Table 6.
Differences of promotional strategies in two tobacco groupsa.
|
|
Wikipedia | YouTube | |||||||
|
|
H | L | P | H | L | P | H | L | P |
| Number of brands | 29 | 14 |
|
31 | 17 |
|
36 | 25 |
|
| Brand promotion (%) | 10 (34) | 2 (14) | .12 | 8 (26) | 3 (18) | .50 | 5 (14) | 0 (0) | .02 |
| Sales promotion (%) | 16 (55) | 1 (7) | <.001 | 2 (6) | 0 (0) | .14 | 28 (78) | 11 (44) | .005 |
| Fetish imagery (%) | 10 (34) | 2 (14) | .12 | 2 (6) | 0 (0) | .14 | 16 (44) | 7 (28) | .09 |
| Sponsorship (%) | 3 (10) | 1 (7) | .72 | 7 (23) | 3 (18) | .87 | 5 (14) | 2 (8) | .46 |
| Misleading (%) | 5 (17) | 1 (7) | .31 | 6 (19) | 2 (12) | .47 | 5 (14) | 0 (0) | .02 |
aGroup H (brands with high retail prices) and Group L (brands with low retail prices).