Evaluations of Alcohol Warning Labels
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- University of Connecticut
- Enrollment
- 1,053
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Reactance
Study Overview
Brief Summary
The goal of this study is to determine the effectiveness of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) featuring narrative (vs. non-narrative) content in communicating the cancer risk of alcohol. Participants will be randomized to view either three narrative or non-narrative PWLs. Key outcome variables include visual attention, message reactance, risk perceptions, and intentions to reduce and stop drinking.
Detailed Description
The goal of this study is to determine the effectiveness of pictorial warning labels (PWLs) featuring narrative (vs. non-narrative) content in communicating the cancer risk of alcohol. Participants will be recruited from online panels. Participants will first be invited to participate in an online screening survey. Eligible participants will be invited to participate in the main experiment. In the main experiment, participants will first answer questions concerning baseline alcohol consumption and other background information. Then they will engage with a webcam-based eye-tracking task through Sticky by Tobii. Participants will first read instructions and tips related to completing the eye-tracking task. They will complete a brief calibration procedure and be presented with either three narrative PWLs or three non-narrative PWLs. Sticky by Tobii will record participants' gaze, thereby measuring visual attention to each PWL. After viewing each PWL, participants will answer a few questions. After viewing all three PWLs, they will answer questions based on all images combined. Upon study completion, participants will be compensated. A follow-up survey will be sent to participants after two weeks, which includes questions about their drinking behaviors, information seeking behaviors, and social interactions.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Prevention
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 21 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Inclusion Criteria
- •be at least 21 years old;
- •have consumed more than three alcoholic drinks per week over the past year;
- •be willing to participate in remote eye tracking tasks and have necessary technical support to complete remote eye tracking tasks (i.e., having access to high-speed Internet and a computer/tablet/phone equipped with a high-speed camera).
Exclusion Criteria
- •be younger than 21 years old;
- •has not consumed more than three alcoholic drinks per week over the past year;
- •be not willing to participate in remote eye tracking tasks and have no necessary technical support to complete remote eye tracking tasks (i.e., having access to high-speed Internet and a computer/tablet/phone equipped with a high-speed camera).
Arms & Interventions
Narrative Pictorial Warning Labels
Participants in this arm will be presented with three narrative pictorial warning labels for alcoholic beverages.
Intervention: Narrative pictorial warning labels for alcoholic beverages (Behavioral)
Non-Narrative Pictorial Warning Labels
Participants in this arm will be presented with three non-narrative pictorial warning labels for alcoholic beverages.
Intervention: Non-narrative pictorial warning labels for alcoholic beverages (Behavioral)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Reactance
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Reactance were measured after exposure to each PWL (i.e., three times in total). It was assessed using the brief Reactance to Health Warnings Scale (Hall et al., 2017). Participants were asked to indicate how much each warning tried to manipulate them, annoyed them, and was overblown (1 = not at all, 5 = a great deal). Reactance for each PWL was averaged across three PWLs within each arm.
Perceived Severity of Harm
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Perceived severity of harm were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to indicate how much getting a specific type of cancer because of drinking would affect their life. Participants responded on a five-point scale (1=Not at all, 2=Very little, 3=Somewhat, 4=Quite a bit, 5=A great deal).
Comparative Risk
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Comparative risk were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to indicate compared to an average person their age, race, and sex, how likely do they think they will get a specific type of cancer if they keep drinking the amount of alcohol like they do now. Participants responded on a five-point scale (1=Much less likely, 2=Less likely, 3=About as likely, 4=More likely, 5=Much more likely).
Intentions to Reduce Drinking
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Intentions to reduce drinking were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to answer questions such as "How interested are you in reducing drinking in the next 6 months?" Participants responded to these questions on an appropriately labeled 5-point scale (e.g., 1 = Not at all interested, 2=Slightly interested, 3=Moderately interested, 4=Very interested, 5=Extremely interested).
Intentions to Stop Drinking
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Intentions to stop drinking were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to answer three questions such as "How interested are you in stopping drinking in the next 6 months?" Participants responded to these questions on an appropriately labeled 5-point scale (e.g., 1 = Not at all interested, 2=Slightly interested, 3=Moderately interested, 4=Very interested, 5=Extremely interested).
Perceived Susceptibility
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Perceived susceptibility were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to indicate how likely it is that they will get a specific type of cancer if they keep drinking the amount of alcohol like they do now. Participants responded on a five-point scale (1 = Not at all likely, 2=A little likely, 3=Somewhat likely, 4=Very likely, 5=Extremely likely).
Affective Risk Perceptions
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Affective risk perceptions were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to indicate how worried they are about getting a specific type of cancer if they keep drinking the amount of alcohol like they do now. Participants responded on a five-point scale (1 = Not at all worried, 2=Slightly worried, 3=Moderately worried, 4=Very worried, 5=Extremely worried).
Experiential Risk Perceptions
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Experiential risk perceptions were assessed once after participants viewed all three PWLs. Participants were asked to indicate how vulnerable they feel about getting a specific type of cancer if they keep drinking the amount of alcohol like they do now. Participants responded on a five-point scale (1 = Not at all vulnerable, 2=Slightly vulnerable, 3=Moderately vulnerable, 4=Very vulnerable, 5=Extremely vulnerable).
Dwell Time
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Dwell time measures the total duration of attention to an area of interest (AOI). Each warning label consisted of two AOIs: image AOI and text AOI. Dwell time for each AOI was averaged across three PWLs within each arm.
Visit Count
Time Frame: Assessed during the one-time 15-minute online survey experiment.
Visit count measures the total number of times participants viewed an area of interest (AOI). Each warning label consisted of two AOIs: image AOI and text AOI. Visit count for each AOI was averaged across three PWLs within each arm.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Zexin Ma
Assistant Professor
University of Connecticut