Framing Antismoking Message –
2
Introduction
Smoking cessation and prevention programs are some of the most frequently
addressed public health campaigns. To combat the problem of youth smoking,
governmental agencies and other organizations disseminate antismoking ads that target
youth (Pechmann, 1997). Some longitudinal field experiments that examined the smoking
rates in the same youth groups over time have found that successful ads emphasized the
short-term costs of smoking (e.g., bad breath), rather than long-term harm to health (e.g.,
lung cancer) (Pechmann, 1997). Other research (Bauman, Brown, Bryan, Fisher, Padgett,
& Sweeney, 1988; McKenna & Williams, 1993; Worden, Flynn, Geller, Chen, Shelton,
Secker-Walker, Soloman, Soloman, Counchy, & Costanza, 1988) suggests that the
content of antismoking ads should: be credible and informative, stress cost of bad breath
and smelly clothes, stress social issues (e.g., smoking is not a norm and smokers do not
fit in), and enforce that the youth should make their own decision (Pechmann &
Ratneshwar, 1994).
Some controlled laboratory experiments tested the effect of antismoking messages.
Some experiments that had subjects participate in antismoking school programs found
that antismoking ad worked in a way that it conveyed social drawbacks and that it could
offset the pro-smoking influences from previous exposure to cigarette ads and peer
pressure (Pechmann & Ratneshwar, 1994). And, some experiments that had subjects
review antismoking materials found some messages were effective in changing people’s
belief or smoking behaviors (e.g., Schneider, Salovey, Pallonen, Mundorf, Smith, &
Steward, 2001).
The focus of the present study is to use a think aloud method to study the effects of
Convention