Home > Impact of e-cigarette retail displays on attitudes to smoking and vaping in children: an online experimental study.

Blackwell, Anna K M and Pilling, Mark A and De-Loyde, Katie and Morris, Richard W and Brocklebank, Laura A and Marteau, Theresa M and Munafò, Marcus R (2023) Impact of e-cigarette retail displays on attitudes to smoking and vaping in children: an online experimental study. Tobacco Control, 32, e220-e227. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056980.

External website: https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2022/...

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the impact of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) retail display exposure on attitudes to smoking and vaping (susceptibility to tobacco smoking and using e-cigarettes, and perceptions of the harms of smoking and e-cigarette use).

DESIGN: Between-subjects randomised experiment using a 2 (e-cigarette retail display visibility: high vs low)×2 (proportion of e-cigarette images: 75% vs 25%) factorial design. Setting was online via the Qualtrics survey platform.

PARTICIPANTS: UK children aged 13-17 years (n=1034), recruited through a research agency.

INTERVENTION: Participants viewed 12 images of retail displays that contained e-cigarette display images or unrelated product images. E-cigarette display images were either high or low visibility, based on a conspicuousness score. Participants were randomised to one of four groups, with e-cigarette display visibility and proportion of e-cigarette images, compared with images of unrelated products, manipulated: (1) 75% e-cigarettes, high visibility; (2) 25% e-cigarettes, high visibility; (3) 75% e-cigarettes, low visibility; (4) 25% e-cigarettes, low visibility.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was susceptibility to smoking (among never smokers only). Secondary outcomes were susceptibility to using e-cigarettes (among never vapers only), and perceptions of smoking and e-cigarette harm (all participants).

RESULTS: Neither e-cigarette retail display visibility, nor the proportion of e-cigarette images displayed, appeared to influence susceptibility to smoking. Planned subgroup analyses indicated that exposure to a higher proportion of e-cigarette images increased susceptibility to smoking among children who visited retail stores more regularly, and those who passed the attention check.In addition, neither e-cigarette retail display visibility nor the proportion of e-cigarette images displayed, appeared to influence susceptibility to using e-cigarettes. Greater visibility of e-cigarette retail displays reduced perceived harm of smoking. There was no evidence that the proportion of e-cigarette images displayed had an effect. Perceived harm of e-cigarette use did not appear to be affected by e-cigarette retail display visibility or by the proportion of e-cigarette images displayed.

CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence in the full sample to suggest that children's susceptibility to smoking is increased by exposure to higher visibility e-cigarette retail displays, or to a higher proportion of e-cigarette images. However, for regular store visitors or those paying more attention, viewing a higher proportion of e-cigarette images increased susceptibility to smoking. In addition, viewing higher visibility e-cigarette images reduced perceived harm of smoking. A review of the current regulatory discrepancy between tobacco and e-cigarette point-of-sale marketing is warranted.


Repository Staff Only: item control page