Plain Package; Can It Affect Health Awareness and Quit Smoking Attempt Behavior?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractPurpose: Graphic Pictorial Health Warnings (GPHW) Policy has been implemented in Indonesia since 2014, but the numbers have never shown declining yet. A few countries like Australia and Canada use plain package policy as a new approach to reducing it. Even the plain package policy has been not implemented in Indonesia, this could be preliminary research as an alternative solution.Design/Methodology/Approach: Paired t-test conducted to test the significant difference between smoker’s perception about a regular and plain package. Because of a plain package has not implemented yet, we demonstrate a product’s prototype and ask them to imagine if the policy has actually implemented. This preliminary research use cross-section methods to gain the data. To test the effect, we collected information from 200 active smokers in Palembang, Indonesia using a questionnaire.Findings: Significant difference (< 0.05 ) occurs between smoker's perception about health awareness and quit smoking behavior at the regular and plain package. There is 9 item to compare each other and two overall variables. Six of a nine-item variable has significant difference each other (< 0.05), and also two others (< 0.05).Practical implication: As preliminary findings, this significant difference addressed to formulate a better GPHW Policy. It can use to gain more smoker's attention to health awareness and drive quit smoking attempt behavior. And we propose ongoing social marketing campaign related to amplify the effect of a plain package according to research findings.Originality/value: We conduct a preliminary test to compared smoker’s perception at the regular package and plain package, even the plain ones have been not implemented yet. To make more realistic about plain package’s response, we use a prototype to amplify their visualization. Social marketing campaign related to a plain package ongoing.Keywords: disturbing pictures on cigarettes pack, graphical picture health warning, health awareness, quit smoking attempt behavior, social marketing.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".