Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nicotine Dependence as a Moderator of Message Framing Effects on Smoking Cessation Outcomes

  • Rapid Communication
  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background

The persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for smoking cessation may vary by smokers' characteristics. Preliminary research in non-treatment-seeking smokers has shown that level of nicotine dependence moderates the effects of framed smoking messages on quit intentions and smoking cessation attitudes. Nicotine dependence as a potential moderator of message framing effects on actual smoking outcomes among treatment-seeking smokers remains to be determined.

Purpose

This secondary analysis of data from a smoking cessation trial (Psychol Addict Behav. 2007; 21: 534–544) examined nicotine dependence as a moderator of message framing effects on smoking cessation success.

Methods

Dependence scores were dichotomized into high and low dependence (n = 249).

Results

Among high-dependent smokers, gain-framed messages were associated with higher levels of smoking abstinence both during and post-treatment than loss-framed messages. There was no differential effect of gain- versus loss-framed messages among low-dependent smokers.

Conclusion

These preliminary findings suggest that the effectiveness of message framing interventions for treatment-seeking smokers may vary by smokers' level of nicotine dependence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  1. Toll BA, O'Malley SS, Katulak NA, et al. Comparing gain- and loss-framed messages for smoking cessation with sustained-release bupropion: A randomized control trial. Psychol Addict Behav. 2007; 21: 534–544.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981; 211: 453–458.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rothman AJ, Salovey P. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychol Bull. 1997; 121: 3–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Detweiler JB, Bedell BT, Salovey P, Pronin E, Rothman AJ. Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach goers. Health Psychol. 1999; 18: 189–196.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Latimer AE, Rench TA, Rivers SE, et al. Promoting participation in physical activity using framed messages: An application of prospect theory. Br J Health Psychol. 2008; 13: 659–681.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Levin IP, Schnittjer SK, Thee SL. Information framing effects in social and personal decisions. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1988; 24: 520–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Marteau TM. Framing information: Its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. Br J Soc Psychol. 1989; 28: 89–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC, Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for different therapies. N Eng J Med. 1982; 306: 1259–1262.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wilson DK, Kaplan RM, Schneiderman L. Framing of decisions and selections of alternatives in health care. Soc Behav. 1987; 2: 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rothman AJ, Martino SC, Bedell B, Detweiler JB, Salovey P. The systematic influence of gain- and loss-framed messages on interest in and use of different types of health behaviors. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1999; 25(11): 1355–1369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kalichman SC, Coley B. Context framing to enhance HIV-antibody-testing messages targeted to African American women. Health Psychol. 1995; 14: 247–254.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Banks SM, Salovey P, Greener S, et al. The effects of message framing on mammography utilization. Health Psychol. 1995; 14: 178–184.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schneider TR, Salovey P, Apanovitch AM, et al. The effects of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychol. 2001; 20: 256–266.

    Google Scholar 

  14. O'Keefe DJ, Jensen JD. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. J Health Commun. 2007; 12(7): 623–644.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bono Santos E, Rodríguez Torronteras A. Two systems of persuasion to quit smoking. A controlled trial. Aten Primaria. 1991; 8: 12–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Van 't Riet J, Ruiter RAC, Werrij MQ, de Vries H. The influence of self-efficacy on the effects of framed health messages. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2008; 38: 800–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Toll B, Martino S, Latimer A, et al. Randomized trial: Quitline specialist training in gain-framed vs standard-care messages for smoking cessation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010; 102: 96–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Steward WT, Schneider TR, Pizarro J, Salovey P. Need for cognition moderates responses to framed smoking-cessation messages. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2003; 33: 2439–2464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schneider T, Salovey P, Pallonen U, et al. Visual and auditory message framing effects on tobacco smoking. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2001; 31: 667–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Latimer AE, Salovey P, Rothman AJ. The effectiveness of gain-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behavior: Is all hope lost? J Health Commun. 2007; 12: 645–649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rothman AJ, Wlaschin JT, Bartels RD, Latimer A, Salovey P. How persons and situations regulate message framing effects: The study of health behavior. In: Elliot AJ, ed. Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation. New York: Psychology Press; 2008: 475–488.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kraemer HC, Wilson GT, Fairburn CG, Agras WS. Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2002; 59(10): 877–883.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Myers-Levy J, Maheswaran D. Exploring message framing outcomes when systematic, heuristic, or both types of processing occur. J Cons Psychol. 2004; 14(1–2): 159–167.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Toll BA, Salovey P, O'Malley SS, Mazure CM, Latimer A, McKee SA. Message framing for smoking cessation: The interaction of risk perceptions and gender. Nicotine Tob Res. 2008; 10: 195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhao G, Pechmann C. The impact of regulatory focus on adolescents' response to antismoking advertising campaigns. J Mark Res. 2007; 44: 671–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Moorman M, van den Putte B. The influence of message framing, intention to quit smoking, and nicotine dependence on the persuasiveness of smoking cessation messages. Addict Behav. 2008; 33: 1267–1275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerström KO. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence: A revision of the Fagerström Tolerance Questionnaire. Br J Addict. 1991; 86: 1119–1127.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fagerström KO, Kunze M, Schoberberger R, et al. Nicotine dependence versus smoking prevalence: Comparisons among countries and categories of smokers. Tob Control. 1996; 5(1): 52–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Brown RA, Burgess SA, Sales SD, Whiteley JA, Evans DM, Miller IM. Reliability and validity of a smoking timeline followback interview. Psychol Addict Behav. 1998; 12: 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Timeline follow-back: A technique for assessing self-reported alcohol consumption. Rockville, MD: The Humana Press Inc; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Alcohol consumption measures. 2nd ed. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  32. SRNT Subcommittee on Biochemcial Verification. Biochemical verification of tobacco use and cessation. Nicotine Tob Res. 2002; 4: 149–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hyland A, Borland R, Li Q, et al. Individual-level predictors of cessation behaviours among participants in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tob Control. 2006; 15(Suppl 3): iii83–iii94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Duncan CL, Cummings SR, Hudes ES, Zahnd E, Coates TJ. Quitting smoking: Reasons for quitting and predictors of cessation among medical patients. J Gen Intern Med. 1992; 7(4): 398–404.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. National Cancer Institute. Changes in cigarette-related disease risks and their implications for prevention and control. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph. Monograph 8 1997. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Deheinzelin D, Lourenço MTC, da Costa CL, Younes RN. The level of nicotine dependence is an independent risk factor for cancer: A case control study. Clinics. 2005; 60: 221–226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Jimenez-Ruiz CA, Masa F, Miravitlles M, et al. Smoking characteristics: Differences in attitudes and dependence between healthy smokers and smokers with COPD. Chest. 2001; 119: 1365–1370.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Witte K. Putting the fear back into fear appeals—the Extended Parallel Process Model. Commun Monogr. 1992; 59(4): 329–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by National Institutes of Health grants P50-DA13334, P50-AA15632, K12-DA000167, K05-AA014715, and T32-AA015496, the Department of Veteran Affairs, and the State of Connecticut, Department of Mental Health, and Addictions Services. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, or the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, 1 Long Wharf Drive, Box 18, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA

    Lisa M. Fucito Ph.D. & Benjamin A. Toll Ph.D.

  2. School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada

    Amy E. Latimer Ph.D.

  3. Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

    Peter Salovey Ph.D.

  4. Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, CT, USA

    Peter Salovey Ph.D. & Benjamin A. Toll Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Lisa M. Fucito Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy E. Latimer Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Salovey Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Benjamin A. Toll Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa M. Fucito Ph.D..

About this article

Cite this article

Fucito, L.M., Latimer, A.E., Salovey, P. et al. Nicotine Dependence as a Moderator of Message Framing Effects on Smoking Cessation Outcomes. ann. behav. med. 39, 311–317 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-010-9187-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-010-9187-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation