Perception de l'efficacité des paquets de cigarettes standardisés
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction - As the tobacco industry has been stripped of most of the marketing mix, the cigarette pack has become an increasingly important marketing tool. It is possible however to reduce the attractiveness of the pack through plain packaging, which involves removing the pack design elements and leaving only the health warning and brand name in standardised font and size. Method - To investigate this tool, a quantitative study based on face to face interviews was conducted in France among a representative sample of 836 individuals (smokers and non smokers, aged 18 and above). A current cigarette pack and a plain pack of the French leading brand were compared. Results - Results indicated that plain packaging reduces the appeal of the pack (dull appearance, reduces the desire to buy). Compared to a current pack, the plain pack was associated with greater awareness of smoking danger and reported to facilitate intentions to reduce consumption, to quit, or not to start among non-smokers. Discussion - Our study highlights that the tobacco pack is an effective promotion tool. The plain packaging certainly has the potential to reduce the attractiveness of tobacco industry products and to help fighting against tobacco use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it