Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2024
Does Reducing the Size of the Tobacco Power Wall Affect Young People's Risk of Future Use of Tobacco Products? An Experimental Investigation.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martino Steven C, Setodji Claude M, Dunbar Michael S, Jenson Desmond, Wong Jody C S, Torbatian Abigail, Shadel William G
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: A ban on tobacco power walls (in-store package displays) is unlikely in the United States because of concerns that such bans violate commercial free speech rights. This experiment evaluated the effectiveness of a more measured strategy for mitigating the influence of the power wall on young people's susceptibility to tobacco use: limiting its size.
METHOD: The experiment took place in the RAND StoreLab, a life-sized replica of a convenience store. Participants (N = 275) ages 11-20 years were randomly assigned to shop in a variant of the StoreLab that had either a large (status quo), medium, or small power wall situated behind the checkout counter. Before and after shopping, participants completed measures of risk of future use of unflavored and flavored cigarettes and vaping products.
RESULTS: Study condition was unrelated to future risk of smoking unflavored cigarettes, using menthol vaping products, and using sweet-flavored vaping products. Study condition was related to future risk of smoking menthol cigarettes and using unflavored vaping products; compared with exposure to a large power wall, exposure to a small power wall increased the odds of a participant's being at risk for future smoking of menthol cigarettes (odds ratio [OR] = 3.29, 95% CI [1.10, 9.83]) and the odds of a participant's being at risk for using unflavored vaping products (OR = 4.09, 95% CI [1.41, 11.85]).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings call into question the viability of reducing the size of the power wall as a singular strategy for dampening its effect on young people's susceptibility to tobacco use.
METHOD: The experiment took place in the RAND StoreLab, a life-sized replica of a convenience store. Participants (N = 275) ages 11-20 years were randomly assigned to shop in a variant of the StoreLab that had either a large (status quo), medium, or small power wall situated behind the checkout counter. Before and after shopping, participants completed measures of risk of future use of unflavored and flavored cigarettes and vaping products.
RESULTS: Study condition was unrelated to future risk of smoking unflavored cigarettes, using menthol vaping products, and using sweet-flavored vaping products. Study condition was related to future risk of smoking menthol cigarettes and using unflavored vaping products; compared with exposure to a large power wall, exposure to a small power wall increased the odds of a participant's being at risk for future smoking of menthol cigarettes (odds ratio [OR] = 3.29, 95% CI [1.10, 9.83]) and the odds of a participant's being at risk for using unflavored vaping products (OR = 4.09, 95% CI [1.41, 11.85]).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings call into question the viability of reducing the size of the power wall as a singular strategy for dampening its effect on young people's susceptibility to tobacco use.