MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346155477 · doi:10.1080/10410236.2015.1089456

Influences of Self-Efficacy, Response Efficacy, and Reactance on Responses to Cigarette Health Warnings: A Longitudinal Study of Adult Smokers in Australia and Canada

2016· article· en· W2346155477 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Communication · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsReactancePsychologySelf-efficacyTraitSmoking cessationGeneralized estimating equationDevelopmental psychologyLongitudinal studySocial psychologyClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guided by the extended parallel process model (EPPM) and reactance theory, this study examined the relationship between efficacy beliefs, reactance, and adult smokers' responses to pictorial health warning labels (HWL) on cigarette packaging, including whether efficacy beliefs or reactance modify the relationship between HWL responses and subsequent smoking cessation behavior. Four waves of data were analyzed from prospective cohorts of smokers in Australia and Canada (n = 7,120 observations) over a period of time after implementation of more prominent, pictorial HWLs. Three types of HWL responses were studied: psychological threat responses (i.e., thinking about risks from smoking), forgoing cigarettes due to HWLs, and avoiding HWLs. The results from Generalized Estimating Equation models indicated that stronger efficacy beliefs and lower trait reactance were significantly associated with greater psychological threat responses to HWLs. Similar results were found for models predicting forgoing behavior, although response efficacy was inversely associated with it. Only response efficacy was significantly associated with avoiding HWLs, showing a positive relationship. Higher self-efficacy and stronger responses to HWLs, no matter the type, were associated with attempting to quit in the follow-up period; reactance was unassociated. No statistically significant interactions were found. These results suggest that stronger efficacy beliefs and lower trait reactance are associated with some stronger responses to fear-arousing HWL responses; however, these HWL responses appear no less likely to lead to cessation attempts among smokers with different levels of self-efficacy to quit, of response efficacy beliefs, or of trait reactance against attempts to control their behavior.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it