Perceived Truthfulness of Reduced Lung Cancer Risk Advertising Claims Influences Consumers' Intention to try and to Purchase Snus

Brian V Fix; Olivia A Wackowski; Akshika Sharma; Destiny Diaz; Maansi Bansal-Travers; K Michael Cummings; Vaughan W Rees; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Richard J O'Connor

doi:10.1177/1179173X231206042

Perceived Truthfulness of Reduced Lung Cancer Risk Advertising Claims Influences Consumers' Intention to try and to Purchase Snus

Tob Use Insights. 2023 Oct 13:16:1179173X231206042. doi: 10.1177/1179173X231206042. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Brian V Fix¹, Olivia A Wackowski², Akshika Sharma¹, Destiny Diaz¹, Maansi Bansal-Travers¹, K Michael Cummings³, Vaughan W Rees⁴, Dorothy K Hatsukami⁵, Richard J O'Connor¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
² Department of Health Behavior, Society, and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
³ Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
⁴ Center for Global Tobacco Control, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
⁵ Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Abstract

The objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of a reduced risk claim about lung cancer, presented in various formats, on smokers' and non-smokers' interest in trying Camel Snus and intention to purchase Camel Snus. We varied claim formats by varying advertising messages for Camel Snus in 4 ways (1) text only; (2) bar chart; (3) text/testimonial; and (4) bar chart/testimonial. 3001 participants were recruited from a web-based consumer specialty panel via an email invitation. In 2015, a second study was conducted, using similar methods, where 3001 additional participants were recruited. Overall, controlling for other factors, the presence of an MRTP claim was not significantly related to interest in trying snus [X² (4) = 8.567, P = .073], or purchase intentions [X² (4) = 1.148, P = .887]. Relative to a control ad where no explicit health risk claim was made, the Graphic + testimonial [OR = 1.29] or Text only [OR = 1.41] claims did significantly increase interest in trying Camel Snus. However, the adverting format did not impact interest in purchasing Camel Snus. While current smokeless tobacco users (95%) and smokers (59%) expressed interest in trying Camel Snus, non-tobacco users (7%) showed low interest in trying or purchasing Camel Snus (P < .001). Interest in trying Camel Snus was stronger in younger smokers compared to older smokers. Among current smokers, worry about lung cancer (the key focus of the reduced risk claim) was not associated with interest in trying Camel Snus or with purchase intention [OR = .91, 95% CI: .72, 1.14] or intention to purchase snus [OR = 1.07, 95% CI: .86, 1.32]. Future research should evaluate how claim and messaging formats influence perceived truthfulness and whether this effect differs among sub-groups of consumers, such as adolescents, those with tobacco-related disease, and former smokers. It will also be helpful to understand whether perceptions of ad truthfulness result in changes in product use patterns over time. In sum, giving people truthful, credible information about relative product risks, such as through authorized MRTP claims, is important, but such information is likely insufficient to get smokers to switch.

Keywords: advertising; lung cancer; marketing; nicotine; tobacco.

Abstract

Grants and funding