The purpose of this study is to evaluate the persuasive effectiveness of narrative advertisements: with acted-out plots (where characters enact a vaping-related experience) versus narrative advertisements without acted-out plots and control. Using a 3-arm between-subjects randomized design, approximately 1,910 adolescents and young adults (aged 13-20) in the U.S. who vape or are susceptible to vaping will be recruited online. Participants will be randomly assigned to view video ads from one of three conditions (narrative with acted-out plots, narrative without acted-out plots, or control videos) and complete a post-exposure survey evaluating message engagement, emotional response, perceived effectiveness, and psychological reactance.
Age 13-20 years old.
Current vaper or at risk of vaping. Participants will be considered as a current vaper if they report using e-cigarettes in the past 30 days. Participants will be considered as "at-risk of vaping" if they answer anything other than "definitely not' to 3 screening items assessing their susceptibility to vaping (e.g., "If one of your best friends were to offer you a vape, would you use it?" Response options: definitely not, probably not, probably yes, definitely yes).
Live in the United States
Younger than 13 years or older than 21 years.
Parallel
Acted-Out Narrative Ads
BehavioralParticipants view 3 randomly ordered vaping prevention video ads featuring characters enacting a vaping-related experience or consequence (e.g., experiencing addiction/withdrawal symptoms).
Non-Acted-Out Narrative Testimonial Ads
BehavioralParticipants view 3 randomly ordered narrative testimonial video ads featuring testimonial narration with static visual presentations, without character enactment.
Neutral Control Videos
BehavioralParticipants view 3 neutral/informational text-and-voice-only control ads about vaping without any testimonial element.
Message engagement
Assessed using a standard 3-item self-report scale (e.g., " I could picture myself in the scene of the events described in the ad", "I was mentally involved while watching the ad"). Responses are scored on a 1-5 Likert scale, with higher averaged scores indicating deeper engagement.
Perceived Message Effectiveness
The 3-item perceived message effectiveness scale assesses the extent to which participants perceived the vaping prevention video ads as effective. Response options are on a 5-point scale from 1="Not at all" to 5="A great deal". The overall scale score is determined by averaging scores from the 3 items, with higher scores representing higher perceived message effectiveness.
Negative Affect
Negative Affect is measured via a 3-item scale assessing negative affects (e.g., "How much do these ads make you feel anxious/ Disgusted/Scared ") on a 1-5 scale, with higher scores representing higher negative affect.
Psychological Reactance
Evaluated using a single-item measure of message resistance ( " How much does this ad annoy you? ") scored on a 1-5 scale, with higher scores representing higher reactance.
Vaping Susceptibility
Evaluated using a 3-item index evaluating future intentions (e.g., "Do you think you will use an e-cigarette or vape in the next year?") scored on a 1-4 response scale, with higher scores representing vaping susceptibility.
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center
Lead sponsor
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Collaborator
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Collaborator
This trial is not recruiting at the moment. You can still explore other options:
