Melanie Wakefield ^1*, Yvonne Terry-McElrath ², Sherry Emery ³, Henry Saffer ⁴, Frank J. Chaloupka ³, Glen Szczypka ³, Brian Flay ³, Patrick M. O'Malley ⁵, Lloyd D. Johnston ²

¹ The Cancer Council Victoria
² University of Michigan
³ University of Illinois at Chicago
⁴ Kean University
⁵ Universityof Michigan

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: melanie.wakefield{at}cancervic.org.au.

	Abstract

Objective. To relate exposure to televised youth smoking prevention advertising to youths’ smoking beliefs, intentions, and behaviors.

Methods. We obtained commercial television ratings data from 75 US media markets, and to determine the average youth exposure to tobacco company youth-targeted and parent-targeted smoking prevention advertising. We merged these data with nationally representative school-based survey data (n=103172) gathered from 1999 to 2002. Multivariate regression models controlled for individual, geographic, and tobacco policy factors, and other televised antitobacco advertising.

Results. There was little relation between exposure to tobacco company-sponsored, youth-targeted advertising and youth smoking outcomes. Among youths in grades 10 and 12, during the 4 months leading up to survey administration, each additional viewing of a tobacco company parent-targeted advertisement was, on average, associated with lower perceived harm of smoking (odds ratio [OR]=0.93; confidence interval [CI]=0.88, 0.98), stronger approval of smoking (OR=1.11; CI=1.03,1.20), stronger intentions to smoke in the future (OR=1.12; CI=1.04,1.21), and greater likelihood of having smoked in the past 30 days (OR=1.12; CI=1.04,1.19).

Conclusions. Exposure to tobacco company youth-targeted smoking prevention advertising generally had no beneficial outcomes for youths. Exposure to tobacco company parent-targeted advertising may have harmful effects on youth, especially among youths in grades 10 and 12.

Key Words: Adolescent Health, Health Promotion, Surveys, Tobacco Control

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. C. Farrelly, K. C. Davis, J. Duke, and P. Messeri Sustaining 'truth': changes in youth tobacco attitudes and smoking intentions after 3 years of a national antismoking campaign Health Educ. Res., February 1, 2009; 24(1): 42 - 48. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Primack, D. Fine, C. K. Yang, D. Wickett, and S. Zickmund Adolescents' impressions of antismoking media literacy education: qualitative results from a randomized controlled trial Health Educ. Res., December 3, 2008; (2008) cyn062v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. Mamudu, R. Hammond, and S. A. Glantz Project Cerberus: Tobacco Industry Strategy to Create an Alternative to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Am J Public Health, September 1, 2008; 98(9): 1630 - 1642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. E. Nelson, P. Mowery, K. Asman, L. L. Pederson, P. M. O'Malley, A. Malarcher, E. W. Maibach, and T. F. Pechacek Long-Term Trends in Adolescent and Young Adult Smoking in the United States: Metapatterns and Implications Am J Public Health, May 1, 2008; 98(5): 905 - 915. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Chapman International tobacco control should repudiate Jekyll and Hyde health philanthropy Tob. Control, January 1, 2008; 17(1): 1 - 1. [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Szczypka, M. A Wakefield, S. Emery, Y. M Terry-McElrath, B. R Flay, and F. J Chaloupka Working to make an image: an analysis of three Philip Morris corporate image media campaigns Tob. Control, October 1, 2007; 16(5): 344 - 350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H.-J. Paek and A. C. Gunther How Peer Proximity Moderates Indirect Media Influence on Adolescent Smoking Communication Research, August 1, 2007; 34(4): 407 - 432. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. M. Cummings, A. Brown, and R. O'Connor The Cigarette Controversy Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2007; 16(6): 1070 - 1076. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. L. Tomar TOBACCO CONCERNS J Am Dent Assoc, February 1, 2007; 138(2): 152 - 152. [Full Text] [PDF]