Estimating the impact of pictorial health warnings and "plain" cigarette packaging: Evidence from experimental auctions among adult smokers in the United States
Objective To estimate differences in demand for cigarette packages with different packaging and health warning label formats.Methods Adult smokers (nÂ =Â 404) in four states participated in experimental auctions. Participants bid on two of four experimental conditions, each involving a different health warning label format but with the same warning message: (1) text on 50% of pack side; (2) text on 50% of the pack front and back; (3) text with a graphic picture on 50% of the pack front and back; and (4) same as previous format, but without brand imagery.Results Mean bids decreased across conditions (1: $3.52; 2: $3.43; 3: $3.11; 4: $2.93). Bivariate and multivariate random effects models indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in demand for packs with either of the two text only warnings; however, demand was significantly lower for both packs with prominent pictorial warnings, with the lowest demand associated with the plain, unbranded pack.Conclusions Results suggest that prominent health warnings with graphic pictures will reduce demand for cigarettes. Regulators should not only consider this type of warning label, but also plain packaging policies for tobacco products.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Frank J. Chaloupka & Kenneth E. Warner, 1999.
"The Economics of Smoking,"
NBER Working Papers
7047, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jay Corrigan & Matthew Rousu, 2008.
"Testing whether field auction experiments are demand revealing in practice,"
Framed Field Experiments
00161, The Field Experiments Website.
- Corrigan, Jay R. & Rousu, Matthew C., 2008. "Testing Whether Field Auction Experiments Are Demand Revealing in Practice," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), August.
- Jay R. Corrigan & Matthew C. Rousu, 2008. "Testing Whether Field Auction Experiments are Demand Revealing in Practice," Working Papers 0804, Kenyon College, Department of Economics.
- Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680, December.
- Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, November.
- Blumenschein, Karen & Johannesson, Magnus & Blomquist, Glenn C. & Liljas, Bengt & O'Conor, Richard M., 1997. "Hypothetical versus real payments in Vickrey auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 177-180, October.
- John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
- repec:feb:framed:0078 is not listed on IDEAS
- Craig A. Gallet & John A. List, 2003. "Cigarette demand: a meta-analysis of elasticities," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(10), pages 821-835.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:102:y:2011:i:1:p:41-48. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.