Abstract
The authors question Smith, Stutts, and Zank's (2012) conclusion that young adult smokers interpret “light” and “mild” as taste attributes on several grounds. First, the current study examines evidence from industry documents that reveal strategies to use light and mild variants to reassure smokers. Second, the authors explore the multiple meanings of terms such as “light” and “mild” and illustrate how “light” is commonly used to imply a reduction, particularly in food and alcohol products. Third, they review the extensive consumer evidence documenting smokers’ belief that light cigarette variants will deliver less tar and nicotine and reduce the risk of harms arising from smoking. Finally, they review Smith, Stutts, and Zank's findings and suggest that their sample, predominantly social smokers, has important cognitive biases. The authors identify limitations in the measures of risk used, suggest that these elicit only superficial risk understanding, and conclude that Smith, Stutts, and Zank's findings reveal a considerable potential for harm. As a result, they conclude that Smith, Stutts, and Zank's study has consolidated prior findings by revealing high levels of deception, even among college students, who might be expected to be better educated and more discerning.