How edible warnings and ads affect different groups of young adults

Effects of cannabis edible advertising messages and warnings on product perceptions among US young adults.

Drug and alcohol dependence • • Moderately Relevant
🤖

AI Summary

This study examined how different advertising messages and warning labels affect young adults' perceptions of cannabis edibles. Researchers surveyed 3,579 US adults ages 18-34 with various combinations of advertising approaches (focusing on psychological effects versus flavors) and warning types (no warning, generic adult-use, intoxication-specific, or edible-specific). The findings revealed limited overall effects, suggesting that simple advertising messages and standard warnings don't dramatically change how young adults view edible products across the board.

However, important differences emerged based on use status. Among past-month users, flavor-based advertising (compared to psychological effect messaging) reduced interest in the product, while an intoxication-specific warning combined with flavor messaging actually increased perceived addictiveness. Conversely, among non-users, an edible-specific warning effectively increased perceived harm, and an adult-use warning reduced perceived addictiveness. These differential effects highlight a critical insight: the impact of advertising and warnings depends heavily on whether someone already uses cannabis regularly.

The research emphasizes that one-size-fits-all regulatory approaches may be insufficient for cannabis edibles marketing. Future regulations and public health interventions should recognize that experienced users respond differently to messaging and warnings than non-users, and that certain warning-message combinations can have unintended consequences (like increasing perceived addictiveness). This finding is particularly important as cannabis edible products continue to gain popularity and regulators develop evidence-based labeling standards.

📄 Original Abstract

Despite increased popularity of cannabis edibles, limited research has assessed effects of warnings or advertising emphasizing different characteristics. This study examined effects of different edible advertising messages and warnings on young adults' product perceptions. In June-November 2024, US adults ages 18-34 (n = 3579) participated in an online survey-based experiment using a 2 × 4 factorial design (advertising message: psychological effects vs. flavors; warning: none, adult-use, intoxication, edible-specific), then reported perceived addictiveness, harm, cautiousness, appeal, and interest (0 =not at all to 7 =extremely). Multivariable regression assessed advertising message, warning, and message-by-warning interactions in relation to outcomes, overall and by past-month use status. Few experimental effects were identified. The overall model showed: one direct, negative effect for flavors (vs. psychological effects) advertising messaging on interest (B=-0.20, SE=0.07, p = .003), shown in stratified analyses to be attributed to effects among those reporting past-month use (B=-0.28, SE=0.11, p = .003; no effect among participants reporting no past-month use-); and one direct, positive effect of the edible-specific (vs. no) warning on perceived harm (B=0.30, SE=0.10, p = .002), driven by those reporting non-use (B=0.32, SE=0.13; no effect among those reporting use). A significant interaction (B=0.38, SE=0.19, p = .048) indicated that adult-use warning exposure reduced perceived addictiveness among participants reporting non-use but had no effect for those reporting use. Among participants reporting use, an interaction (B=0.66, SE= 0.29, p = .019) indicated flavor (vs. effect) messaging alongside edible-specific warning exposure resulted in higher addictiveness. Regulations and interventions must consider effects of advertising messages and advertising message/warning combinations, particularly among different subgroups (e.g., those who use).

Explore More Research

Stay informed about the latest cannabis science.

Your stash, decoded.