Fear or Humour in anti-smoking campaigns? Impact on perceived effectiveness and support for tobacco control Policies

Several anti-smoking campaigns have been used for decades to reduce smoking consumption. However, so far, there is no consensus regarding the effectiveness of inducing distinct emotions in reducing smoke consumption. This study tested the effects of two types of anti-smoking ads, inducing fear or humor, on emotions, perceived effectiveness, support for tobacco control policies, urges to smoke, and susceptibility to smoke. Participants (N = 108; 54 smokers) of both genders were randomly assigned to one of the two following emotion ads condition: fear (N = 52) or humor (N = 56). During exposure, the continuous flow of their emotions by self-report and physiologically was collected. Measures of ads impact on emotions, perceived effectiveness, urges and susceptibility to smoking, and support for tobacco policies were applied after exposure. The results have shown that fear ads were perceived as more effective and reduced the urges to smoke in smokers. Non-smokers were more supportive of tobacco control policies. In conclusion, this study showed that fear campaigns can reduce the urge to smoke among smokers and are perceived to be more effective. This perceived effectiveness can be partially explained by feelings of fear, regardless the other emotions it also triggers, and of the smoking status.