Correct Recognition and Appeal Ratings of Copycat Cannabis Edible Packaging: Evidence from an Online Experiment.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-12 DOI:10.1089/can.2025.0017
Michael Cooper, Yuyan Shi
{"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.

假冒大麻食用包装的正确识别和吸引力评级:来自在线实验的证据。
导言:尽管禁止对年轻人有吸引力的包装,欺骗性的“山寨”大麻可食用包装在美国娱乐性大麻合法化的州很常见。山寨包装模仿流行食品的品牌特征,造成意外摄入的高风险,特别是对年轻人。材料与方法:在18-29岁的年轻人中进行了一项具有代表性的在线实验(N = 2523)。参与者被要求在定时试验中识别一系列图像中的每个包装是否含有大麻成分。通过回归分析,分析包装类型与正确标识之间的关系以及正确标识与申诉等级之间的关系。结果:与非山寨品牌大麻包装相比,山寨大麻包装正确识别大麻含量的几率较低(优势比= 0.35,95% CI =[0.31, 0.40])。正确识别大麻含量与较低的上诉评级相关(优势比= 0.75,95% CI =[0.69, 0.81])。讨论:仿制大麻包装与误认大麻成分的风险增加有关,使其成为意外摄入的公共健康风险。使包装易于识别的包装特征不那么吸引人,强调需要在大麻包装上要求突出特征表明大麻内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.90%
发文量
164
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信