自下而上与自上而下相遇:在电子烟争议的背景下,探索电子烟使用者对风险的描述

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Rikke Tokle
{"title":"自下而上与自上而下相遇:在电子烟争议的背景下,探索电子烟使用者对风险的描述","authors":"Rikke Tokle","doi":"10.1080/13698575.2020.1749571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Framed both as a solution to and as an additional part of the tobacco problem, e-cigarettes have been the subject of risk controversies since they were launched in 2006, followed by massive divergence in media, public health approaches and regulations across the world. This study explores vapers’ risk perceptions and accounts of the public risk communication and regulation of e-cigarettes in a Norwegian context were nicotine-containing e-liquids are prohibited from being sold by domestic retailers. Based on analyses of semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 30, 17 males) with adult vapers, I find that the participants emphasised three important dimensions related to risk. First, they perceived vaping as harm reduction by substituting for smoking. Second, they devalued much of the risk communication about e-cigarettes from Norwegian health authorities and media. Interlinked with their harm-reduction approach, they perceived the present regulation of nicotine e-liquid and vaporisers as increasing risk by decreasing their availability to smokers. Third, in general they preferred the lay expertise available online to the health authorities’ information on e-cigarettes. The analysis displays a lack of trust among the participants in what can be labelled as top-down information. Based on these dimensions, I conclude that the dissonance between vapers risk perceptions and the regulation and mixed messages in risk communication of e-cigarettes has contributed to their preference for bottom-up expertise. From the vapers’ point of view, e-cigarettes represent harm reduction, and the vaper community symbolises a bottom-up health movement where peer assistance compensates for a perceived lack of assistance from health authorities.","PeriodicalId":47341,"journal":{"name":"Health Risk & Society","volume":"240 1","pages":"118 - 135"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bottom-up meets top-down: exploring vapers’ accounts of risk in a context of e-cigarette controversies\",\"authors\":\"Rikke Tokle\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13698575.2020.1749571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Framed both as a solution to and as an additional part of the tobacco problem, e-cigarettes have been the subject of risk controversies since they were launched in 2006, followed by massive divergence in media, public health approaches and regulations across the world. This study explores vapers’ risk perceptions and accounts of the public risk communication and regulation of e-cigarettes in a Norwegian context were nicotine-containing e-liquids are prohibited from being sold by domestic retailers. Based on analyses of semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 30, 17 males) with adult vapers, I find that the participants emphasised three important dimensions related to risk. First, they perceived vaping as harm reduction by substituting for smoking. Second, they devalued much of the risk communication about e-cigarettes from Norwegian health authorities and media. Interlinked with their harm-reduction approach, they perceived the present regulation of nicotine e-liquid and vaporisers as increasing risk by decreasing their availability to smokers. Third, in general they preferred the lay expertise available online to the health authorities’ information on e-cigarettes. The analysis displays a lack of trust among the participants in what can be labelled as top-down information. Based on these dimensions, I conclude that the dissonance between vapers risk perceptions and the regulation and mixed messages in risk communication of e-cigarettes has contributed to their preference for bottom-up expertise. From the vapers’ point of view, e-cigarettes represent harm reduction, and the vaper community symbolises a bottom-up health movement where peer assistance compensates for a perceived lack of assistance from health authorities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Risk & Society\",\"volume\":\"240 1\",\"pages\":\"118 - 135\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Risk & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2020.1749571\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Risk & Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2020.1749571","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

电子烟既是烟草问题的解决方案,也是烟草问题的一部分,自2006年推出以来,电子烟一直是风险争议的主题,随后在世界各地的媒体、公共卫生方法和法规方面出现了巨大分歧。本研究探讨了在挪威禁止国内零售商销售含尼古丁的电子烟液体的情况下,电子烟使用者的风险认知以及对电子烟公共风险沟通和监管的描述。基于对成年电子烟者的半结构化定性访谈(n = 30,17名男性)的分析,我发现参与者强调了与风险相关的三个重要维度。首先,他们认为电子烟可以代替吸烟来减少危害。其次,他们低估了挪威卫生当局和媒体关于电子烟的风险沟通。与他们减少危害的方法相关联的是,他们认为目前对尼古丁电子液体和蒸发器的监管减少了吸烟者的可获得性,从而增加了风险。第三,总的来说,他们更喜欢网上的专业知识,而不是卫生当局关于电子烟的信息。分析显示,对于那些可以被称为自上而下的信息,参与者之间缺乏信任。基于这些维度,我得出结论,电子烟风险认知与监管之间的不协调,以及电子烟风险沟通中的混合信息,导致了他们对自下而上的专业知识的偏好。从电子烟使用者的角度来看,电子烟代表着减少危害,电子烟社区象征着自下而上的卫生运动,同伴援助弥补了卫生当局缺乏援助的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bottom-up meets top-down: exploring vapers’ accounts of risk in a context of e-cigarette controversies
Framed both as a solution to and as an additional part of the tobacco problem, e-cigarettes have been the subject of risk controversies since they were launched in 2006, followed by massive divergence in media, public health approaches and regulations across the world. This study explores vapers’ risk perceptions and accounts of the public risk communication and regulation of e-cigarettes in a Norwegian context were nicotine-containing e-liquids are prohibited from being sold by domestic retailers. Based on analyses of semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 30, 17 males) with adult vapers, I find that the participants emphasised three important dimensions related to risk. First, they perceived vaping as harm reduction by substituting for smoking. Second, they devalued much of the risk communication about e-cigarettes from Norwegian health authorities and media. Interlinked with their harm-reduction approach, they perceived the present regulation of nicotine e-liquid and vaporisers as increasing risk by decreasing their availability to smokers. Third, in general they preferred the lay expertise available online to the health authorities’ information on e-cigarettes. The analysis displays a lack of trust among the participants in what can be labelled as top-down information. Based on these dimensions, I conclude that the dissonance between vapers risk perceptions and the regulation and mixed messages in risk communication of e-cigarettes has contributed to their preference for bottom-up expertise. From the vapers’ point of view, e-cigarettes represent harm reduction, and the vaper community symbolises a bottom-up health movement where peer assistance compensates for a perceived lack of assistance from health authorities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Health Risk & Society is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the social processes which influence the ways in which health risks are taken, communicated, assessed and managed. Public awareness of risk is associated with the development of high profile media debates about specific risks. Although risk issues arise in a variety of areas, such as technological usage and the environment, they are particularly evident in health. Not only is health a major issue of personal and collective concern, but failure to effectively assess and manage risk is likely to result in health problems.
×
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