{"title":"Correct Recognition and Appeal Ratings of Copycat Cannabis Edible Packaging: Evidence from an Online Experiment.","authors":"Michael Cooper, Yuyan Shi","doi":"10.1089/can.2025.0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Despite prohibitions against youth-appealing packages, deceptive \"copycat\" cannabis edible packages have been commonly seen in U.S. states that legalized recreational cannabis. Copycat packages mimic the branding features of popular food products, posing a high risk for accidental ingestion, particularly for the younger population. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> An online experiment was conducted among a representative sample of young adults aged 18-29 (<i>N</i> = 2,523). Participants were asked in timed trials to identify whether each package in a series of images contained cannabis content. Regression analysis was conducted to analyze the association between package type and correct identification and the association between correct identification and appeal ratings. <b>Results:</b> Copycat cannabis packages were associated with lower odds of correct identification of cannabis content (odds ratio = 0.35, 95% CI = [0.31, 0.40]) compared with the non-copycat branded cannabis package. Correct identification of cannabis content was associated with lower appeal ratings (odds ratio = 0.75, 95% CI = [0.69, 0.81]). <b>Discussion:</b> Copycat cannabis packages were associated with elevated risk of misidentification of cannabis content, making them a public health risk for accidental ingestion. Package features that make a package easily identifiable were less appealing, underscoring the need of requiring salient features to indicate cannabis content on cannabis packages.</p>","PeriodicalId":9386,"journal":{"name":"Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research","volume":" ","pages":"420-424"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/can.2025.0017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Despite prohibitions against youth-appealing packages, deceptive "copycat" cannabis edible packages have been commonly seen in U.S. states that legalized recreational cannabis. Copycat packages mimic the branding features of popular food products, posing a high risk for accidental ingestion, particularly for the younger population. Materials and Methods: An online experiment was conducted among a representative sample of young adults aged 18-29 (N = 2,523). Participants were asked in timed trials to identify whether each package in a series of images contained cannabis content. Regression analysis was conducted to analyze the association between package type and correct identification and the association between correct identification and appeal ratings. Results: Copycat cannabis packages were associated with lower odds of correct identification of cannabis content (odds ratio = 0.35, 95% CI = [0.31, 0.40]) compared with the non-copycat branded cannabis package. Correct identification of cannabis content was associated with lower appeal ratings (odds ratio = 0.75, 95% CI = [0.69, 0.81]). Discussion: Copycat cannabis packages were associated with elevated risk of misidentification of cannabis content, making them a public health risk for accidental ingestion. Package features that make a package easily identifiable were less appealing, underscoring the need of requiring salient features to indicate cannabis content on cannabis packages.