Vaping
Conditions
Brief summary
Adolescents (N = 664) participated in the online survey-based experiment. They were randomly shown 10 videos, featuring influencers promoting e-cigarettes alongside healthy lifestyle activities (experimental group), or e-cigarette promotion alone (control). After watching each video, participants rated perceptions of influencer credibility (i.e., honesty, trustworthiness, knowledge) on the scale of 0 (e.g., dishonest) to 100 (honest). Among all participants, harm perceptions and appeal of e-cigarettes was assessed. Susceptibility to use e-cigarettes was assessed among never users of e-cigarettes. These outcomes were then compared among participants who perceived influencers as credible and those who perceived influencers as non-credible.
Detailed description
Adolescents (13-17 years of age) living in California were recruited by Qualtrics marketing research panel to participate in a survey on tobacco-related attitudes and behaviors. Qualtrics, a research panel agency, has been used in prior research to survey adolescents about their tobacco-related attitudes and behaviors. Participants were provided with a survey URL link. After completing informed consent, participants completed the survey online. The study was approved by the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (UP-21-00352). Respondents were randomly assigned to watch 10 10-second long TikTok videos in either experimental (influencers promoting e-cigarettes alongside healthy lifestyle activities) or control group (influencers promoting e-cigarettes alone).
Interventions
OTHERInfluencer marketing
Participants watched online survey-imbedded promotional videos featuring influencers
Sponsors
University of Southern California
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
FACTORIAL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Videos featuring influencers promoting e-cigarettes alongside healthy lifestyle activities
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
13 Years to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* 13-17 years of age, * English fluency, * Current California resident.
Exclusion criteria
Not meeting these criteria: * 13-17 years of age, * English fluency, * Current California resident.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Harm perceptions of e-cigarettes | one-time assessment after the experimental exposure (immediately post-treatment) | Responses to two questions adapted from PATH, Based on the videos you just watched, do you think using e-cigarettes for vaping nicotine is harmful to your health? Based on the videos you just watched, do you think people harm themselves when they use e-cigarettes for vaping nicotine? Outcome was assessed on the 0 (Not harmful at all) - 100 (Very harmful) scale. Since the items were closely related (α=0.87), they were combined (by summing all the non-missing values of the items) into one variable. |
| Perceived appeal of e-cigarettes | one-time assessment after the experimental exposure (immediately post-treatment) | Responses to the following questions: using e-cigarette is: * not cool/cool, * unattractive/attractive, * boring/fun were assessed on the 7-point semantic differential scale with the word pairs anchored at each end. The scale was adapted from prior research. The items were combined (by summing all the non-missing values of the items) into one variable (α=0.93). |
| Susceptibility to use e-cigarettes | one-time assessment after the experimental exposure (immediately post-treatment) | Susceptibility to use e-cigarettes was measured (among never-users of e-cigarettes), using the validated three-item scale adapted from PATH, and combined into one variable (α=0.93). Consistent with prior research, the measure was dichotomized with responses definitely not to all items being coded as not susceptible and responses probably not, probably yes, or definitely yes being coded as susceptible. |
| Perceptions of influencer credibility | assessed 10 times immediately after each video | Perceptions of influencer credibility (i.e., honesty, trustworthiness, knowledge) were assessed using a 0 (e.g., dishonest) -100 (e.g., honest) scale that has been validated in prior research. |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed