Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This study assessed the proscriptive models and evidence used in antismoking campaigns. A content analysis of 399 television advertisements cataloged in the Media Campaign Resource Center database was conducted. Findings reveal that the analyzed advertisements fail to use evidence and often reinforce proscriptive models of smoking. In advertisements with images of a smoker (N = 111), 40% showed no graphic visual consequences from smoking, and 2% portrayed the smoker as someone engaged in vigorous activities. In 20% of the advertisements, smoking was portrayed as a rite of passage to adulthood. Most of the advertisements did not provide any evidence to support the claims made, and advertisements aimed at teenagers were significantly less likely to use evidence than were advertisements aimed at adults (p < .01). The research identifies several areas of improvement for antismoking campaigns.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10410230802056313 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!