Discussion Topic Week 4

The task for this assignment is to research the effects of disturbing or graphic images on cigarette boxes, and whether or not they are effective at reducing smoking. Currently in the U.S. smoking manufacturers are only required to put a small text based warning on the packages. Attempts by the FDA to require graphic images on cigarette boxes have been opposed by the cigarette companies, perhaps because they have seen the effects it has had in other countries. 

A study comparing Australia and Canada (countries that require graphic images) to the United States and the United Kingdom (which do not require graphic images) showed that the graphic warnings had greater impact on awareness and avoidance of cigarettes than the text only warnings (Borland, Wilson, Fong, Hammond, Cummings, Yong, Hosking & Hosking, 2009). Another study assessed the perceived value of a pack of cigarettes and found that the ones with graphic images were consistently valued less (Thrasher, Rousu, Anaya-Ocampo, Reynales-Shigametsu, Arillo-Santillan & Hernandez-Avila, 2007). The reasons these measures are significant are because they are indicators for quitting smoking in populations. So why hasn’t smoking cessation increased drastically in the countries that have graphic images on the boxes?

Some argue that the studies are flawed or that there is a psychological response that encourages people to continue smoking when faced with the disturbing images (Ruiter & Kok, 2005). I believe that the images do not go far enough, and that improvements could be made. I propose making changes to the texture of the box to affect more than just an emotional sense. If the box was very sticky, or slimy, people would be much less likely to carry them around. Some people enjoy the smell of tobacco so I propose making the boxes smell like rancid or rotting flesh, which would elicit a powerful sense of revulsion. Changing the color and shape of cigarettes could also have an effect, perhaps in the shape of a slug or some other repulsive creature. I hypothesize these changes would have a drastic impact on reducing the number of smokers, and more importantly reducing the number of new smokers. 

 

References:

Borland, R., Wilson, N., Fong, G., Hammond, D., Cummings, K., Yong, H., Hosking, W., & Hosking, W. (2009). Impact of graphic and text warnings on cigarette packs: findings from four countries over five years. Tobacco Control, 18(5), 358-364. doi: 10.1136/tc.2008.028043

Thrasher, J., Rousu, M., Anaya-Ocampo, R., Reynales-Shigametsu, L., Arillo-Santillan, E., & Hernandez-Avila, M. (2007). Estimating the impact of different cigarette package warning label policies: The auction method. Addictive Behaviors, 32(12), 2916-2925. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460307001682

Ruiter, R., & Kok, G. (2005). Saying is not (always) doing: cigarette warning labels are useless. European Journal of Public Health, 15(3), 329. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/cki095