Assessing the Relationship between Retail Store Tobacco Advertising and Local Tobacco Control Policies: A Massachusetts Case Study

Table 3

Descriptive and bivariate statistics for tobacco advertisements categories by retail store type, n = 419.

	Total (n = 419)	Convenience (n = 122)	Gas station (n = 118)	Liquor store (n = 73)	Drug store (n = 10)	Chain retail (n = 49)	Nonchain (n = 16)	Other (n = 31)	χ2, F (df), value
Presence of tobacco ads	363 (100%)	107 (87.8%)	115 (97.5%)	63 (86.3%)	8 (80.0%)	38 (77.6%)	12 (75.0%)	20 (64.5%)	21.1 (1),
Total no. of tobacco ads (count)	2804	1016	1096	309	13	187	78	105	3.7 (28),
Average no. of tobacco ads	6.7 (6.6)	8.3 (7.5)	9.3 (6.3)	4.2 (4.6)	1.3 (1.2)	3.8 (4.9)	4.9 (5.0)	3.4 (5.9)	2.2e + 03 (36),
Average no. of tobacco ad categories (range)	2.9 (1.8)	3.4 (2.0)	3.7 (1.3)	2.2 (1.5)	1.2 (0.9)	2.0 (1.7)	2.4 (2.0)	1.5 (1.9)	24.1 (6),
External ads	204 (100%)	72 (59.0%)	77 (65.3%)	23 (31.5%)	0 (0.0%)	14 (28.6%)	7 (43.8%)	11 (35.5%)	46.5 (6),
Backlist ads	0 (100%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)
Branded items	14 (100%)	7 (5.7%)	4 (0.3%)	3 (0.04%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	6.0 (6),
Smokeless tobacco ads	181 (100%)	63 (51.6%)	72 (61.0%)	18 (0.3%)	0 (0.0%)	15 (30.6%)	7 (43.8)	6 (19.4%)	47.0 (6),
Flavored tobacco ads	26 (100%)	11 (9.0%)	7 (5.9%)	7 (9.6%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (3.2%)	8.5 (6),
Power wall	335 (100%)	101 (82.8/%)	109 (92.4%)	51 (69.9%)	8 (80.0%)	38 (77.6%)	12 (75.0%)	16 (51.6%)	32.6 (6),
E-cigarette ads	234 (100%)	74 (60.7%)	92 (78.0%)	27 (37.0%)	3 (30.0%)	21 (42.9%)	7 (43.8%)	10 (32.3%)	49.1 (6),
Ads of discounts	91 (100%)	49 (40.2%)	23 (19.5%))	9 (12.3%)	1 (10.0%)	3 (6.1%)	4 (25.0%)	2 (6.5%)	40.7 (6),
Internal posters	125 (100%)	44 (36.1%)	48 (40.7%)	20 (27.4%)	0 (0.0%)	9 (18.4%)	2 (12.5%)	2 (6.5%)	26.8 (6),