Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Do Flavour Descriptions Influence Subjective Ratings of Flavoured and Unflavoured E-Liquids among Non-Smoking and Non-Vaping UK Adolescents?
Dyer, Maddy L; Suddell, Steph F; Khouja, Jasmine N; Havill, Michelle A; Blackwell, Anna K M; Maynard, Olivia M; Munafò, Marcus R; Attwood, Angela S.
Afiliação
  • Dyer ML; School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
  • Suddell SF; Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
  • Khouja JN; Trinity College Institute of Neuroscience (TCIN), Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
  • Havill MA; School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
  • Blackwell AKM; Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
  • Maynard OM; Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, Department of Health and Social Care, London, UK.
  • Munafò MR; Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
  • Attwood AS; School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Nicotine Tob Res ; 2024 Mar 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38468465
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Youth use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is rising globally and is associated with health harms. Flavour descriptions on e-liquid packaging may contribute to the appeal of e-cigarettes among youth. This study compared subjective ratings of e-liquid packaging flavour descriptions among non-smoking and non-vaping UK adolescents.

METHODS:

This was an online observational study in a UK sample of non-smoking and non-vaping adolescents aged 11-17 years. The primary analyses compared flavoured versus unflavoured descriptions and the secondary analyses compared candy/sweet flavour versus fruit flavour descriptions. Outcomes were packaging appraisal, packaging receptivity, perceived harm, and perceived audience.

RESULTS:

The survey was completed by 120 participants (74% female). Packaging appraisal ratings were higher for e-liquids with flavoured descriptions than unflavoured descriptions (mean difference 5.9, 95% CI 4.2 to 7.6, p<.001). Similarly, packaging receptivity ratings were higher for e-liquids with flavoured descriptions than unflavoured descriptions (mean difference 4.2, 95% CI 2.8 to 5.6, p<.001). Participants also perceived e-liquids with flavoured (versus unflavoured) descriptions as less 'grown-up' (mean difference -5.2, 95% CI -7.3 to -3.1, p<.001). However, ratings of perceived harm were similar for flavoured and unflavoured descriptions (mean difference -1.0, 95% CI -2.6 to 0.5, p=.189).

CONCLUSIONS:

Although this study found differences in subjective ratings of e-liquids with flavoured and unflavoured descriptions, non-smoking and non-vaping UK adolescents generally had low appraisal and receptivity for e-liquids and they perceived them as being 'grown-up' and harmful. IMPLICATIONS Youth use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is increasing globally, leading to concerns about health harms. This study compared adolescents' ratings of e-liquids with flavoured versus unflavoured descriptions and e-liquids with candy/sweet flavour versus fruit flavour descriptions. This study adds to previous studies that have compared adolescents' ratings of e-liquids with tobacco flavour versus non-tobacco flavour descriptions. Although packaging appraisal and receptivity ratings were higher (more positive) for e-liquids with flavoured versus unflavoured descriptions, overall, adolescents who do not smoke or vape had low appraisal and receptivity for e-liquids, and they perceived them as being 'grown-up' and harmful.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article