RESEARCH PAPER

The impact of anti-tobacco industry prevention messages in tobacco producing regions: evidence from the US truth® campaign

J F Thrasher^1,2, J Niederdeppe², M C Farrelly², K C Davis², K M Ribisl¹ and M L Haviland³

¹ Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
² RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
³ American Legacy Foundation, Washington DC, USA

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
James F Thrasher
MS, MA, 311 Rosenau Hall, Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, CB#7440, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7440, USA; thrasher{at}email.unc.edu

Background: Adolescents who live in tobacco producing regions may not respond favourably to anti-industry ads.

Objective: To examine whether state level involvement in tobacco production appears to limit the effectiveness of anti-industry ads to prevent tobacco use among adolescents in the USA.

Design: Time trend analyses were done using repeated cross sectional data from six waves of the Legacy Media Tracking Survey, which were collected between 1999 and 2003.

Setting and participants: 28 307 adolescents, ages 12–17 years, were classified as living in: tobacco producing states (TPS) (n = 1929); non-tobacco producing states (non-TPS) with low tobacco control funding comparable to TPS (n = 5323); non-TPS with relatively high funding (n = 15 076); and non-TPS with established anti-industry ad campaigns (n = 5979).

Main outcome measures: Reactions to anti-industry ads; strength of anti-industry attitudes/beliefs; changes in anti-industry attitudes/beliefs over time.

Results: Ad reactions did not differ by state type. Multivariate adjusted time trend analyses indicated significant, comparable increases in anti-industry attitudes/beliefs since the onset of the truth® campaign, in both TPS and non-TPS. Mediation analyses indicated that these increases were due, in part, to campaign exposure.

Conclusions: Adolescents who live in tobacco producing regions appear to be as responsive to anti-industry ads as their counterparts in non-tobacco producing regions. This study provides further evidence for the effectiveness of such ads.

Abbreviations: LMTS, Legacy Media Tracking Surveys; TPS, tobacco producing states

Keywords: health communication; tobacco prevention; youth; tobacco production

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Apollonio, D. E., Malone, R. E. (2009). Turning negative into positive: public health mass media campaigns and negative advertising. Health Educ Res 24: 483-495 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Livingood, W. C., Woodhouse, L. D., Wludyka, P. (2009). Implementation of Possession Laws and the Social Ecology of Tobacco Control. Health Educ Behav 36: 214-229 [Abstract]  
• Farrelly, M. C., Davis, K. C., Duke, J., Messeri, P. (2009). Sustaining 'truth': changes in youth tobacco attitudes and smoking intentions after 3 years of a national antismoking campaign. Health Educ Res 24: 42-48 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Thrasher, J. F., Niederdeppe, J. D., Jackson, C., Farrelly, M. C. (2006). Using anti-tobacco industry messages to prevent smoking among high-risk adolescents. Health Educ Res 21: 325-337 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Pechmann, C., Reibling, E. T. (2006). Antismoking Advertisements for Youths: An Independent Evaluation of Health, Counter-Industry, and Industry Approaches. Am. J. Public Health 96: 906-913 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Callard, C, Thompson, D, Collishaw, N (2005). Transforming the tobacco market: why the supply of cigarettes should be transferred from for-profit corporations to non-profit enterprises with a public health mandate. Tobacco Control 14: 278-283 [Abstract] [Full Text]