IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v128y2021icp462-472.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Thank you for not smoking – A multi-method investigation to understand the effect of anti-smoking warnings in television programs

Author

Listed:
  • Khandeparkar, Kapil
  • Motiani, Manoj
  • Sharma, Amalesh

Abstract

Several countries insert statutory warnings about the adverse effects of smoking in movie and television (TV) content. This study tests the effectiveness of anti-smoking warnings as a prevention-based stimulus for non-smokers in TV programs. Study 1 (a qualitative study) finds that on-screen smoking can induce viewers to take up smoking. Study 2 tested anti-smoking warnings’ efficacy based on viewers’ smoking habits and finds that warnings are most effective in enabling viewers to resist persuasion when they are non-smokers. Study 3, using an eye-tracking device, examines the role of visual attention in the underlying processes. The proposed model compared four warning timings: no warning, warning prior to the content (PW), warning concurrent with the content (CW), and both warnings (both), which lead viewers to pay attention to the on-screen smoking, influencing critical processing (CP) and attitude toward smoking (ASM). Findings indicate that warning timing has a significant indirect effect on ASM, mediated by attention to the warning and on-screen smoking, and CP. There were no direct effects between warning timings and CP or ASM. Additionally, PW and both demonstrated a significantly higher indirect effect on CP and ASM than CW. As compared to CW, PW and both are more effective at countering the persuasion attempt of on-screen smoking. This study contributes to the literature on statutory warning timings, persuasion knowledge models, and healthcare policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Khandeparkar, Kapil & Motiani, Manoj & Sharma, Amalesh, 2021. "Thank you for not smoking – A multi-method investigation to understand the effect of anti-smoking warnings in television programs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 462-472.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:128:y:2021:i:c:p:462-472
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296321000655
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haugtvedt, Curtis P & Wegener, Duane T, 1994. "Message Order Effects in Persuasion: An Attitude Strength Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 205-218, June.
    2. Campbell, Margaret C & Kirmani, Amna, 2000. "Consumers' Use of Persuasion Knowledge: The Effects of Accessibility and Cognitive Capacity on Perceptions of an Influence Agent," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 69-83, June.
    3. Friestad, Marian & Wright, Peter, 1994. "The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, June.
    4. Charlesworth, Annemarie & Glantz, Stanton A. Ph.D., 2005. "Smoking in the Movies Increases Adolescent Smoking: A Review," University of California at San Francisco, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education qt9039p7cm, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, UC San Francisco.
    5. Michael Thomas, 2019. "Was Television Responsible for a New Generation of Smokers?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 689-707.
    6. Hazan, A.R. & Lipton, H.L. & Glantz, S.A., 1994. "Popular films do not reflect current tobacco use," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 84(6), pages 998-1000.
    7. Rosbergen, Edward & Pieters, Rik & Wedel, Michel, 1997. "Visual Attention to Advertising: A Segment-Level Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(3), pages 305-314, December.
    8. Robin J. Tanner & Rosellina Ferraro & Tanya L. Chartrand & James R. Bettman & Rick Van Baaren, 2008. "Of Chameleons and Consumption: The Impact of Mimicry on Choice and Preferences," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(6), pages 754-766, August.
    9. Pechmann, Cornelia & Knight, Susan J, 2002. "An Experimental Investigation of the Joint Effects of Advertising and Peers on Adolescents' Beliefs and Intentions about Cigarette Consumption," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(1), pages 5-19, June.
    10. Rosbergen, E. & Pieters, R. & Wedel, M., 1997. "Visual attention to advertising : A segment-level analysis," Other publications TiSEM c77552c4-5b16-4ecb-8a21-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Duke, J.C. & Vallone, D.M. & Allen, J.A. & Cullen, J. & Mowery, P.D. & Xiao, H. & Dorrler, N. & Asche, E.T. & Healton, C., 2009. "Increasing youths' exposure to a tobacco prevention media campaign in rural and low-population-density communities," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(12), pages 2210-2216.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rosbergen, Edward & Wedel, Michel & Pieters, Rik, 1997. "Analyzing visual attention tot repeated print advertising using scanpath theory," Research Report 97B32, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    2. repec:dgr:rugsom:97b32 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Suwelack, Thomas & Hogreve, Jens & Hoyer, Wayne D., 2011. "Understanding Money-Back Guarantees: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Outcomes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 462-478.
    5. Skarmeas, Dionysis & Leonidou, Constantinos N., 2013. "When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1831-1838.
    6. Puccinelli, Nancy M. & Goodstein, Ronald C. & Grewal, Dhruv & Price, Robert & Raghubir, Priya & Stewart, David, 2009. "Customer Experience Management in Retailing: Understanding the Buying Process," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 15-30.
    7. Singh, Jaywant & Crisafulli, Benedetta & Quamina, La Toya & Xue, Melanie Tao, 2020. "‘To trust or not to trust’: The impact of social media influencers on the reputation of corporate brands in crisis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 464-480.
    8. Caldieraro, Fabio & Cunha, Marcus, 2022. "Consumers’ response to weak unique selling propositions: Implications for optimal product recommendation strategy," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 724-744.
    9. Merle, Aurélie & St-Onge, Anik & Sénécal, Sylvain, 2022. "Does it pay to be honest? The effect of retailer-provided negative feedback on consumers’ product choice and shopping experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 532-543.
    10. Joëlle Vanhamme & Valérie Swaen & Guido Berens & Catherine Janssen, 2015. "Playing with fire: aggravating and buffering effects of ex ante CSR communication campaigns for companies facing allegations of social irresponsibility," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 565-578, December.
    11. Wu, Fang & Swait, Joffre & Chen, Yuxin, 2019. "Feature-based attributes and the roles of consumers' perception bias and inference in choice," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 325-340.
    12. Yuri Borgianni & Lorenzo Maccioni & Anton Dignös & Demis Basso, 2022. "A Framework to Evaluate Areas of Interest for Sustainable Products and Designs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, June.
    13. Zhuang, Mengzhou & Cui, Geng & Peng, Ling, 2018. "Manufactured opinions: The effect of manipulating online product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 24-35.
    14. Kumar, Vikas & Kaushal, Vikrant & Shashi,, 2023. "Role of customer perceived brand ethicality in inducing engagement in online brand communities," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    15. Mehdi Hossain & Ritesh Saini, 2014. "Suckers in the morning, skeptics in the evening: Time-of-Day effects on consumers’ vigilance against manipulation," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 109-121, June.
    16. Freya De Keyzer & Nathalie Dens & Patrick De Pelsmacker, 2023. "The processing of native advertising compared to banner advertising: an eye-tracking experiment," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1921-1940, September.
    17. Jones, Michael A. & Taylor, Valerie A., 2018. "Marketer requests for positive post-purchase satisfaction evaluations: Consumer depth interview findings," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 218-226.
    18. Tessitore, Tina & Geuens, Maggie, 2019. "Arming consumers against product placement: A comparison of factual and evaluative educational interventions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-48.
    19. Avramova, Yana R. & Dens, Nathalie & De Pelsmacker, Patrick, 2021. "Brand placement across media: The interaction of placement modality and frequency in film versus text," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 20-30.
    20. Li, Qian & Huang, Zhuowei (Joy) & Christianson, Kiel, 2016. "Visual attention toward tourism photographs with text: An eye-tracking study," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 243-258.
    21. Golovacheva, E., 2016. "When consumers activate persuasion knowledge: Review of antecedents and consequences," Working Papers 6440, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:128:y:2021:i:c:p:462-472. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.