IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i22p11814-d676705.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Self-Report and Psychophysiological Measures in Waterpipe Tobacco Message Testing: A Novel Application of Multi-Attribute Decision Modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Elise M. Stevens

    (Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Division of Preventative and Behavioral Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01655, USA)

  • Andrea C. Villanti

    (Vermont Center on Behavior and Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA)

  • Glenn Leshner

    (Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA)

  • Theodore L. Wagener

    (Center for Tobacco Research, The Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43214, USA
    Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA)

  • Brittney Keller-Hamilton

    (Center for Tobacco Research, The Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43214, USA
    Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA)

  • Darren Mays

    (Center for Tobacco Research, The Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43214, USA
    Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA)

Abstract

Background: Waterpipe (i.e., hookah) tobacco smoking (WTS) is one of the most prevalent types of smoking among young people, yet there is little public education communicating the risks of WTS to the population. Using self-report and psychophysiological measures, this study proposes an innovative message testing and data integration approach to choose optimal content for health communication messaging focusing on WTS. Methods: In a two-part study, we tested 12 WTS risk messages. Using crowdsourcing, participants ( N = 713) rated WTS messages based on self-reported receptivity, engagement, attitudes, and negative emotions. In an in-lab study, participants ( N = 120) viewed the 12 WTS risk messages while being monitored for heart rate and eye-tracking, and then completed a recognition task. Using a multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) model, we integrated data from these two methods with scenarios assigning different weights to the self-report and laboratory data to identify optimal messages. Results: We identified different optimal messages when differently weighting the importance of specific attributes or data collection method (self-report, laboratory). Across all scenarios, five messages consistently ranked in the top half: four addressed harms content, both alone and with themes regarding social use and flavors and one addiction alone message. Discussion: Results showed that the self-report and psychophysiological data did not always have the same ranking and differed based on weighting of the two methods. These findings highlight the need to formatively test messages using multiple methods and use an integrated approach when selecting content.

Suggested Citation

  • Elise M. Stevens & Andrea C. Villanti & Glenn Leshner & Theodore L. Wagener & Brittney Keller-Hamilton & Darren Mays, 2021. "Integrating Self-Report and Psychophysiological Measures in Waterpipe Tobacco Message Testing: A Novel Application of Multi-Attribute Decision Modeling," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:22:p:11814-:d:676705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/22/11814/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/22/11814/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lilianna Phan & Andrea C. Villanti & Glenn Leshner & Theodore L. Wagener & Elise M. Stevens & Andrea C. Johnson & Darren Mays, 2020. "Development and Pretesting of Hookah Tobacco Public Education Messages for Young Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Platts, K. W. & Probert, D. R. & Canez, L., 2002. "Make vs. buy decisions: A process incorporating multi-attribute decision-making," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 247-257, June.
    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. Andrea C. Villanti & Olivia A. Wackowski & S. Elisha LePine & Julia C. West & Elise M. Stevens & Jennifer B. Unger & Darren Mays, 2022. "Effects of Vaping Prevention Messages on Electronic Vapor Product Beliefs, Perceived Harms, and Behavioral Intentions among Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-18, October.
    2. S. Elisha LePine & Elias M. Klemperer & Julia C. West & Catherine Peasley-Miklus & Caitlin McCluskey & Amanda Jones & Maria Roemhildt & Megan Trutor & Rhonda Williams & Andrea Villanti, 2022. "Exploring Definitions of “Addiction” in Adolescents and Young Adults and Correlation with Substance Use Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-11, June.
    3. Djurdjica Stojanović & Svetlana Nikoličić & Milica Miličić, 2011. "Transport Fleet Sizing By Using Make And Buy Decision-Making," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 56(190), pages 77-102, July – Se.
    4. Z. Aytan Ediz & M. Atilla Öner & Y. Can Erdem & Nesimi Kaplan, 2018. "A Model for Make-or-Buy Decisions in Engineering Design Services Sector: A Case Study from Turkey," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 1-27, August.
    5. Ali Bonyadi Naeini & Amin Reza Atashkar, 2016. "Identify and Prioritize the Key Success Factors in the Establishment of Crowdsourced Systems," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(6), pages 105-105, June.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:22:p:11814-:d:676705. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.