Public acceptability of tax, nudge, and health education policies targeting health behavior change in China.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Qiumian Hong, Ruiting Wang, Yichen Wu, Ning Zhang
{"title":"Public acceptability of tax, nudge, and health education policies targeting health behavior change in China.","authors":"Qiumian Hong, Ruiting Wang, Yichen Wu, Ning Zhang","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibaf034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Public health policies are crucial for shaping public health practices and promoting healthier lifestyles; however, successful implementation and widespread adoption of these policies largely depend on their public acceptability.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to understand the public acceptability of tax, nudge (design, size, and availability), and health education policies targeting health behavior change including reducing tobacco use, alcohol consumption, snack consumption, beverage consumption, and increasing physical activity among Chinese citizens, along with the factors that influence public acceptability of different public health policies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The cross-sectional study was conducted in the WJX online platform between January and March 2024, involving 2409 participants who were randomly assigned to 23 groups. Besides the demographics, the policy acceptability, perceived policy effectiveness, engagement in health behaviors, and social value orientation were also assessed. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and post hoc tests were used to examine differences in policy acceptability across various policies and behaviors. The t-tests and ANOVA analyses were conducted to compare policy acceptability among participants with different characteristics. Multiple linear regression was performed to reveal the impact of strategies used, perceived effectiveness, social value orientation, and socioeconomic status on policy acceptability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall policy acceptability rate was 79.1%. \"Design\" strategies achieved the highest acceptability (86.8%), followed by health education (82.0%). Tax policies had the lowest acceptability (71.0%). Policies targeting smoking (83.7%) and physical activity (85.8%) were highly accepted. Smokers showed lower acceptability for policies to control smoking compared to non-smokers (75.9% vs. 85.7%, P = .015). Individuals who rarely exercise had lower acceptability for policies to promote physical activity compared to those who were physically active (77.1% vs. 88.3%, P = .019). Those with a stronger \"proself\" orientation or higher socioeconomic status tended to report lower acceptability of public health policies to promote healthy eating.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Integrating traditional education with tailored nudges could be an effective public health promotion strategy in China. Future pilot programs leveraging these findings could enhance the public acceptability of such policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaf034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Public health policies are crucial for shaping public health practices and promoting healthier lifestyles; however, successful implementation and widespread adoption of these policies largely depend on their public acceptability.

Purpose: This study aims to understand the public acceptability of tax, nudge (design, size, and availability), and health education policies targeting health behavior change including reducing tobacco use, alcohol consumption, snack consumption, beverage consumption, and increasing physical activity among Chinese citizens, along with the factors that influence public acceptability of different public health policies.

Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted in the WJX online platform between January and March 2024, involving 2409 participants who were randomly assigned to 23 groups. Besides the demographics, the policy acceptability, perceived policy effectiveness, engagement in health behaviors, and social value orientation were also assessed. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and post hoc tests were used to examine differences in policy acceptability across various policies and behaviors. The t-tests and ANOVA analyses were conducted to compare policy acceptability among participants with different characteristics. Multiple linear regression was performed to reveal the impact of strategies used, perceived effectiveness, social value orientation, and socioeconomic status on policy acceptability.

Results: The overall policy acceptability rate was 79.1%. "Design" strategies achieved the highest acceptability (86.8%), followed by health education (82.0%). Tax policies had the lowest acceptability (71.0%). Policies targeting smoking (83.7%) and physical activity (85.8%) were highly accepted. Smokers showed lower acceptability for policies to control smoking compared to non-smokers (75.9% vs. 85.7%, P = .015). Individuals who rarely exercise had lower acceptability for policies to promote physical activity compared to those who were physically active (77.1% vs. 88.3%, P = .019). Those with a stronger "proself" orientation or higher socioeconomic status tended to report lower acceptability of public health policies to promote healthy eating.

Conclusions: Integrating traditional education with tailored nudges could be an effective public health promotion strategy in China. Future pilot programs leveraging these findings could enhance the public acceptability of such policies.

中国公众对以健康行为改变为目标的税收、推动和健康教育政策的接受程度。
背景:公共卫生政策对于形成公共卫生做法和促进更健康的生活方式至关重要;然而,这些政策的成功实施和广泛采用在很大程度上取决于公众对其的接受程度。目的:本研究旨在了解公众对税收、推动(设计、规模和可获得性)和健康教育政策的接受程度,这些政策旨在改变中国公民的健康行为,包括减少烟草使用、酒精消费、零食消费、饮料消费和增加体育锻炼,以及影响公众对不同公共卫生政策接受程度的因素。方法:横断面研究于2024年1 - 3月在WJX在线平台进行,2409名参与者随机分为23组。除人口统计外,还评估了政策可接受性、感知政策有效性、健康行为参与和社会价值取向。采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和事后检验来检验不同政策和行为之间政策可接受性的差异。采用t检验和方差分析比较不同特征的被试对政策的接受程度。多元线性回归分析了策略使用、感知有效性、社会价值取向和社会经济地位对政策可接受性的影响。结果:总体政策接受率为79.1%。“设计”策略接受度最高(86.8%),其次是健康教育(82.0%)。税收政策的可接受度最低(71.0%)。针对吸烟(83.7%)和体育活动(85.8%)的政策被高度接受。与非吸烟者相比,吸烟者对控制吸烟政策的可接受性较低(75.9%对85.7%,P = 0.015)。与经常运动的人相比,很少运动的人对促进身体活动的政策的可接受性较低(77.1%对88.3%,P = 0.019)。“自我”倾向较强或社会经济地位较高的人对促进健康饮食的公共卫生政策的可接受性较低。结论:在中国,将传统教育与量身定制的推动相结合是一种有效的公共卫生促进策略。利用这些发现的未来试点项目可以提高公众对此类政策的接受程度。
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
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Translational Behavioral Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989. TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信