a broader set of health effects of vaping beyond nicotine addiction.

Adolescents' Understanding of Smoking and Vaping Risk Language: Cognitive Interviews to Inform Scale Development.

INTRODUCTION: Perceived message effectiveness (PME) is a common metric to understand receptivity to tobacco prevention messages, yet most measures have been developed with adults. We examined adolescents' interpretation of language within candidate items for a new youth-targeted PME measure using cognitive interviewing. We sought to understand the meaning adolescents assigned to our candidate PME items to improve item wording. AIMS AND METHODS: Participants were 20 adolescents, ages 13-17 years from the United States. Cognitive interviews used a structured guide to elicit feedback on comprehension, answer retrieval, and language regarding a set of Reasoned Action Approach-based survey items that assessed the PME of smoking and vaping prevention ads. We employed thematic analysis to synthesize findings from the interviews. RESULTS: Interviews identified three main issues related to survey items: ambiguity of language, word choice (risk and other terminology), and survey item phrasing. Adolescents preferred direct, definitive language over more ambiguous phrasing which they saw as less serious (eg, "will" instead of "could"). For risk terminology, they preferred terms such as "harmful" and "dangerous" over "risky," which was viewed as easy to discount. The term "negative effects" was interpreted as encompassing a broader set of tobacco harms than "health effects." Adolescents said that the term "vape" was preferable to "e-cigarette," and identified ways to simplify item wording for greater clarity. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco risk terms that appear similar differ in meaning to adolescents, and more direct and unambiguous language is preferred. Our findings informed changes to the PME scale items to improve clarity and reduce measurement error. IMPLICATIONS: This study adds to the literature on how adolescents interpret tobacco prevention language. Adolescents may interpret terminology differently than adults, which could lead to ambiguity in meaning and thus measurement error. Through cognitive interviewing, we identified and improved the language in a youth-focused PME measure for tobacco and vaping prevention.

Terms tobacco users employ to describe e-cigarette aerosol.

BACKGROUND: The scientific term for the substance people inhale and exhale from a vaping device is 'aerosol', but whether the public uses this term is unclear. To inform tobacco control communication efforts, we sought to understand what tobacco users call e-cigarette aerosols. METHODS: Participants were a national convenience sample of 1628 US adults who used e-cigarettes, cigarettes or both (dual users). In an online survey, conducted in spring 2021, participants described what 'people inhale and exhale when they vape', using an open-ended and then a closed-ended response scale. Participants then evaluated warning statements, randomly assigned to contain the term 'aerosol' or 'vapor' (eg, 'E-cigarette aerosol/vapor contains nicotine, which can lead to seizures'). RESULTS: In open-ended responses, tobacco users most commonly provided the terms 'vapor' (31%) and 'smoke' (23%) but rarely 'aerosol' (<1%). In closed-ended responses, the most commonly endorsed terms were again 'vapor' (57%) and 'smoke' (22%) but again infrequently 'aerosol' (2%). In closed-ended responses, use of the term 'vapor' was more common than other terms among people who were older; white; gay, lesbian or bisexual; college educated; or vape users only (all p<0.05). In the experiment, warnings using the terms 'aerosol' and 'vapor' were equally effective (all p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The public rarely uses the term 'aerosol' to describe e-cigarette output, potentially complicating educational efforts that use the term. Future studies should explore public knowledge and understanding of the terms 'aerosol' and the more popular 'vapor' to better inform vaping risk communication.

Reactions to messages about smoking, vaping and COVID-19: two national experiments.

INTRODUCTION: The pace and scale of the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with ongoing efforts by health agencies to communicate harms, have created a pressing need for data to inform messaging about smoking, vaping, and COVID-19. We examined reactions to COVID-19 and traditional health harms messages discouraging smoking and vaping. METHODS: Participants were a national convenience sample of 810 US adults recruited online in May 2020. All participated in a smoking message experiment and a vaping message experiment, presented in a random order. In each experiment, participants viewed one message formatted as a Twitter post. The experiments adopted a 3 (traditional health harms of smoking or vaping: three harms, one harm, absent) × 2 (COVID-19 harms: one harm, absent) between-subjects design. Outcomes included perceived message effectiveness (primary) and constructs from the Tobacco Warnings Model (secondary: attention, negative affect, cognitive elaboration, social interactions). RESULTS: Smoking messages with traditional or COVID-19 harms elicited higher perceived effectiveness for discouraging smoking than control messages without these harms (all p <0.001). However, including both traditional and COVID-19 harms in smoking messages had no benefit beyond including either alone. Smoking messages affected Tobacco Warnings Model constructs and did not elicit more reactance than control messages. Smoking messages also elicited higher perceived effectiveness for discouraging vaping. Including traditional harms in messages about vaping elicited higher perceived effectiveness for discouraging vaping (p <0.05), but including COVID-19 harms did not. CONCLUSIONS: Messages linking smoking with COVID-19 may hold promise for discouraging smoking and may have the added benefit of also discouraging vaping.