There are many misconceptions about nicotine. Despite not being the primary cause of cancer in cigarettes, people often mistakenly believe it is the main culprit. While nicotine contributes significantly to cigarette addiction, a significant number of individuals dispute this fact.
Research teams from Penn's Annenberg School for Communication and Rutgers University's Institute for Nicotine & Tobacco Studies are working to ensure that consumers understand nicotine's impact in advance of an anticipated FDA mandate restricting cigarette nicotine levels to 0.7 mg per gram of tobacco, much lower than the typical level of 10–12 milligrams in conventional cigarettes.
Low-nicotine-content cigarettes have been introduced by manufacturers and may be less addictive, although they still pose health risks. According to Xinyi Wang, a postdoctoral fellow at Annenberg's Health Communication and Equity Lab, even low-nicotine products are not healthy. "Smoking any type of tobacco can lead to lung cancer, emphysema, and other diseases regardless of nicotine levels," she says. "Nonetheless, very low nicotine content cigarettes may aid those who smoke in quitting, so it's crucial they understand that these options are less addictive."
In a recent study published in Scientific Reports, Wang and her team members — Annenberg associate professors Andy Tan and David Lydon-Staley, doctoral candidate Benjamin Muzekari, and INTS researcher Melissa Mercincavage — tested different ways to educate people about nicotine.
The research focused on three groups who are often targeted by the tobacco industry and hold more false beliefs concerning nicotine: Black/African American adults who smoke, rural adults who smoke, and young adults who smoke.
The team found that educational messages stirring curiosity were more effective in reducing nicotine misconceptions than typical fact-driven messages. They examined three types of message framing known to spark curiosity: 1. Using questions rather than statements (e.g., "What substance makes tobacco cigarettes addictive?"), 2. Encouraging active participation instead of passive exposure to facts (e.g., "On a scale from 1 to 10, how interesting do you find this fact about nicotine?"), and 3. Including cues signaling that others found the facts interesting (e.g., "Over 63% of U.S. adults were surprised to learn…").
"People experiencing higher curiosity show better learning outcomes since they are more likely to remember information," explains Wang. "In prior research, we have discovered that curiosity helps individuals who smoke retain facts about smoking, even when those facts highlight the dangers."
The team also tested each of these three curiosity-eliciting techniques for their likelihood in reducing nicotine false beliefs among the targeted populations.
Certain techniques proved more effective with specific groups: questions were better received by Black/African American smoking adults while social signals had greater success with young smoking adults. "This highlights the importance of tailoring messages to particular populations," Wang emphasizes.
The research team aims for their findings to guide future studies in nicotine education and interventions for individuals trying to quit, especially considering the rise in low-nicotine-content cigarette availability.
Wang states: "We need further insights into nicotine messaging. Our goal is to understand how long individuals retain these facts, how socio-psychological factors influence message effectiveness, and ways curiosity can be applied within widespread public health campaigns."