Skip to main content
. 2019 Jul 10;28(e1):e64–e70. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054878

Table 2.

Impact of type of e-cigarette warning

     Type of warning
(1) Control
Mean (SD)
(2) Text-only
Mean (SD)
(3) Pictorial
Mean (SD)
1 vs 2
d
2 vs 3
d
Intended effects
Attention to message 3.20 (1.12) 3.66 (1.07) 3.70 (1.07) 0.43** 0.03
Believability 3.80 (1.00) 3.77 (1.03) 3.69 (1.00) −0.04 −0.08
Negative affect 1.81 (.98) 2.51 (1.12) 2.75 (1.35) 0.64** 0.21**
Anticipated social interactions 2.23 (1.26) 2.55 (1.35) 2.70 (1.36) 0.24** 0.10*
Cognitive elaboration 2.25 (1.32) 3.34 (1.29) 3.49 (1.31) 0.84** 0.11*
Interest in e-cigarette use
(current users only)
2.67 (.68) 2.33 (.76) 2.25 (.77) −0.46** −0.11
Perceived message effectiveness 2.64 (1.12) 3.48 (1.10) 3.65 (1.06) 0.76** 0.15**
Unintended effects
Message reactance 2.47 (1.06) 2.69 (1.08) 2.88 (1.12) 0.21* 0.17**
Anticipated message avoidance 2.20 (1.21) 2.57 (1.20) 2.77 (1.21) 0.30** 0.17**
Interest in cigarette use
(current smokers only)
2.43 (.72) 2.32 (.73) 2.26 (.71) −0.15* −0.08
% % % h h
Interest in cigarette use (non-smokers only) 8 6 6 −0.08 0.01

d, standardised mean difference; h, standardised proportion difference. Condition received text about not littering. Risk belief findings appear in online supplementary tables S2 and S3.

*p<0.05, **p<0.001.