Table 4.
Association between reactions to graphic warning labels and motivation to quit among smokers
| Labels | Reaction | Outcomes Adj. OR (95% CI)
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Label made me think about quitting smoking (yes vs. no) | Action steps (likely vs. not likely) | ||
| Man smoking with tracheotomy (Label 1) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 2.51 (1.29–4.91), p=0.007 | 1.15 (0.62–2.12), p=0.654 |
| Counterarguing | 1.01 (0.83–1.24), p=0.904 | 1.13 (0.97–1.31), p=0.118 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 2.63 (1.50–4.61), p<0.001 | 2.19 (1.05–4.59), p=0.372 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.36 (1.07–1.72), p=0.012 | 0.83 (0.6–1.16), p=0.277 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.14 (0.90–1.44), p=0.274 | 1.31 (0.95–1.82), p=0.103 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.11 (0.95–1.29, p=0.198 | 1.32 (1.11–1.56), p=0.002 | |
|
| |||
| Baby exposed to smoke (Label 2) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.39 (0.11–1.40), p=0.149 | 1.49 (0.44–5.01), p=0.520 |
| Counterarguing | 1.16 (0.94–1.42), p=0.163 | 1.16 (1.01–1.34), p=0.039 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 4.47 (2.50–8.00), p<.001 | 0.84 (0.45–1.57), p=0.581 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.08 (0.90–1.30), p=0.399 | 1.08 (0.88–1.33), p=0.451 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.49 (1.22–1.82), p<0.001 | 1.42 (1.06–1.91), p= 0.018 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.23 (1.05–1.44), p=0.010 | 1.29 (1.08–1.52), p=0.004 | |
|
| |||
| Woman crying (Label 3) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.76 (0.37–1.55), p=0.454 | 0.63 (0.31–1.26), p=0.192 |
| Counterarguing | 1.15 (0.97–1.37), p=0.114 | 1.14 (0.98–1.32), p=0.085 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 6.16 (3.51–10.83), p=<.001 | 1.35 (0.76–2.38), p=0.300 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.1 (0.90–1.35), p=0.361 | 1.04 (0.81–1.34), p=0.747 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.39 (1.12–1.73), p=0.003 | 1.08 (0.8–1.45), p=0.609 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.13 (0.97–1.31), p=0.107 | 1.37 (1.15–1.63), p<0.001 | |
|
| |||
| Diseased lip (Label 4) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.52 (0.17–1.61), p=0.258 | 1.01 (0.35–2.93), p=0.981 |
| Counterarguing | 1.07 (0.88–1.31), p=0.499 | 1.16 (1.01–1.34), p=0.034 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 3.08 (1.79–5.32), p=<.001 | 1.17 (0.62–2.21), p=0.626 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.47 (1.19–1.83), p=0.001 | 0.92 (0.67–1.24), p=0.571 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.17 (0.96–1.42), p=0.115 | 1.25 (0.96–1.62), p=0.093 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.17 (1.00–1.38), p=0.052 | 1.34 (1.13–1.60), p=0.001 | |
|
| |||
| Oxygen mask on man’s face (Label 5) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.75 (0.41–1.37), p=0.355 | 0.94 (0.49–1.80), p=0.841 |
| Counterarguing | 1.02 (0.85–1.21), p=0.847 | 1.27 (1.10–1.48), p=0.002 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 2.67 (1.67–4.26), p=<0.001 | 1.14 (0.65–2.01), p=0.651 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.28 (1.02–1.6), p=0.036 | 1.14 (0.82–1.57), p=0.439 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.24 (0.99–1.55), p=0.066 | 1.05 (0.76–1.44), p=0.785 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.03 (0.89–1.19), p=0.736 | 1.34 (1.13–1.59), p<0.001 | |
|
| |||
| Baby in an incubator (Label 6) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.80 (0.38–1.66), p=0.545 | 0.82 (0.40–1.68), p=0.589 |
| Counterarguing | 1.05 (0.88–1.24), p=0.618 | 1.18 (1.01–1.37), p=0.032 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 1.97 (1.19–3.24), p=0.008 | 1.20 (0.61–2.35), p=0.604 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.47 (1.24–1.73), p=<0.001 | 1.21 (0.97–1.52), p=0.092 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.11 (0.92–1.34), p=0.265 | 1.04 (0.79–1.38), p=0.776 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.17 (1.02–1.34), p=0.028 | 1.32 (1.11–1.56), p=0.001 | |
|
| |||
| Man with I quit t-shirt (Label 7) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.73 (0.36–1.49), p=0.392 | 1.30 (0.58–2.95), p=0.525 |
| Counterarguing | 1.07 (0.91–1.26), p=0.426 | 1.24 (1.07–1.44), p=0.005 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 4.57 (3.02–6.92), p=<0.001 | 1.31 (0.83–2.06), p=0.247 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.02 (0.84–1.23), p=0.861 | 1.23 (0.97–1.56), p=0.083 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.15 (0.94–1.40), p=0.181 | 0.99 (0.78–1.26), p=0.950 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.20 (1.05–1.38), p=0.008 | 1.27 (1.07–1.50), p=0.006 | |
|
| |||
| Healthy/Diseased lung (Label 8) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 1.19 (0.59–2.42), p=0.624 | 0.65 (0.34–1.22), p=0.177 |
| Counterarguing | 1.04 (0.85–1.27), p=0.716 | 1.14 (0.98–1.32), p=0.083 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 2.64 (1.53–4.55), p<0.001 | 1.07 (0.62–1.86), p=0.813 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.08 (0.82–1.43), p=0.585 | 0.58 (0.32–1.04), p=0.066 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.47 (1.13–1.92), p=0.004 | 2.13 (1.16–3.91), p=0.015 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 0.97 (0.82–1.14), p=0.676 | 1.35 (1.14–1.59), p<0.001 | |
|
| |||
| Man with chest staples (Label 9) | Preferred interpretation of label (yes vs. no) | 0.73 (0.35–1.53), p=0.404 | 0.96 (0.47–1.96), p=0.915 |
| Counterarguing | 0.89 (0.75–1.06), p=0.210 | 1.23 (1.05–1.43), p=0.009 | |
| Perceived effectiveness | 2.37 (1.48–3.81), p<0.001 | 1.33 (0.74–2.39), p=0.334 | |
| Perceived harm to self of smoking | 1.24 (0.97–1.59), p=0.082 | 1.05 (0.71–1.54), p=0.825 | |
| Perceived harm to others of smoking | 1.20 (0.95–1.53), p=0.127 | 1.11 (0.77–1.60), p=0.574 | |
| Self-efficacy for quitting smoking | 1.27 (1.10–1.47), p<0.001 | 1.33 (1.12–1.58), p=0.001 | |
Note: All models included age, sex, race, low income, education and novelty of label.
Note: Raw p-values are shown above. After controlling for the false discovery rate, it was found that p-values >0.010 were >0.05 after adjustment. Thus, 7/38 rejected null hypotheses would not be rejected after adjustment. The values that remained statistically significant after the adjustment are bolded.