Top

Gepubliceerd in:

20-02-2017

Icons for health effects of cigarette smoke: a test of semiotic type

Auteurs: Allison J. Lazard, Annie Schmidt, Huyen Vu, M. Justin Byron, Ellen Peters, Marcella H. Boynton, Noel T. Brewer

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Behavioral Medicine | Uitgave 4/2017

Abstract

We sought to identify icons to effectively communicate health harms of chemicals in cigarette smoke. Participants were a convenience sample of 701 U.S. adults. A within-subjects online experiment explored the effects of icon semiotic type: symbolic (arbitrary, most abstract), indexical, and iconic (representative, most concrete). Outcomes were perceived representation, affect toward smoking, elaboration, perceived severity, and perceived effectiveness. For not-easy-to-visualize harms of cancer and addiction, symbolic icons received the highest ratings (all p < .001). For easy-to-visualize symptoms of heart attack/stroke, indexical icons received the highest ratings (all p < .001). For easy-to-visualize harm of reproductive organ damage, the iconic image did best (all p < .001). Icon type often had a larger impact among participants with higher health literacy. Symbolic icons may be most effective for health effects not easily visualized. Iconic or indexical icons may be more effective for health effects attributable to specific body parts or symptoms.

vorige artikel Friendly tanning: young adults’ engagement with friends around indoor tanning

volgende artikel The relationship between pain, disability, guilt and acceptance in low back pain: a mediation analysis

Andrews, J. C., Netemeyer, R. G., Kees, J., & Burton, S. (2014). How graphic visual health earnings affect young smokers’ thoughts of quitting. Journal of Marketing Research, 51, 165–183.CrossRef

Baig, S. A., Noar, S. M., Ribisl, K. M., & Brewer, N. T. (2017). UNC perceived effectiveness scale: Psychometric properties among a large sample of adult smokers and non-smokers (Working paper)

Baker, R. R., Massey, E. D., & Smith, G. (2004). An overview of the effects of tobacco ingredients on smoke chemistry and toxicity. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 42, 53–83. doi:10.1016/j.fct.2004.01.001 CrossRef

Baker, D., Williams, M., Parker, R., Gazmarian, J., & Nurss, J. (1999). Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Education and Counseling, 38, 33–42.CrossRefPubMed

Boynton, M. H., Agans, R. P., Bowling, J. M., Brewer, N. T., Sutfin, E. L., Goldstein, A. O., et al. (2016). Understanding how perceptions of tobacco constituents and the FDA relate to effective and credible tobacco risk messaging: A national phone survey of U.S. adults, 2014–2015. BMC Public Health, 16, 1–13. doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3151-5 CrossRef

Brewer, N. T., Gottlieb, S. L., Reiter, P. L., McRee, A.-L., Liddon, N., Markowitz, L., et al. (2011). Longitudinal predictors of HPV vaccine initiation among adolescent girls in a high-risk geographic area. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 38, 197.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Brewer, N. T., Hall, M. G., Noar, S. M., Parada, H., Stein-Seroussi, A., Bach, L. E., et al. (2016). Effect of pictorial cigarette pack warnings on changes in smoking behavior: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Internal Medicine, 176, 905–912. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.2621 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.CrossRefPubMed

Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon’s MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2156–2160.CrossRef

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Fact sheets: Smoking and tobacco use. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Behavioral risk factor surveillance system questionnaire. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/questionnaires/pdf-ques/2013brfss_english.pdf

111th Congress of the United States of America. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, Public Law 111–31, 123 Statute 1776. June 22, 2009.

Evans, A. T., Peters, E., Strasser, A. A., Emery, L. F., Sheerin, K. M., & Romer, D. (2015). Graphic warning labels elicit affective and thoughtful responses from smokers: Results of a randomized clinical trial. PLoS ONE, 10, e0142879. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0142879 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fathelrahman, A. I., Omar, M., Awang, R., Cummings, K. M., Borland, R., & Samin, A. S. B. M. (2010). Impact of the new Malaysian cigarette pack warnings on smokers’ awareness of health risks and interest in quitting smoking. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 7, 4089–4099. doi:10.3390/ijerph7114089 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fowles, J., & Dybing, E. (2003). Application of toxicological risk assessment principles to the chemical constituents of cigarette smoke. Tobacco Control, 12, 424–430.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Garcia-Retamero, R., & Galesic, M. (2010). Who proficts from visual aids: Overcoming challenges in people’s understanding of risks. Social Science and Medicine, 70, 1019–1025. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.11.031 CrossRefPubMed

Green, M. J., & Myers, K. R. (2010). Graphic medicine: Use of comics in medical education and patient care. British Medical Journal, 340, 574–577.CrossRef

Hall, M. G., Ribisl, K. M., & Brewer, N. T. (2014). Smokers’ and nonsmokers’ beliefs about harmful tobacco constituents: Implications for FDA communication efforts. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 16, 343–350. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntt158 CrossRef

Hecht, S. S. (2012). Research opportunities related to establishing standards for tobacco products under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 14, 18–28. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntq216 CrossRef

Hoffmann, D., & Hoffmann, I. (2001). The changing cigarette: Chemical studies and bioassays. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph, 13, 159–192.

Houts, P. S., Doak, C. C., Doak, L. G., & Loscalzo, M. J. (2006). The role of pictures in improving health communication: A review of research on attention, comprehension, recall, and adherence. Patient Education and Counseling, 61, 173–190. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2005.05.004 CrossRefPubMed

Katz, M. G., Kripalani, S., & Weiss, B. D. (2006). Use of pictorial aids in medication instructions: A review of the literature. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 63, 2391–2397.CrossRefPubMed

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding comics: The invisible art. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers Inc.

Meppelink, C. S., Smit, E. G., Buurman, B. M., & van Weert, J. C. (2015). Should we be afraid of simple messages? The effects of text difficulty and illustrations in people with low or high health literacy. Health Communication, 30, 1181–1189.CrossRefPubMed

Messaris, P. (1997). Visual persuasion: The role of images in advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Moracco, K. E., Morgan, J. C., Mendel, J., Teal, R., Noar, S. M., Ribisl, K. M., et al. (2016). “My first thought was croutons”: Perceptions of cigarettes and cigarette smoke constituents among adult smokers and nonsmokers. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 18, 1566–1574.CrossRef

Moriarty, S. (2002). The symbiotics of semiotics and visual communication. Journal of Visual Literacy, 22, 19–28.CrossRef

Nakamura, C., & Zeng-Treitler, Q. (2012). A taxonomy of representation strategies in iconic communication. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70, 535–551.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Palmer-Wackerly, A. L., & Krieger, J. L. (2015). Dancing around infertility: The use of metaphors in a complex medical situation. Health Communication, 30, 612–623. doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.888386 CrossRefPubMed

Peirce, C. S. (1991). Peirce on signs: Writing on semiotic. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. (2006). Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science, 17, 407–413.CrossRefPubMed

Rodgman, A., & Perfetti, T. A. (2013). The chemical components of tobacco and tobacco smoke. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.CrossRef

Sopory, P. (2005). Metaphor in formative evaluation and message design: An application to relationships and alcohol use. Health Communication, 17, 149–172.CrossRefPubMed

Stevens, J. P. (2007). Intermediate statistics: A modern approach (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Talhout, R., Schulz, T., Florek, E., Van Benthem, J., Wester, P., & Opperhuizen, A. (2011). Hazardous compounds in tobacco smoke. International Journal of Environ Research and Public Health, 8, 613–628. doi:10.3390/ijerph8020613 CrossRef

United States Department of Health Human Services. (2014). The health consequences of smoking—50 years of progress: A report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/50-years-of-progress/exec-summary.pdf

United States Department of Health and Human Services. (2016). Nicotine addiction and your health. Retrieved from http://betobaccofree.hhs.gov/health-effects/nicotine-health/

United States Food and Drug Administration. (2012). Harmful and potentially harmful constituents in tobacco products and tobacco smoke: Established list. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/ucm297786.htm

Wayne, G. F., & Carpenter, C. M. (2009). Tobacco industry manipulation of nicotine dosing Nicotine. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 192, 457–485.

Yu, B., Willis, M., Sun, P., & Wang, J. (2013). Crowdsourcing participatory evaluation of medical pictograms using Amazon Mechanical Turk. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15, e108.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Witteman, H. O., Dickson, M., Fuhrel-Forbis, A., Kahn, V. C., Exe, N. L., et al. (2014). Blocks, ovals, or people? Icon type affects risk perceptions and recall of pictographs. Medical Decision Making, 34, 443–453. doi:10.1177/0272989X13511706 CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Icons for health effects of cigarette smoke: a test of semiotic type
Auteurs: Allison J. Lazard
Annie Schmidt
Huyen Vu
M. Justin Byron
Ellen Peters
Marcella H. Boynton
Noel T. Brewer
Publicatiedatum: 20-02-2017
Uitgeverij: Springer US
Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Behavioral Medicine / Uitgave 4/2017
Print ISSN: 0160-7715
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-3521
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-017-9833-3

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2017

Temporal daily associations among sleep and pain in treatment-seeking youth with acute musculoskeletal pain

Refinement of measures to assess psychosocial constructs associated with skin cancer risk and protective behaviors of young adults

Health promotion in the poly-tobacco market

Effects of breakfast eating and eating frequency on body mass index and weight loss outcomes in adults enrolled in an obesity treatment program

Impact of food craving and calorie intake on body mass index (BMI) changes during an 18-month behavioral weight loss trial

Depressive symptoms moderate the relationship between medication regimen complexity and objectively measured medication adherence in adults with heart failure