Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Qualitative study of Singaporean youths’ perception of antismoking campaigns: what works and what does not
  1. Shazana Shahwan,
  2. Restria Fauziana,
  3. Pratika Satghare,
  4. Janhavi Vaingankar,
  5. Louisa Picco,
  6. Siow Ann Chong,
  7. Mythily Subramaniam
  1. Research Division, Institute of Mental Health, Singapore
  1. Correspondence to Shazana Shahwan, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore 539747, Singapore; shazana_mohamed_shahwan{at}imh.com.sg

Abstract

Background Youths are more likely to rebel against messages perceived to inhibit their independence. In order for antismoking campaigns to be effective with this population, adopting evidence-based strategies is crucial. In this study, we examined youths’ reaction to past and ongoing antismoking campaigns, and delineate effective and ineffective components of campaigns as identified by them.

Methods 12 focus group discussions were conducted with 91 youth smokers aged 15–29 years. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. A codebook was derived through an iterative process. The data were coded systematically by three coders, using Nvivo V.10.

Results Fear appeals that had no immediate relevance to youths, and campaigns involving humour or sports/dance activities that distracted youths from the antismoking messages, were deemed ineffective. In contrast, elements identified to be efficacious were: positive tone, low-fear visual images, ‘low-controlling language’ and a genuine spokesperson. Youth tended to favour campaigns circulating on social media platforms. Importantly, youths voiced a lack of tangible support for their efforts to quit smoking.

Conclusions Participants expressed a preference towards antismoking messages that were less authoritative, and perceived a distinct lack of support for their intentions to quit smoking. There is room for incorporating suggestions by participants in future antismoking campaigns. Future research is needed to identify barriers to accessing available support.

  • Cessation
  • Health Services
  • Prevention

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors SS recruited participants, conducted FGDs, conducted data-analysis and wrote the first draft of the article. RF recruited participants, conducted and transcribed FGDs, and gave input into data analysis and the manuscript. PS transcribed FGDs, conducted data-analysis and gave input into the manuscript. JV was involved in the design of the study, gave input into data-analysis and manuscript. LP was involved in the design of the study, was a note-taker in FGDs, and gave input into data-analysis and manuscript. SAC was involved in the design of the study, and gave input into data-analysis and manuscript. MS was involved in the study design, conducted FGDs, led the data analysis and provided feedback on the manuscript.

  • Funding The study was funded by the National Healthcare Group Small Innovative Grant. NHG SIG/13003.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval National Healthcare Group Domain Specific Review Board.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.