Cited by 87Smoking Behavior and CessationGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologySubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Responses to tobacco control policies among youth

Open access
Crawford, M A, Balch, G I, Mermelstein, R, The Tobacco Control Network Writing Group·2002·Tobacco Control

Abstract

Objective: Explore adolescents' response to current and potential tobacco control policy issues. Design: The 13 site Tobacco Control Network (TCN), sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, conducted 129 sex and ethnic homogeneous focus groups. Participants: 785 white, African American, Asian American/Pacific Islander, American Indian, and Hispanic adolescents who were primarily smokers from rural, urban, and suburban locations across the USA. Main outcome measures: Awareness, knowledge, opinions, and behaviour regarding laws and rules, prices, cigarette ingredients, and warning labels. Results: Teenagers were generally familiar with laws and rules about access and possession for minors, but believed them ineffective. They were knowledgeable about prices, and reported that a sharp and sudden increase could lead them to adjust their smoking patterns but could also have negative consequences. They found a list of chemical names of cigarette ingredients largely meaningless, but believed that disclosing and publicising their common uses could be an effective deterrent, especially for those who were not yet smoking. They were aware of current warning labels, but considered them uninformative and irrelevant. Conclusions: Understanding teenagers' attitudes and behaviours before implementing policies that will affect them will likely increase their effectiveness. Disclosing and publicising the chemical contents of cigarettes, and increasing prices quickly and sharply, are potentially effective areas for policy change to impact adolescent tobacco use.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/tc.11.1.14

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Observational, quasi-experimental, and short-term controlled studies demonstrate that warning labels are most effective in countering the attractiveness and persuasiveness of cigarettes when they are visually noticeable, avoid the use of chemical names or ingredients, are specific rather than general, include pictorial and especially graphic warnings, are attributed to a specific source rather

    “These studies demonstrate that warning labels are most effective in countering the attractiveness and persuasiveness of cigarettes when they are visually noticeable,132,133 avoid the use of chemical names or ingredients,134 are specific rather than general,135 include pictorial and especially graphic136 warnings, are attributed to a specific source (eg, “medical studies,” “the Ministry of Health”)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Mertens DM. Research methods in education and psychology: integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 1998.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Crawford, M. A., Balch, G. I., Mermelstein, R., & The Tobacco Control Network Writing Group
Affiliations
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Crawford, M A
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2002-03
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
14-19
ISSN
  • 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3318
OpenAlex
W2058597740
Cited by
87
References
22
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Minnesota
  • University of Washington
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • University of Oklahoma
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham
  • University of South Carolina
  • West Virginia University
  • University of Alabama
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • University of Illinois at Chicago
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
tobacco control, adolescent smoking, youth tobacco use, tobacco prices, cigarette warning labels, policy effectiveness, adolescent attitudes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Ethnicity, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Product Labeling, Public Policy, Sex Factors, Smoking, Socioeconomic Factors, United States, Focus Groups, Tobacco Industry

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review