The need for new anti‐smoking advertising strategies that do not provoke smoker defiance

Abstract

The misguided effort to change the smoking behavior of college students using the same anti-smoking messages created for young teens apparently stems from the misplaced marketing belief that ads designed to prevent young teens from smoking can also effectively encourage college-student smokers to quit. When college students were asked to respond to current anti-smoking messages, non-smokers championed the anti-smoking cause while smokers responded with defiance, denial, and other counter-productive behaviors. These studies show that persuading legal-age young adults to quit would require new message strategies which show greater respect for the individual, greater support for the effort in quitting, and ways to counter faulty logic.

Determinants of Underage College Student Drinking: Implications for Four Major Alcohol Reduction Strategies

“…In the case of smoking in particular, past studies have demonstrated that youths resent antismoking messages because they do not want their freedom of choice to be restricted (reactance theory; Grandpre, Alvaro, Burgoon, Miller, & Hall, 2003). In addition, previous studies on unexpected or boomerang effects have indicated that people who have preexisting inclinations toward a risky health issue would be more likely to resist persuasion (e.g., Wolburg, 2004). Moreover, youths with risk-taking, rebellious, and sensation-seeking tendencies are more likely to use substances (e.g., Henry, Slater, & Oetting, 2005).…”

How social media influence college students’ smoking attitudes and intentions

“…However, contrary to our expectations, the perceived peer reception of antismoking messages increased perceived peer smoking norms, resulting in more favorable attitudes toward smoking and higher smoking intentions. This pathway is an extension of the unexpected or boomerang effects of antismoking messages, in other words, an increased desire to smoke in defiance of antismoking campaigns (Wolburg, 2004, 2006). Reactance theory suggests that when people are forced to do something they tend to feel threatened, become argumentative, deny the accuracy of a charge, and assert their personal freedom (Miller & Rollnick, 2002).…”

Responsible Ads: A Workable Ideal

“…For example, the increase in childhood obesity is attributed partly to inundating children with overly seductive television ads for unhealthful foods (Kurnit, 2005). Ads designed to prevent young teens from smoking often induce retaliatory consumption by college-aged smokers (Wolburg, 2004). Increased voter cynicism may be an unintended byproduct of negative political advertising (Yoon et al, 2005).…”