Cross-sectional analysis reveals tobacco marketing influences purchase intentions among smokers, indicating significant emotional responses.
Despite regulations restricting tobacco marketing and a purported global industry strategy to transition to less harmful products, smoking rates in emerging markets remain high. A paradox that needs to be paid attention to is that even though businesses have committed to complying with tobacco restriction policies, cigarette sales, and smokers still increase. The purpose of this study is to examine the nexus between tobacco marketing exposure as the stimulus factor and individual processes, including emotional and rational aspects, in forming smokers’ purchase intentions. A deductive strategy based on positivist philosophy was used to construct the study model to describe the influencing of smokers’ buying intentions. Cross-sectional research involving 999 respondents in southern Vietnam was undertaken by randomly sending questionnaires via face-to-face survey in the café shops. Before evaluating the measurement and structural models, Cronbach’s alpha was used to analyze the reliability and validity of measurement scales using SPSS software. The SmartPLS program was then used to analyze the measurement and structural models and test the hypotheses using partial least squares structural equation modelling. The positive associations between tobacco marketing exposure and pleasure, arousal, and purchase intention were identified. Although dominance has negative impacts on both tobacco marketing exposure and marketing receptivity, attitudes toward tobacco marketing have positive impacts on both marketing receptivity and smokers’ purchase intentions. Based on these findings, the study not only makes a significant theoretical contribution but also provides a comprehensive view to provide practical implications to limit and reduce smoking prevalence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tran et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: