Electronic Cigarette Device and Liquid Characteristics: Comparison of Self-Reports to User-Provided Pictures

Ashley E. Douglas Margaret G. Childers Nicholas J. Felicione Andrea R. Milstred Melissa D. Blank a Department of Psychology,West Virginia University,Morgantown,West Virginia,USAb Department of Community Health and Health Behavior,University at Buffalo,Buffalo,New York,USA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2024.2392517
2024-08-22
Substance Use & Misuse
Abstract:Introduction: Self-reports of electronic cigarette (ECIG) device and liquid characteristics are not always accurate or consistent with characteristics as measured by researchers. Two methods for measuring ECIG characteristics were compared: user self-reports and rater-coded pictures. Methods: Exclusive ECIG users ( N = 321) reported on device (disposable, refillable, adjustable power, brand) and liquid (nicotine concentration, formulation, flavor) characteristics. To measure device type, they chose the term that best described their device ("cig-alike," "vape pen," "mod," "pod," "don't know") and the picture that best resembled their device (cig-alike, vape pen, box mod, USB-shaped pod, teardrop-shaped pod, none). Respondents uploaded device and liquid pictures, and independent raters coded these same features. Agreement between methods was examined with Cohen's kappa and intra-class correlations, including with "don't know" responses included and excluded from analyses. Results: Regardless of how "don't know" responses were treated, agreement was highest for disposable (95.3–97.7%), refillable (96.3%), adjustable power (83.6–88.7%), and brand (77.9–80.4%), and lower for nicotine concentration (72.7%), nicotine formulation (58.6–79.4%), and flavor (66.2%). For device type, agreement was moderate using both term-based (67.9–78.8%) and picture resemblance-based (71.7%) items. For terms, the greatest discrepancy was for devices classified as "vape pens" by self-reports; of these, 70.6% were classified as "pods" by raters. For picture resemblance, ∼13% of users reported that their device resembled none of the pictures; raters classified these devices as USB-shaped pods (50.0%) and mods (23.8%). Conclusions: Self-reports may be sufficient for measuring some characteristics (brand, disposable, refillable, adjustable power), but not others (nicotine concentration and formulation, and some flavor).
psychiatry,substance abuse,psychology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?