Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
Based on tenets of persuasive communications theory, five recently proposed alcohol warning labels are examined for their differential impact on label believability and attitudes. While all warnings are rated as believable, the ones regarding birth defects and driving impairment are perceived to be significantly more believable than the others. In addition, persons with more favorable attitudes toward alcohol consumption tend to disbelieve specific instance hazards (e.g., birth defects, driving impairment and drug combination warnings), while disliking longterm risks of alcohol consumption and abuse (e.g., hypertension, liver disease, cancer and addiction warnings). Implications for public policy and researchers are discussed.