Do Flavour Descriptions Influence Subjective Ratings of Flavoured and Unflavoured E-Liquids among Non-Smoking and Non-Vaping UK Adolescents?

INTRODUCTION: Youth use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is rising globally and is associated with health harms. Flavour descriptions on e-liquid packaging may contribute to the appeal of e-cigarettes among youth. This study compared subjective ratings of e-liquid packaging flavour descriptions among non-smoking and non-vaping UK adolescents. METHODS: This was an online observational study in a UK sample of non-smoking and non-vaping adolescents aged 11-17 years. The primary analyses compared flavoured versus unflavoured descriptions and the secondary analyses compared candy/sweet flavour versus fruit flavour descriptions. Outcomes were packaging appraisal, packaging receptivity, perceived harm, and perceived audience. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 120 participants (74% female). Packaging appraisal ratings were higher for e-liquids with flavoured descriptions than unflavoured descriptions (mean difference 5.9, 95% CI 4.2 to 7.6, p<.001). Similarly, packaging receptivity ratings were higher for e-liquids with flavoured descriptions than unflavoured descriptions (mean difference 4.2, 95% CI 2.8 to 5.6, p<.001). Participants also perceived e-liquids with flavoured (versus unflavoured) descriptions as less 'grown-up' (mean difference -5.2, 95% CI -7.3 to -3.1, p<.001). However, ratings of perceived harm were similar for flavoured and unflavoured descriptions (mean difference -1.0, 95% CI -2.6 to 0.5, p=.189). CONCLUSIONS: Although this study found differences in subjective ratings of e-liquids with flavoured and unflavoured descriptions, non-smoking and non-vaping UK adolescents generally had low appraisal and receptivity for e-liquids and they perceived them as being 'grown-up' and harmful. IMPLICATIONS: Youth use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is increasing globally, leading to concerns about health harms. This study compared adolescents' ratings of e-liquids with flavoured versus unflavoured descriptions and e-liquids with candy/sweet flavour versus fruit flavour descriptions. This study adds to previous studies that have compared adolescents' ratings of e-liquids with tobacco flavour versus non-tobacco flavour descriptions. Although packaging appraisal and receptivity ratings were higher (more positive) for e-liquids with flavoured versus unflavoured descriptions, overall, adolescents who do not smoke or vape had low appraisal and receptivity for e-liquids, and they perceived them as being 'grown-up' and harmful.

State anxiety and alcohol choice: Evidence from experimental and online observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Experimental studies have investigated the effects of physical, psychological and pharmacological stressors (that induce state anxiety) on alcohol outcomes. However, no study has investigated the effects of state anxiety on alcohol outcomes, and the moderating role of drinking to cope (DTC) motives, using the 7.5% carbon dioxide (CO2) challenge. AIMS: We aimed to investigate the relationships between state anxiety and alcohol-related outcomes (primarily alcohol choice). We also explored whether DTC motives moderated these relationships. METHODS: We conducted two experiments using the 7.5% CO2 challenge (Studies 1 and 2) and an observational study (Study 3) (ns = 42, 60 and 219, respectively), to triangulate findings. RESULTS: In Study 1, experimentally induced state anxiety increased alcohol choice (p < .001, ηp2 = .29). This finding was replicated in Study 2, but the effect was weaker (p = .076, ηp2 = .06). Furthermore, DTC moderated the effect (p = .013, ηp2= .11). However, in Study 3 there was no clear evidence of an association between naturally occurring state anxiety and alcohol choice (b = 0.05, p = .655), or a moderating role of DTC (b = 0.01, p = .852). CONCLUSIONS: Experimentally induced, but not naturally occurring, state anxiety increases alcohol choice, although state anxiety levels were lower in the non-manipulated sample.

Is e-cigarette use in non-smoking young adults associated with later smoking? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to investigate whether e-cigarette use compared with non-use in young non-smokers is associated with subsequent cigarette smoking. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Wiley Cochrane Library databases, and the 2018 Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco and Society for Behavioural Medicine conference abstracts. STUDY SELECTION: All studies of young people (up to age 30 years) with a measure of e-cigarette use prior to smoking and an outcome measure of smoking where an OR could be calculated were included (excluding reviews and animal studies). DATA EXTRACTION: Independent extraction was completed by multiple authors using a preprepared extraction form. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 9199 results, 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was strong evidence for an association between e-cigarette use among non-smokers and later smoking (OR: 4.59, 95% CI: 3.60 to 5.85) when the results were meta-analysed in a random-effects model. However, there was high heterogeneity (I2 =88%). CONCLUSIONS: Although the association between e-cigarette use among non-smokers and subsequent smoking appears strong, the available evidence is limited by the reliance on self-report measures of smoking history without biochemical verification. None of the studies included negative controls which would provide stronger evidence for whether the association may be causal. Much of the evidence also failed to consider the nicotine content of e-liquids used by non-smokers meaning it is difficult to make conclusions about whether nicotine is the mechanism driving this association.

The way others move can influence what we choose.

Whether pointing at a menu item or rifling through a clothes rack, when we choose we often move. We investigated whether people's tendency to copy the movements of others could influence their choices. Participants saw pairs of pictures in private and indicated which one they preferred. They then entered a virtual art gallery and saw the same picture pairs in the presence of a virtual character. Having observed the virtual character point to indicate her preference with either a high or low movement trajectory, participants indicated their preference. There was either an anatomical (same movement, same choice) or spatial correspondence (same movement, different choice) between the participant's pictures and those of the virtual character. We found that participants copied the movement made by the virtual character rather than her action goal (i.e., her choice of picture). This resulted in a shift towards the virtual character's preferences in the anatomical condition but away from her preferences in the spatial condition. This effect was driven by the observation of the virtual character's high pointing movements. In a further experiment, we did not find any significant differences in imitation behaviour in autism, although autistic participants were less consistent in their choices. Our findings demonstrate that we are not only influenced by other's choices but also the types of movements others make to indicate those choices.