Perceptions of branded and plain cigarette packaging among Mexican youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plain cigarette packaging, which seeks to remove all brand imagery and standardize the shape and size of cigarette packs, represents a novel policy measure to reduce the appeal of cigarettes. Plain packaging has been studied primarily in high-income countries like Australia and the UK. It is unknown whether the effects of plain packaging may differ in low-and-middle income countries with a shorter history of tobacco regulation, such as Mexico. An experimental study was conducted in Mexico City to examine perceptions of branded and plain cigarette packaging among smoking and non-smoking Mexican adolescents (n = 359). Respondents were randomly assigned to a branded or plain pack condition and rated 12 cigarette packages for appeal, taste, harm to health and smoker-image traits. As a behavioral measure of appeal, respondents were offered (although not given) four cigarette packs (either branded or plain) and asked to select one to keep. The findings indicated that branded packs were perceived to be more appealing (β = 3.40, p < 0.001) and to contain better tasting cigarettes (β = 3.53, p < 0.001), but were not perceived as less harmful than plain packs. Participants rated people who smoke the branded packs as having relatively more positive smoker-image traits overall (β = 2.10, p < 0.001), with particularly strong differences found among non-smokers for the traits 'glamorous', 'stylish', 'popular' and 'sophisticated' (p < 0.001). No statistically significant difference was found for the proportion of youth that accepted when offered branded compared with plain packs. These results suggest that plain packaging may reduce brand appeal among Mexican youth, consistent with findings in high-income countries.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".