IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i5p3891-d1076653.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reactions to a Hypothetical Menthol Cigarette Ban among Sexual- and Gender-Minoritized Communities: A Concept Mapping Study

Author

Listed:
  • Ashlee N. Sawyer

    (Center for the Study of Tobacco Products, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23220, USA)

  • Madison Combs

    (Center for the Study of Tobacco Products, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23220, USA)

  • Viktor Clark

    (Department of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA 23220, USA)

  • Eric K. Soule

    (Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, USA)

  • Joseph G. L. Lee

    (Department of Health Education and Promotion, College of Health and Human Performance, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, USA)

  • Alison B. Breland

    (Center for the Study of Tobacco Products, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23220, USA
    Department of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA 23220, USA)

Abstract

Menthol cigarette use is disproportionately higher among sexual- and gender-minoritized (SGM; 36%) individuals compared to cisgender, heterosexual (29%), individuals. The FDA has announced intentions to ban menthol in cigarettes, citing these use and health disparities as partial motivation. This study identified potential outcomes of a menthol cigarette ban among SGM individuals who smoke menthol cigarettes (N = 72). Potential outcomes were identified via concept mapping using the prompt: “If menthol in cigarettes was banned, a specific action I would take related to my tobacco use is…” Participants generated 82 response statements, sorted them, and rated them on personal relevance. Eight thematic clusters were identified: (1) Thoughtful Consideration of the Ban, (2) Negative Reactions to the Ban, (3) Positive Aspects of the Ban, (4) Strategies to Reduce Cravings, (5) Intent to Quit and Cessation Strategies, (6) Support-Seeking and Engagement in Positive Behaviors, (7) Strategies to Maintain Menthol-Flavored Product Use, and (8) Substance Use Alternatives to Menthol Cigarettes. Cluster differences based on sociodemographic factors, smoking behavior, and quitting interest were identified. Results provide insight into potential responses to a menthol cigarette ban and can contribute to public health prevention and intervention efforts, messaging campaigns, and support services for SGM people who smoke menthol cigarettes, specifically.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashlee N. Sawyer & Madison Combs & Viktor Clark & Eric K. Soule & Joseph G. L. Lee & Alison B. Breland, 2023. "Reactions to a Hypothetical Menthol Cigarette Ban among Sexual- and Gender-Minoritized Communities: A Concept Mapping Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:3891-:d:1076653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/3891/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/3891/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nina Jackson Levin & Shanna K. Kattari & Emily K. Piellusch & Erica Watson, 2020. "“We Just Take Care of Each Other”: Navigating ‘Chosen Family’ in the Context of Health, Illness, and the Mutual Provision of Care amongst Queer and Transgender Young Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Rosas, Scott R. & Kane, Mary, 2012. "Quality and rigor of the concept mapping methodology: A pooled study analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 236-245.
    3. Winickoff, J.P. & McMillen, R.C. & Vallone, D.M. & Pearson, J.L. & Tanski, S.E. & Dempsey, J.H. & Healton, C. & Klein, J.D. & Abrams, D., 2011. "US attitudes about banning menthol in cigarettes: Results from a nationally representative survey," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(7), pages 1234-1236.
    4. Trochim, William M. K., 1989. "An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laraib Mazhar & Jonathan Foulds & Sophia I. Allen & Susan Veldheer & Shari Hrabovsky & Jessica M. Yingst, 2024. "Likely Response to a Hypothetical Menthol Cigarette Ban Among Adults with Mood Disorders Who Smoke Menthol Cigarettes and Have No Current Plans to Quit Smoking," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(11), pages 1-8, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laura Borge & Stefanie Bröring, 2020. "What affects technology transfer in emerging knowledge areas? A multi-stakeholder concept mapping study in the bioeconomy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 430-460, April.
    2. Rosas, Scott R. & Ridings, John W., 2017. "The use of concept mapping in measurement development and evaluation: Application and future directions," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 265-276.
    3. Orsi, Rebecca, 2017. "Use of multiple cluster analysis methods to explore the validity of a community outcomes concept map," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 277-283.
    4. Stoyanov, Slavi & Jablokow, Kathryn & Rosas, Scott R. & Wopereis, Iwan G.J.H. & Kirschner, Paul A., 2017. "Concept mapping—An effective method for identifying diversity and congruity in cognitive style," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 238-244.
    5. Dare, Lynn & Nowicki, Elizabeth, 2019. "Engaging children and youth in research and evaluation using group concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Szijarto, Barbara & Bradley Cousins, J., 2019. "Mapping the practice of developmental evaluation: Insights from a concept mapping study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    7. McLinden, Daniel, 2017. "And then the internet happened: Thoughts on the future of concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 293-300.
    8. Ivana Stankov & Natasha J. Howard & Mark Daniel & Margaret Cargo, 2017. "Policy, Research and Residents’ Perspectives on Built Environments Implicated in Heart Disease: A Concept Mapping Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Donnelly, James P., 2017. "A systematic review of concept mapping dissertations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 186-193.
    10. Lisa M. Vaughn & Farrah Jacquez & Daniel Marschner & Daniel McLinden, 2016. "See what we say: using concept mapping to visualize Latino immigrant’s strategies for health interventions," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 61(7), pages 837-845, September.
    11. Lilian G. L. van der Ven & Elisa L. Duinhof & Michel L. A. Dückers & Marielle Jambroes & Marja J. H. van Bon-Martens, 2021. "Conceptualizing Vulnerability for Health Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Associated Measures in Utrecht and Zeist: A Concept Map," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-12, November.
    12. Soellner, Renate & Lenartz, Norbert & Rudinger, Georg, 2017. "Concept mapping as an approach for expert-guided model building: The example of health literacy," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 245-253.
    13. Nabitz, Udo & van Randeraad-van der Zee, Carlijn & Kok, Ineke & van Bon-Martens, Marja & Serverens, Peter, 2017. "An overview of concept mapping in Dutch mental health care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 202-212.
    14. Kinga Varga & Ciaran MacDonncha & Laurence Blondel & Enrico Bozzano & Fabrice Burlot & Rute Costa & Nadine Debois & Dominique Delon & Antonio Figueiredo & Joerg Foerster & Masar Gjaka & Carlos Gonçalv, 2021. "Collective conceptualization of parental support of dual career athletes: The EMPATIA framework," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-23, September.
    15. Jabbar, Amina M. & Abelson, Julia, 2011. "Development of a framework for effective community engagement in Ontario, Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 59-69, June.
    16. Mohammed Abdullatif Almulla & Mahdi Mohammed Alamri, 2021. "Using Conceptual Mapping for Learning to Affect Students’ Motivation and Academic Achievement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-17, April.
    17. Caroline Schlinkert & Marleen Gillebaart & Jeroen Benjamins & Maartje P. Poelman & Denise de Ridder, 2020. "Snacks and The City: Unexpected Low Sales of an Easy-Access, Tasty, and Healthy Snack at an Urban Snacking Hotspot," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-17, October.
    18. Goldman, Alyssa W. & Kane, Mary, 2014. "Concept mapping and network analysis: An analytic approach to measure ties among constructs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 9-17.
    19. Sutherland, Stephanie & Katz, Steven, 2005. "Concept mapping methodology: A catalyst for organizational learning," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 257-269, August.
    20. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:3891-:d:1076653. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.