IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i8p4330-d539104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Cigarillo Packaging Characteristics on Young Adult Perceptions and Intentions: An Experimental Study

Author

Listed:
  • Cristine D. Delnevo

    (Rutgers Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA)

  • Michelle Jeong

    (Rutgers Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA)

  • Ollie Ganz

    (Rutgers Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA)

  • Daniel P. Giovenco

    (Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA)

  • Erin Miller Lo

    (Rutgers Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA)

Abstract

Research demonstrates that characteristics of cigarette packaging influence consumer product perceptions, yet the current literature on the impact of cigar packaging is limited. This study aims to examine how different cigarillo packaging features influence young adult cigar smokers’ perceptions. In 2016, we recruited past-year cigar users aged 18–34 from Amazon Mechanical Turk (N = 1260). We utilized a 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 between-subjects factorial design, randomly assigning participants to view one of 24 images of a cigarillo package that varied by brand (Black & Mild vs. Swisher Sweets), brand name (full vs. abbreviated), color (brown vs. green vs. purple), and price promotion (present vs. absent). Participants rated the product on several perceptions and purchase intentions, and they reported on cigar use and demographics. Overall, color and brand name influenced perceptions, but effects varied by brand. For Swisher Sweets, only price promotions influenced perceptions (e.g., taste, use for marijuana); for Black & Mild, all packaging features influenced perceptions (e.g., harshness, tobacco quality), and price promotions increased purchase intentions. Our findings also raise questions that product features may interact with one another, with certain features, such as color, overpowering other attributes. More research is needed to understand the impact of other packaging features, such as warning labels, on product perceptions across a variety of brands.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristine D. Delnevo & Michelle Jeong & Ollie Ganz & Daniel P. Giovenco & Erin Miller Lo, 2021. "The Effect of Cigarillo Packaging Characteristics on Young Adult Perceptions and Intentions: An Experimental Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:4330-:d:539104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/4330/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/4330/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. F. Thomas Juster, 1966. "Consumer Buying Intentions and Purchase Probability: An Experiment in Survey Design," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number just66-2, July.
    2. Sarah D. Kowitt & Clare Meernik & Hannah M. Baker & Amira Osman & Li-Ling Huang & Adam O. Goldstein, 2017. "Perceptions and Experiences with Flavored Non-Menthol Tobacco Products: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ollie Ganz & Olivia A. Wackowski & Stefanie Gratale & Julia Chen-Sankey & Zeinab Safi & Cristine D. Delnevo, 2022. "The Landscape of Cigar Marketing in Print Magazines from 2018–2021: Content, Expenditures, Volume, Placement and Reach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, December.

    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. Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd R. Stinebrickner, 2014. "A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 426-472.
    2. Engelberg, Joseph & Manski, Charles F. & Williams, Jared, 2009. "Comparing the Point Predictions and Subjective Probability Distributions of Professional Forecasters," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 27, pages 30-41.
    3. Jos'e Raimundo Carvalho & Diego de Maria Andr'e & Yuri Costa, 2023. "Individual Updating of Subjective Probability of Homicide Victimization: a "Natural Experiment'' on Risk Communication," Papers 2312.08171, arXiv.org.
    4. Nugroho, Adi, 2021. "Study of Airport Service Quality and Profitability in Indonesia," OSF Preprints ah2ns, Center for Open Science.
    5. Kirstin Lindloff & Nadine Pieper & Nils C. Bandelow & David M. Woisetschläger, 2014. "Drivers of carsharing diffusion in Germany: an actor-centred approach," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(3/4), pages 217-245.
    6. Tine Janžek & Petra Ziherl, 2013. "Overview of models and methods for measuring economic agent’s expectations," IFC Bulletins chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth IFC Conference on "Statistical issues and activities in a changing environment", Basel, 28-29 August 2012., volume 36, pages 172-179, Bank for International Settlements.
    7. Silvia Balia, 2007. "Reporting expected longevity and smoking: evidence from the SHARE," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 07/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    8. Romaniuk, Jenni & Nenycz-Thiel, Magda, 2016. "Lapsed buyers' durable brand consideration in emerging markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3645-3651.
    9. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.
    10. Das, J.W.M. & Dominitz, J. & van Soest, A.H.O., 1997. "Comparing Predictions and Outcomes : Theory and Application to Income Changes," Discussion Paper 1997-45, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    11. Conti, G.; & Giustinelli, P.;, 2022. "For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    12. Ozer, Muammer, 2011. "Understanding the impacts of product knowledge and product type on the accuracy of intentions-based new product predictions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 359-369, June.
    13. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew Parker & Jürgen Maurer, 2011. "Assessing small non-zero perceptions of chance: The case of H1N1 (swine) flu risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 145-159, April.
    14. Nguyen, Cathy & Romaniuk, Jenni, 2013. "Factors moderating the impact of word of mouth for TV and film broadcasts," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 25-29.
    15. Roper, Stuart & Parker, Cathy, 2013. "Doing well by doing good: A quantitative investigation of the litter effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(11), pages 2262-2268.
    16. John R. Hauser & Guilherme (Gui) Liberali & Glen L. Urban, 2014. "Website Morphing 2.0: Switching Costs, Partial Exposure, Random Exit, and When to Morph," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1594-1616, June.
    17. Dario Rukelj & Barbara Ulloa, 2011. "Incorporating uncertainties into economic forecasts: an application to forecasting economic activity in Croatia," Financial Theory and Practice, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 35(2), pages 140-170.
    18. Michael D. Hurd & Kathleen McGarry, 2002. "The Predictive Validity of Subjective Probabilities of Survival," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 966-985, October.
    19. Ozer, Muammer, 2007. "Reducing the demand uncertainties at the fuzzy-front-end of developing new online services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1372-1387, November.
    20. Asher A. Blass & Saul Lach & Charles F. Manski, 2010. "Using Elicited Choice Probabilities To Estimate Random Utility Models: Preferences For Electricity Reliability," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(2), pages 421-440, May.

    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:8:p:4330-:d:539104. 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.