Testing public communications about tobacco product bans: an online experiment with Australian adults who smoke.

Abstract

Objective: Regulating tobacco product features can reduce the appeal and addictiveness of smoking and promote quitting, but may be undermined by misperceptions about the reasons for the ban and the relative harmfulness of the remaining products. We tested how messages about slated (menthol/flavoured crushballs) or hypothetical (filter ventilation, regular nicotine content) tobacco product bans in Australia affected quit intentions, product harmfulness perceptions and knowledge about the ban's rationale.

Methods: Australian adults who currently smoked (n=1514) completed one arm of an online study (menthol, filter ventilation or regular nicotine content, allocated based on the products they usually smoke). Within arms, participants were randomly allocated to one of three message conditions: condition A introduced the ban and rationale and encouraged quitting; B and C additionally highlighted the harmfulness of remaining products; and C additionally described other negative attributes of remaining products.

Results: Message condition did not affect perceived product harmfulness or quit intentions for any ban. Awareness of one (of three) accurate statements about the menthol ban rationale was significantly higher in condition C than A. Regardless of condition, awareness of the rationale (menthol arm: one of three statements, other arms: all statements) predicted quit intentions in response to each ban.

Conclusions: Boosting awareness of the rationale for tobacco product bans may maximise quitting in response. This may be achieved for a menthol ban using messages describing the rationale, emphasising the remaining products' harmfulness and negative attributes and explicitly encouraging quitting (relative to merely describing the ban and rationale and encouraging quitting).