Message framing to inform cancer prevention pricing interventions in the UK and USA: a factorial experiment, 2019

Abstract

ObjectivesTo advance understanding of how message framing can be used to maximise public support across different pricing policies for alcohol, tobacco and sugary drinks/foods that prevent consumption of cancer-causing products.DesignWe designed a 3×4×3 randomised factorial experiment to test responses to messages with three pricing policies, four message frames and three products.SettingOnline survey panel (Qualtrics) in 2019.ParticipantsAdults (N=1850) from the UK and USA.InterventionsParticipants randomly viewed one of 36 separate messages that varied by pricing policy (increasing taxes, getting rid of price discounts, getting rid of low-cost products), four frames and product (alcohol, tobacco, sugary drinks/foods).Primary and secondary outcome measuresWe assessed the relationship between the message characteristics and four dependent variables. Three were related to policy support: (1) increasing taxes on the product mentioned in the message, (2) getting rid of price discounts and special offers on the product mentioned in the message and (3) getting rid of low-cost versions of the product mentioned in the message. One was related to reactance, a psychological response to having one’s freedom limited.ResultsWe found no effect for pricing policy in the message. Frames regarding children and reducing cancer risk moderated some outcomes, showing promise for real-world use. We found differences in support by product and reactance with greatest support and least reactance for tobacco policies, less support and more reactance for alcohol policies, and the least support and most reactance for sugary drinks/foods policies.ConclusionsCancer prevention efforts using policy interventions can be informed by the message framing literature. Our results offer insights for cancer prevention advocacy efforts across the UK and USA and highlight that tax versus non-tax approaches to increasing the cost of cancer-causing products result in similar responses from consumers.

Implications of psychological reactance for clinical practice in psychiatry including a systematic review.

“…From our records we added another article not identified by the search (Moore et al, 2000), making a total of 32 articles. Of the 32 articles, 10 were excluded due to be related to: (a) legal matters and no psychiatry (Allen et al, 1994;Ho et al, 2005); (b) marketing: marketing of tobacco (Cho et al, 2016), marketing effects on stigmatization (Zimbres et al, 2020) and marketing of cancer prevention (Lee et al, 2021); (c) education (Cunningham et al, 2020); (d) public health including COVID-19 vaccination (Soveri et al, 2020) or mask use during COVID-19 pandemic (Taylor & Asmundson, 2021) and health services use (Taboada-Vázquez et al, 2021); and (e) mention theory of psychological reactance but there is no measure (Longshore & Teruya, 2006) The large sample combines the samples of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar, and depressive disorders.…”

“…A missing article from 2000 known by the authors (Moore et al, 2000) was added making a total of 33 articles. As described in footnote a of Table 1, 10 of the 32 articles were excluded (Allen et al, 1994; Cho et al, 2016; Cunningham et al, 2020; Ho et al, 2005; Lee et al, 2021; Longshore & Teruya, 2006; Soveri et al, 2020; Taboada-Vázquez et al, 2021; Taylor & Asmundson, 2021; Zimbres et al, 2020). The 22 included articles were five written by other authors (Jaeger, 2015; McNiel et al, 2013; Moore et al, 2000; Pogany & Lazary, 2021; Pogany et al, 2022) and 17 written by at least one of the two authors of this article (De Las Cuevas, 2023; De Las Cuevas & de Leon, 2017, 2019, 2020; De Las Cuevas & Peñate, 2015a, 2015b; De Las Cuevas, Baptista, et al, 2021; De Las Cuevas et al, 2016, 2017; De Las Cuevas, Lazary, et al, 2021; De Las Cuevas, Motuca, et al, 2021; De Las Cuevas, Peñate, & Sanz, 2014; De Las Cuevas, Villasante-Tezanos, et al, 2021; Lara-Cabrera et al, 2020; Lazary et al, 2021; Mundal et al, 2021; Pogany et al, 2021).…”