Vaping across the United States has caused 68 deaths and 2,087 lung injuries since February 2020. With tobacco use typically starting by age 26, colleges and universities provide a venue to prevent initiation. The current study looks at the effects of messages on vape-free policies along with testing effects of these messages based on vaping status.
The final study included 219 students from a large public university. Each participant was assigned one of four experimental conditions. Conditions included self vs. group affirmation and gain vs. loss message framing. Gain-framed messages included protection form risks, keeping clean air, and encouraging people to stop. Loss-framed messages included exposing students to risks, polluting the air, and creating negative social influence. The vape-free policy support was taken from previous research and tobacco-free-campus policy guidelines. Researchers examined vaping status by asking participants about previous use of tobacco. If they answered yes, they then asked if they used it once or twice in their life, used it regularly before but have quit, currently using occasionally, or currently using it every day. They also asked participants about e-cigarette risk perception.
Results showed non-vapers reported higher levels of supporting the vape-free policy messages than those participants that vape. Participants in the self-affirmation condition reported more support than the group condition. Findings showed self-affirmed and group-affirmed non-vapers showed more support than self-affirmed and group-affirmed non-vapers. Framing had less of an impact on students support of the messages. Self-affirmation was associated with a higher level of vape-free policy support than group affirmation. These findings show that campuses may benefit from communication that is based on students’ vaping status. They also show group or collective identity appeals may not be as effective as more individualized policy promotions.
Take Away: The current study looks at the effects of messages on vape-free policies along with testing effects of these messages based on vaping status. The final study included 219 students from a large public university. Measures included vaping status and e-cigarette risk perception. Participants were put into one of four test conditions. These conditions included self vs. group affirmation and gain vs. loss message framing. Results showed non-vapers reported higher levels of supporting vape-free policy messages. Self-affirmation was associated with a higher level of vape-free policy support than group affirmation. These findings show that campuses may benefit from communication that is based on students’ vaping status. They also show group or collective identity appeals may not be as effective as more individualized policy promotions.