The Effects of Varying Electronic Cigarette Warning Label Design Features On Attention, Recall, and Product Perceptions Among Young Adults

ABSTRACT

This study was a 3 (Brand: Blu, MarkTen, Vuse) by 3 (Warning Size: 20%, 30%, or 50% of advertisement surface) by 2 (Warning Background: White, Red) experimental investigation of the effects of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) warning label design features. Young adults aged 18–30 years (n = 544) were recruited online, completed demographic and tobacco use history measures, and randomized to view e-cigarette advertisements with warning labels that varied by the experimental conditions. Participants completed a task assessing self-reported visual attention to advertisements with a-priori regions of interest defined around warning labels. Warning message recall and perceived addictiveness of e-cigarettes were assessed post-exposure. Approximately half of participants reported attending to warning labels and reported attention was greater for warnings on red versus white backgrounds. Recall of the warning message content was also greater among those reporting attention to the warning label. Overall, those who viewed warnings on red backgrounds reported lower perceived addictiveness than those who viewed warnings on white backgrounds, and e-cigarette users reported lower perceived addictiveness than non-users. Among e-cigarette users, viewing warnings on white backgrounds produced perceptions more similar to non-users. Greater recall was significantly correlated with greater perceived addictiveness. This study provides some of the first evidence that e-cigarette warning label design features including size and coloring affect self-reported attention and content recall.

KEYWORDS:

• Electronic cigarettes
• warning labels
• young adults

Funding

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products under NIH grant number K07CA172217. This work was also supported by the Georgetown University Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI; U01FD004319), a collaborative effort between the university and the FDA to promote regulatory science through innovative research and education, and the Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center Support Grant under NIH grant number P30CA051008. Dr. Villanti was supported by the NIH and FDA under award P50DA036114. Dr. Niaura was supported by Truth Initiative. Dr. Strasser was supported by P50CA179546. The study sponsors had no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or the FDA.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products under NIH grant number K07CA172217. This work was also supported by the Georgetown University Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI; U01FD004319), a collaborative effort between the university and the FDA to promote regulatory science through innovative research and education, and the Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center Support Grant under NIH grant number P30CA051008. Dr. Villanti was supported by the NIH and FDA under award P50DA036114. Dr. Niaura was supported by Truth Initiative. Dr. Strasser was supported by P50CA179546. The study sponsors had no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or the FDA.