Cited by 72Smoking Behavior and CessationGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyBehavioral Health and Interventions

What happened to smokers’ beliefs about light cigarettes when “light/mild” brand descriptors were banned in the UK? Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey

Open access
Borland, R, Fong, G T, Yong, H-H, Cummings, K M, Hammond, D, King, B, Siahpush, M, McNeill, A +4 more·2008·Tobacco Control

Abstract

Aim: This paper examines how beliefs of smokers in the UK were affected by the removal of “light” and “mild” brand descriptors, which came into effect on 30 September 2003 for Member States of the European Union (EU). Participants: The data come from the first four waves (2002–2005) of the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation (ITC) Four-Country Survey, an annual cohort telephone survey of adult smokers in Canada, USA, UK and Australia (15 450 individual cases). Design: The UK ban on misleading descriptors occurred around the second wave of data collection in the ITC survey, permitting us to compare beliefs about light cigarettes among adult smokers in the UK before and after the ban, with beliefs in the three other ITC countries unaffected by the ban. Results: There was a substantial decline in reported beliefs about the benefits of light cigarettes in the UK following the policy change and an associated public information campaign, but by 2005 (ie, wave 4), these beliefs rebounded slightly and the change in beliefs was no greater than in the USA, where there was no policy change. Conclusions: The findings reveal that high levels of misperceptions about light cigarettes existed among smokers in all four countries before and after the EU ban took effect. We cannot conclude that the policy of removing some aspects of misleading labels has been effective in changing beliefs about light cigarettes. Efforts to correct decades of consumer misperceptions about light cigarettes must extend beyond simply removing “light” and “mild” brand descriptors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/tc.2007.023812

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Authors
Borland, R., Fong, G. T., Yong, H.-H., Cummings, K. M., Hammond, D., King, B., Siahpush, M., McNeill, A., Hastings, G., O’Connor, R. J., Elton-Marshall, T., & Zanna, M. P.
Affiliations
  • Cancer Council Victoria (AU)
  • Ontario Institute for Cancer Research (CA)
  • Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • University of Nebraska Medical Center (US)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • University of Stirling (GB)
Corresponding author
Borland, R
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2008-04-21
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
256-262
ISSN
  • 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3318
OpenAlex
W2107669981
Cited by
72
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Cancer Research UK (C312/A3726)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007489/1)
  • National Cancer Institute (P50CA111236, R01CA100362)
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
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
light cigarettes, consumer misperception, tobacco control policy evaluation, information campaigns
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attitude to Health, Australia, Canada, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Terminology as Topic, Product Labeling, Smoking, United States

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