Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Formative study shows tailored anti-smoking messages affect perceptions among sexual minority women, suggesting a need for inclusive strategies.
Cultural tailoring is increasingly recognized in sexual and gender minority (SGM) focused health interventions, yet its effectiveness in anti-smoking messages for sexual minority women (SMW) remains underexplored. This formative study examined how culturally tailored messages were received among SMW populations. Using a quantitative online experiment ( N = 155), we investigated whether tailored messages are more effective than non-tailored messages in influencing SMW’s message perceptions (i.e., perceived message effectiveness and perceived targetedness) and whether message effects varied by sexual orientation. Participants were randomly assigned to view either SGM-tailored messages, which featured rainbow colors and LGBTQ+-themed slogans, or non-tailored messages that used pink colors and slogans highlighting general women’s health. Tailored and non-tailored anti-smoking messages were equally influential in shaping young adult SMW’s message perceptions. However, variations were observed within different SMW subgroups. Compared to bisexual participants, gay/lesbian participants and those with another sexual orientation (e.g., asexual, queer, and pansexual) showed a preference for tailored messages, with gay/lesbian participants rating non-tailored messages as less effective and those of another sexual orientation considering non-tailored messages as less personally relevant. In contrast, bisexual participants reported relatively high message effectiveness across both conditions but did not find either message type particularly targeted. These findings suggest that while broad tailoring efforts may enhance general appeal, their impact may vary across SMW subgroups. More nuanced and inclusive tailoring strategies may be needed to strengthen the relevance and impact of health communication among SMW populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: