Indoor tanning is associated with an increased risk of developing skin cancer. In the United States, nearly 1 in 5 white women aged 18 to 25 are indoor tanners. This study elicited beliefs about tanning indoors and quitting/cutting back on indoor tanning.
Design:
Semi-structured interviews.
Participants and Setting:
Forty 18- to 25-year-old white females who engaged in frequent indoor tanning participated in either in-person or telephone interviews. Most were college students from southeastern Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Method:
A semi-structured interview was used to elicit beliefs about indoor tanning and quitting or cutting back. Data analyses using NVivo and multiple coders identified key themes about going and quitting/cutting back on indoor tanning.
Results:
Key themes stated as reasons for indoor tanning included improving physical appearance, social acceptance, increased confidence, and happiness. The main themes identified as advantages of quitting/cutting back on indoor tanning were to decrease skin cancer risk and save money. Perceived disadvantages of quitting/cutting back included themes of concerns about being pale and a decline in self-confidence. The prospect of saving money and warm weather were seen as facilitating quitting/cutting back.
Conclusion:
Findings suggest the necessity of addressing appearance concerns, psychological benefits associated with feeling more attractive, and short-term gains such as saving money. These findings provide a foundation for developing effective anti-indoor tanning communication.
BoniolMAutierPBoylePGandiniS. Cutaneous melanoma attributable to sunbed use: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2012;345:e4757. doi:10.1136/bmj.e4757
3.
El GhissassiFBaanRStraifK. A review of human carcinogens—part D: radiation. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(8):751–752. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70213-X
4.
GuyGPJrWatsonMSeidenbergAB. Trends in indoor tanning and its association with sunburn among US adults. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(6):1191–1193. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.01.022
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use of indoor tanning devices by adults—United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61(18):323–326. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6118a2.htm. Accessed November 16, 2017.
7.
CoupsEJPhillipsLA. A more systematic review of correlates of indoor tanning. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2011;25(5):610–616. doi:10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.03996.x
8.
HolmanDMWatsonM. Correlates of intentional tanning among adolescents in the United States: a systematic review of the literature. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(suppl 5):S52–S59. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.09.021
9.
MaysDZhaoX. The Influence of framed messages and self-affirmation on indoor tanning behavioral intentions in 18- to 30-year-old women. Health Psychol. 2015;35(7)123–130. doi:10.1037/hea0000253
10.
BanerjeeSCHayJLGellerAC. Quitting the “Cancer Tube”: a qualitative examination of the process of indoor tanning cessation. Transl Behav Med. 2014;4(2):209–219. doi:10.1007/s13142-014-0257-0
11.
HolmanDMFoxKAGlennJD. Strategies to reduce indoor tanning: current research gaps and future opportunities for prevention. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44(6):672–681. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.02.014
12.
SinclairC. Lessons learnt in sunbed advocacy and education: an international perspective. In: CDC Skin Cancer Informal Expert Meeting. Washington, D.C.; 2012.
13.
NoarSMMyrickJGZeitanyA. Testing a social cognitive theory-based model of indoor tanning: implications for skin cancer prevention messages. Health Commun. 2015;30(2):164–174. doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.974125
14.
KelleyDENoarSMMyrickJG. An empirical analysis of indoor tanners: implications for audience segmentation in campaigns. J Health Commun. 2016;21(5):564–574. doi:10.1080/10810730.2015.1114051
15.
MyrickJGNoarSMKelleyD. A longitudinal test of the comprehensive indoor tanning expectations scale: the importance of affective beliefs in predicting indoor tanning behavior. J Health Psychol. 2015;22(1):3–15. doi:10.1177/1359105315595116
16.
FishbeinMAjzenI. Review of predicting and changing behavior: a reasoned action approach. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis; 2010;151(3):382–385. doi:10.1080/00224545.2011.563209
17.
MontanoDEKasprzykD. Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral dodel. In: GlanzKRimerBKViswanathV, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 5th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2015:95–124.
18.
CarcioppoloNOrrego DunleavyVYangQ. How do perceived descriptive norms influence indoor tanning intentions? An application of the theory of normative social behavior. Health Commun. 2017;32(2):230–239. doi:10.1080/10410236.2015.1120697
19.
GlanzKSchoenfeldEWeinstockMA. Development and reliability of a brief skin cancer risk assessment tool. Cancer Detect Prev. 2003;27(4):311–315. doi:10.1016/S0361-090X(03)00094-1
20.
GlanzKYarochALDancelM. Measures of sun exposure and sun protection practices for behavioral and epidemiologic research. Arch Dermatol. 2008;144(2):217–222. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2007.46
McEachanRTaylorNHarrisonR. Meta-analysis of the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA) to understanding health behaviors. Ann Behav Med. 2016;50(4):592–612. doi:10.1007/s12160-016-9798-4
23.
GlanzKLewRASongVCookVA. Factors associated with skin cancer prevention practices in a multiethnic population. Health Educ Behav. 1999;26(3):344–359. doi:10.1177/109019819902600305
24.
Community Preventive Services Task Force. Community-wide interventions to prevent skin cancer: recommendation of the community preventive services task force. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51(4):540–541. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2016.03.019
25.
SandhuPKElderRPatelM. Community-wide interventions to prevent skin cancer: two community guide systematic reviews. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51(4):531–539. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2016.03.020
26.
McWhirterJEHoffman-GoetzL. Systematic review of population-based studies on the impact of images on UV attitudes and behaviours. Health Promot Int. 2015;30(2):397–410. doi:10.1093/heapro/dat031
27.
GibbonsFXGerrardMLaneDJ. Using UV photography to reduce use of tanning booths: a test of cognitive mediation. Health Psychol. 2005;24(4):358–363. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.24.4.358
28.
PerssonSGroganSDhingraKBennY. ‘It’s bit of an eye opener’—a qualitative study of women’s attitudes towards tanning, sun protection and a facial morphing intervention. Psychol Health. 2018;33(3):381–397. doi:10.1080/08870446.2017.1357815
29.
PerssonSBennYDhingraK. Appearance-based interventions to reduce UV exposure: a systematic review. Br J Health Psychol. 2018;23(2):334–351. doi:10.1111/bjhp.12291
30.
HillhouseJTurrisiRShieldsAL. Patterns of indoor tanning use: implications for clinical interventions. Arch Dermatol. 2007;143(12):1530–1535. doi:10.1001/archderm.143.12.1530
31.
BagdasarovZBanerjeeSGreeneKCampoS. Indoor tanning and problem behavior. J Am Coll Health. 2008;56(5):555–561. doi:10.3200/JACH.56.5.555-562
