a reply to the comment of franke and andrews on 'The economics of tobacco advertising: spending, demand and the effects of bans'
purpose of our study, 'The economics of tobacco advertising: spending, demand
and the effects of bans' (Lancaster & Lancaster 2003), was to examine most
of the published evidence worldwide on the effects of aggregate advertising and
of advertising bans on aggregate cigarette and tobacco demand. This broad and
polemic literature spans more than 30 years and includes an array of research
designs, econometric models, dependent and independent variables, data,
statistical procedures, and statistical assumptions. Much of it has been
vigorously challenged across these dimensions as well, including criticism for
dated and weak study designs, specification bias, poor and incomplete data, and
violations of statistical assumptions. From this complex and contradictory
literature, researchers, scholars, policy makers, managers, activists and
interested readers are left to their own resources and expertise to make sense
of it. Those with particular points of view or objectives likely will find
studies to support them.