LITERATURE REVIEW:
Addressing health and safety issues through social marketing is a very effective but a not easy process. Most of teenagers who are addicted to smoke cigarettes are not aware about its toxic consequences on health. There is a need to educate smokers and youths by making use of visuals warnings, pictorial and textual messages along with cessation support showing potential danger of smoking on health. This will help to motivate smokers to be aware of the consequences of heavily smoking on health finally giving up smoking and will also prevent non-smokers from starting it. These visuals warnings have worked in countries like Brazil and Canada to spread awareness among smokers by making them alert about its effects on health. The effect of pictorial visuals warnings was more on low income groups (Costa e Silva 2002).[i] As these visuals created fear of death and expenses in minds on smokers belonging to low income groups. Visuals with symbols are very effective to create impact in minds of consumers. Symbols are very eye catching in attracting attention of consumers (Dewar RE., 1999, Wogalter MS. 1998).[ii][iii]The three major disease caused by excessive smoking are respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease and cancer (Herdman, Hewitt, and Laschober 1993; Oster, Colditz, and Kelly 1984).[iv]Social marketers spread awareness to motivate target groups to quit smoking. People wanted to quit smoking but they don’t know the successive approach which would help them to quit smoking (Bloom, 1981). According to Daniel et al (2009) the most significant challenge today in addressing the health issues is that the individuals change their behaviour and way of living as a means of solution.[v] Lee and Kotler (2009) believe that there are many activities and techniques through which organisations can promote and influence a person’s behaviour however these tools have to be well structured and designed.[vi] Furthermore (Todd et al, 2010) comments that understanding the target audience is the most critical aspect of successful social marketing[vii]. Ruiter and Kok (2005) concluded that makers of the packs should include pictorial warning labels on it as they believed that graphical presentation plays vital role in tobacco reduction.[viii] According to research done by Mcaffee (2010) in US very individual who quits smoking can reduce an annual insurance cover by more than $210 immediately other than that there are other statistics which suggest that construction and maintenance cost are 7% higher in buildings which allow smoking furthermore on an average a smokers spend $15 more than the non smoker in medical cost on an average per day. Thus such cost effective statistics could be immensely effective in thus current period of economic recession. A graphical display on packs already exists in various countries around the globe and is introduced in United Kingdom in 2008. Hammond D and Fong G.T considered pictorial presentation on the packs as very useful, effective and innovative method rather than textual imprints on the pack itself.[ix] Pictures on the packs of cigarettes motivated smokers to quit smoking to certain extent. 44% supported that pictorial presentation on the packs helped smokers to quit smoking in Canada.[x] However, researchers also stated that pictures warnings on tobacco packs targets smokers by proving health information making it less eye-catching. [xi] Rootman & Flay (1995) observed and stated that younger generation finds plain packaging as boring, less attractive and out of fashion. Only very few people would consume cigarettes packs if they are sold out in plain packs.[xii] Health warning on packs itself acts as easiest medium to promote quit smoking to smokers except television as smokers are exposed to smoking ads per pack more than 7000 times a day.[xiii] Key outcomes from the survey conducted in Canada reported that pictures on packs also help to create awareness among non-smokers.[xiv][xv] The research among various countries indicated pictorial visuals on the packs are much more effective then textual and written data on cognitive and emotional reactions (O'Hegarty et al., 2007)[xvi], and very easy to understand and successfully creating health awareness among smokers (Hammond et al., 2006; Trasher et al., 2007).[xvii] Packaging of cigarette helps to attract audience with respect to its colours, designs and logos on the pack which helps to develop a brand identity and brand recognition. The brand Marlboro is very famous because of its unique appearance and colour[xviii]. According to (Kees et al., 2006; Koval et al., 2005), behavioural intentions and visuals on the packs are very effective in motivating a smoker to quit smoking and prevents non-smoker to start smoking.[xix][xx](Hammond et al, 2004) concluded that after seeing the visuals and textual messages on the packs, 36% respondents took the effort to avoid it. 1% group of smokers started smoking more after watching it and 13% respondents felt that it lacks credibility. The difference in the opinions may be because of the fear in minds of respondents. Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) can be useful tool to reduce smoking among active smokers through coping and threat appraisal. PMT states that behaviour and attitude can be changed through cognitive process. Protection Motivation model helps in combining fear with self efficacy which means fear is inserted on one side of the pack and quitting message on other side of the pack. Many people were motivated with the help of large visuals displays along with textual warnings on the packs about harmful effects of consuming tobacco which enabled to reduce tobacco consumption and quit it after certain extent.[xxi][xxii][xxiii][xxiv] In addition, Gallopel –Morvan et al.,(2006), research with pictorial and visual presentation of warnings regarding consumption of tobacco is very limited addressing these issues in few countries like USA and CANADA. Cultural differences also play a vital role as different colours have different meaning in different countries. After considering cultural differences it is not compulsory that reactions of people in United Kingdom will be similar to reactions of people in CANADA and FRANCE. Trachtenberg (Forbes Magazine, 1987) stated that “When we offered them Marlboros at half price – in generic brown boxes – only 21% were interested, even though we assured them that each package was fresh, had been sealed at the factory and was identical (except for the different packaging) to what they normal bought at their local, tobacconist or cigarette machine. How to account for the difference? Simple Smokers put their cigarettes in and out of their pockets 20 to 25 times a day. The package makes a statement. The consumer is expressing how he wants to be seen by others.”[xxv] [i] Costa e Silva, VL. Presentation to EU Commission on enforcement of health warnings in Brazil. Brussels 2002.
[ii] Dewar RE. 1999. Design and evaluation of public information symbols. In: Zwaga HJG, Boersma T, Hoonhout HCM, editors. Visual information for everyday use: Design and research perspectives. London: Taylor and Francis.
[iii] Sojourner RJ, Wogalter MS. 1998. The influence of pictorials on the comprehension of and recall of pharmaceutical safety and warning information.
[iv] Herdman, R., M. Hewitt, and M. Laschober (1993), "Smoking-Related Deaths and Financial Costs: Office of Technology Assessment Estimates for 1990," Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment.
[v] Daniel, K. Bernhardt, J and Eroglu, D. (2009), Social Marketing and Health Communication: From people to places, American Journal of Public Health, 99(12).
[vi] Kotler, P. Lee NL. (2008), Social Marketing: Influencing behaviour for Good. 3rd ed Thousand Oaks: Sage
[vii] Todd, A. Timothy, L. (2010), Prosocial effects in youth form of involment in an experimental, cause- related marketing event, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 18(1), 41-52.
[viii] Ruiter RAC, Kok G. Saying is not (always) doing: cigarette warning labels are useless. Eur J Public Health2005;15:329.
[ix] Hammond D., Fong G.T., Borland R., Cummings K.M., McNeill A., Driezen P., “Text and Graphic Warnings
on Cigarette Packages: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Study” American Journal
of Preventive Medicine 2007;32(3): 210-217.
[x] Environics Research Group, Evaluation of new warnings on cigarette packs, Toronto, Ontario, January 2002.
[xi] Research voor Beleid. Kleurenfoto's op tabaksverpakkingen - Ervaringen in andere landen. Een onderzoek in
opdracht van het ministerie van VWS, Leiden, 22 januari 2007.
[xii] Flay, B., Root, A., 1995. Study of whether plain cigarette packaging affects purchases by youth.
[xiii] Hammond D, Fong GT, Borland R, McNeill A, Cummings KM, Hastings G. Effectiveness of cigarette warning labels in informing smokers about the risks of
smoking: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tob Control 2006;15(Suppl III):iii19–iii25.
[xiv] Health Canada. The health effects of tobacco and health warning messages on cigarette packages - survey of adults and adults smokers: Wave 9 surveys.
Prepared by Environics Research Group; January, 2005.
[xv] Fong et al. International tobacco control policy evaluation survey: ITC South East Asia Survey, 2000.
of cigarette warning labels in the USA and Canada. Preventing Chronic Disease
2007;4(2).
package warnings with graphic imagery and with only text: a comparison between
Mexico and Canada. Salud Publica de Mexico 2007;49(Suppl 2):233–40.
[xviii] Lambat I. Top dogs. What it takes to enter into the league of global bestsellers – and how to remain there. Tobacco Reporter 2007;(February):40-4.
[xix] Kees J, Burton S, Andrews JC, Kozup J. Tests of graphic visuals and cigarette package warning combinations: implications for the framework convention on tobacco control. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 2006;25(2):212–23.
[xx] Koval JJ, Aubut JA, Pederson LL, O'Hegarty M, Chan SS. The potential effectiveness of warning labels on cigarette packages: the perception of young adult Canadians. Canadian Journal of Public Health 2005;96(5):353–6.
[xxi] Borland R, Hill D. Initial impact of the new Australian tobacco health warnings on knowledge and beliefs. Tob Control 1997;6:317-325.
[xxii] Koval JJ, Aubut JA, Pederson LL, O’Hegarty M, Chan SS.The potential effectiveness of warning labels on cigarette packages: the perceptions of young adult
Canadians. Can J Public Health 2005;96:353-6.
[xxiii] Hammond D, Fong GT, McDonald P, Cameron R, Brown SK. Impact of the graphic Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behaviour. Tob Control 2003; 12:
391-395.
[xxiv] Hammond D, Fong GT, Borland R, Cummings KM, McNeill A, Driezen P. Text and graphic warnings on cigarette packages: Findings from the ITC Four Country
Survey. Am J Prev Med 2007;32:202–209.
No comments:
Post a Comment