Effect of increased social unacceptability of cigarette smoking on reduction in cigarette consumption

University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States
American Journal of Public Health (Impact Factor: 4.23). 09/2006; 96(8):1359-63. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.069617
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Taxes on cigarettes have long been used to help reduce cigarette consumption. Social factors also affect cigarette consumption, but this impact has not been quantified. We computed a social unacceptability index based on individuals' responses to questions regarding locations where smoking should be allowed. A regression analysis showed that the social unacceptability index and price had similar elasticities and that their effects were independent of each other. If, through an active tobacco control campaign, the average individual's views on the social unacceptability of smoking changed to more closely resemble the views of California residents, there would be a 15% drop in cigarette consumption, equivalent to a 1.17 dollars increase in the excise tax on cigarettes.

  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Respondents (N = 224) read 1 of 4 scenarios: a heavy smoker, a moderate smoker, an occasional smoker, or a nonsmoker diagnosed with lung cancer. Results showed that smokers with lung cancer received more blame than did nonsmokers. Nonsmokers assigned more blame to tobacco companies and cigarette advertising and made more negative attributions about lung cancer victims. Respondents high in smoking-cessation efficacy assigned more blame and negative attributions to lung cancer victims. This study suggests that lung cancer is stigmatized because of the widely held belief that it is preventable. Interventions must encourage smokers to be vigilant about their lung health, to know the symptoms of lung cancer, and to see their doctor immediately if they experience lung problems.
    Journal of Applied Social Psychology 06/2013; 43(S1). DOI:10.1111/jasp.12030 · 0.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Skin cancer is an increasingly important global public health problem. Mass media is a key source of skin cancer information. We examined how media coverage of skin cancer has changed over time as a consequence of the release of a key public health report from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in 2006, which linked ultraviolet (UV) radiation from indoor tanning and skin cancer. Methods A directed content analysis of skin cancer and tanning coverage in 29 popular North American magazines (2001–2012) examined reporting of skin cancer risk factors, UV behaviors, and early detection in article text (n = 761) and images (n = 1267). Chi-square and correlational analyses were used determine whether coverage changed in relation to the 2006 IARC report. Results The total volume of articles about skin cancer and tanning increased modestly after the IARC report (χ2 = 4.57, df = 1, p < .05); however, key IARC report messages (e.g., avoid indoor tanning, UV as a risk factor) were no more likely to be reported after compared to before the report. There were virtually no changes in the percentage of coverage for both risk factors and early detection information over time. There were some changes in the percentage of coverage about UV behaviors after the IARC report, but these variables were not directly related to the report. Magazines were more likely to encourage sunscreen use (χ2 = 11.55, df = 1, p < .01) and less likely to promote the tanned look as attractive (χ2 = 9.72, df = 1, p < .01) after the IARC report. It also became less common for magazines to promote sun avoidance (χ2 = 6.82, df = 1, p < .01) and use of sunless tanners (χ2 = 7.46, df = 1, p < .01) after the report. Conclusions Despite a modest increase in volume of coverage post-IARC report, key messages from the report were not taken up by the media. While there have been some improvements in magazine reporting, there is a need for more effective dissemination of public health messages about skin cancer and tanning.
    BMC Public Health 12/2015; 15(169). DOI:10.1186/s12889-015-1511-1 · 2.32 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Dec 15, 2014