Does cigarette promotion increase susceptibility to smoking? : a re-test of the link between tobacco industry promotion and adolescent susceptibility to cigarette use

In 1998, using the Index of Receptivity to Tobacco Industry Promotion (IRTIP), it was claimed that tobacco promotion increased youth susceptibility to smoking. Arguably, this claim started the belief that ?cigarette advertising causes smoking? and led to many countries severely restricting cigarette promotion. The problem is, ten years lat... more »er, youth are still lighting up. Could they have gotten it wrong? The IRTIP procedure is widely used to model the link between promotional activities and susceptibility to product use. It is now being used for other products like alcohol, fast-food and colas. This book reports the results of a verification and re-test of the IRTIP model. Using the original data, it was found that IRTIP magnifies Response-Style and Respondent Drop-Out Biases. These biases are shown to lead to the finding of a positive link between tobacco promotion and susceptibility to smoking. Because the IRTIP process is biased, it may be prudent to revisit the many research studies that have used this procedure. The faulty 1998 claim may have harmed efforts to control and limit the use of cigarettes.

Re-testing the link between youth receptivity to tobacco promotion and their susceptibility to smoke

The Index of Receptivity to Tobacco Industry Promotion (IRTIP) is a model that is used by hundreds of articles. The causal claim based on findings from this model is even more pervasive, and has resulted in much of the modern post 1998 tobacco legislation that is still enforced. This thesis tested the link between adolescent receptivity to tobacco industry promotion and susceptibility to smoking. Pierce et al. (1998) reported that they had found a positive and causal association between receptivity and susceptibility by using IRTIP. They claimed that receptivity to tobacco industry promotion was the only significant causal factor affecting adolescent susceptibility to smoking. Exposure to peer and parental smoking was not found to be a significant effect. A review of the literature found that many sections of IRTIP differ from accepted marketing theory on how cigarette advertising and promotions affect adolescent adoption of cigarette smoking. The proxy measures used in IRTIP were shown to diverge from those previously used for measuring the constructs of Attention, Intention, Desire and Action (AIDA) in marketing communications. IRTIP also differs from previous theory by including measures that attempt to quantify the effect of tobacco premiums into a model that was designed to measure the effects of advertising.

Questioning the construct of 'susceptibility' in the causal link between tobacco industry promotion and adolescent smoking

The first article to report on a causal connection between tobacco industry promotion and adolescent smoking (Pierce et al. 1998) had, and continues to have, a significant influence on the marketing of cigarettes in many parts of the world. A key construct in determining causality was the ability to identify the respondents’ “susceptibility to smoke”. Through an analysis of the questions, and reanalysis of the original data used by Pierce et al. (1998), it is shown that the construct is flawed, and needs revision before a causal link can be claimed with the original data.

How well does the index of receptivity to tobacco industry promotion discriminate between smoking and never smoking adolescents.

Tobacco advertising is often named as the culprit that causes children to start smoking (Lancaster & Lancaster, 2003). This belief can partly be attributed to the Index of Receptivity to Tobacco Industry Promotion (IRTIP) developed by Evans, Farkas, Gilpin, Berry, & Pierce (1995). IRTIP was later modified and used by Pierce, Choi, Gilpin, Farkas, & Berry (1998) in a longitudinal study that claimed to have found a causal link between advertising and adolescent cigarette trial. The model is advertised by the American National Cancer Institute (2004) as being able to measure the likelihood of an adolescent starting smoking. Because of Pierce’s causality claim and this endorsement, IRTIP has been widely adopted by tobacco-control researchers. Consequently, the results from IRTIP based surveys have played a central role in influencing tobacco control policy. Based on the logic that a model used to predict the chances of a non-smoker becoming a smoker should be able to distinguish between these two groups, discriminant analysis with dummy coded variables was used to validate IRTIP. The results show that while IRTIP classifies never-smokers well, it grossly misclassifies smokers. This leads to questions about the validity of the model and of studies using IRTIP.

Does government linked companies (GLCs) perform better than non-GLCs? Evidence from Malaysian listed companies

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of an alternative ownership/control structure of corporate governance on firm performance. Specifically, we investigated the governance system of government linked companied (GLCs) in Malaysia. In this paper, we examine governance mechanism and firm performance of Malaysian GLCs and non-GLCs over a 11 year period from 1995 to 2005. We only select a sample of companies which are listed in Main Board. We chose a sample of 210 firms. We used Tobin’s Q which is an indicator of market performance is used as a proxy for company’s performances; meanwhile ROA is used to determine accounting performance. This paper is to determines whether after controlling firm specific characteristics such as corporate governance, agency cost, growth, risk and profitability, GLCs perform better than non-GLCs. Findings highlight that non-GLCs performance is better GLCs in term of corporate governance, and other firm specific characteristics. The relationship between ownership structure and firm performance has been issue of interest among academics, investors and policy makers as one of key issues in understanding the effectiveness of alternative governance systems where government ownership serves as a control mechanism.

Benchmarking occupational health and safety performance of Australian construction companies.

It is mandatory for Australian construction companies to provide a safe working environment for their workers and sub-contractors. Consequently, occupational health and safety (OHS) is a major issue for construction firms mainly due to the fear of prosecution. The recent introduction of Zero Tolerance by the Victorian government WorkCover Authority provided even higher OHS safety standards for the construction industry. This has placed a increased burden on construction companies especially small firms that are not in a position of financial strength.

The size of the companies has been found to be a major contributing factor to the OHS performance of construction contractors. This research is based on benchmarking study of 44 construction companies in Victoria, Australia. The results show that the major factors influencing safety performance were; company size, and management commitment to OHS.

Measuring the occupational health and safety performance of construction companies in Australia

Many facility managers are now required to deal directly with small firms engaged in the maintenance, alteration and cleaning of physical infrastructure. Increasingly the performance of small firms reflects on the manager of the facility, and so an understanding of their operation is required. It is mandatory for all firms to provide a safe working environment for their workers and subcontractors. Consequently, occupational health and safety (OHS) is a major issue for companies mainly due to the fear of prosecution. The introduction of Zero Tolerance by the Victorian government WorkCover Authority in 1999 provided even higher OHS safety standards for the construction industry. This has placed an increased burden on construction and maintenance companies especially small firms that are not in a position of financial strength. The size of the company has been found to be a major contributing factor to the OHS performance of construction contractors. This research is based on a benchmarking study of 44 construction companies in Victoria, Australia. The results show that the major factors influencing safety performance were; company size, and management and employee commitment to OHS.