A Thematic Text Analysis of Cannabis Edibles Brand Names

<b>Introduction:</b> This study explores whether the cannabis edibles industry uses brand names that might impact consumer appeal and harm perceptions. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> An exploratory thematic text analysis of brand names for 1344 cannabis edible products from 250 brands advertised online between June and November 2022 was performed. Brands marketing only delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) products (<i>n</i> = 80), THC and cannabidiol (CBD) products (<i>n</i> = 130), and only CBD products (<i>n</i> = 40) were compared. <b>Results:</b> Five core themes emerged: cannabis culture (42% of brands, <i>n</i> = 106), product characteristics (30%, <i>n</i> = 76), medicine and health (23%, <i>n</i> = 58), environment and nature (20%, <i>n</i> = 51), and identity and culture (14%, <i>n</i> = 34), with 15 subthemes. Brands only marketing CBD products more often had names with medicine and health (45%, <i>n</i> = 18) themes with subthemes of health and wellness (30%, <i>n</i> = 12) and expected effects (18%, <i>n</i> = 7) in contrast to brands marketing THC products (18%, <i>n</i> = 14; 2%, <i>n</i> = 2; 11%, <i>n</i> = 9 THC-only; 20%, <i>n</i> = 26; 5%, <i>n</i> = 6; 13%, <i>n</i> = 17 THC and CBD). Brands marketing THC products more often had names with cannabis (12%, <i>n</i> = 10 THC-only; 18%, <i>n</i> = 23 THC and CBD; 8%, <i>n</i> = 3 CBD-only) and spiritual/mystical (9%, <i>n</i> = 7 THC-only; 9%, <i>n</i> = 12, THC and CBD; 0%, CBD-only) subthemes. Food type subthemes were also more common among brands marketing THC products (19%, <i>n</i> = 15 THC-only; 21%, <i>n</i> = 27 THC and CBD; 8%, <i>n</i> = 3 CBD-only). Unconventionality (6%, <i>n</i> = 5 THC-only; 2%, <i>n</i> = 2 THC and CBD; 0% CBD-only) and names and places (16%, <i>n</i> = 13 THC-only; 5%, <i>n</i> = 8 THC & CBD; 5%, <i>n</i> = 2 CBD-only) were subthemes more common among brands only marketing THC products. <b>Conclusions:</b> This study identified distinct cannabis edibles brand name marketing strategies for THC versus CBD products that may affect consumer appeal and perceptions of harm, underscoring the need to monitor and potentially regulate cannabis edibles marketing to ensure that it does not mislead consumers or downplay potential risks.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Published
2025-06-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1089/can.2025.0033
Primary Topic
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Thematic Text Analysis of Cannabis Edibles Brand Names

Beth A. Reboussin, E. Alfonso Romero‐Sandoval, Shelby Lake, Erin L. Sutfin et al.
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
article

A Thematic Text Analysis of Cannabis Edibles Brand Names

Beth A. Reboussin, E. Alfonso Romero‐Sandoval, Shelby Lake, Erin L. Sutfin, Jennifer Cornacchione Ross, Kathleen L. Egan, Allison J. Lazard, Kimberly G. Wagoner, Cynthia K. Suerken, Olivia E. Horton
article en

Abstract

<b>Introduction:</b> This study explores whether the cannabis edibles industry uses brand names that might impact consumer appeal and harm perceptions. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> An exploratory thematic text analysis of brand names for 1344 cannabis edible products from 250 brands advertised online between June and November 2022 was performed. Brands marketing only delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) products (<i>n</i> = 80), THC and cannabidiol (CBD) products (<i>n</i> = 130), and only CBD products (<i>n</i> = 40) were compared. <b>Results:</b> Five core themes emerged: cannabis culture (42% of brands, <i>n</i> = 106), product characteristics (30%, <i>n</i> = 76), medicine and health (23%, <i>n</i> = 58), environment and nature (20%, <i>n</i> = 51), and identity and culture (14%, <i>n</i> = 34), with 15 subthemes. Brands only marketing CBD products more often had names with medicine and health (45%, <i>n</i> = 18) themes with subthemes of health and wellness (30%, <i>n</i> = 12) and expected effects (18%, <i>n</i> = 7) in contrast to brands marketing THC products (18%, <i>n</i> = 14; 2%, <i>n</i> = 2; 11%, <i>n</i> = 9 THC-only; 20%, <i>n</i> = 26; 5%, <i>n</i> = 6; 13%, <i>n</i> = 17 THC and CBD). Brands marketing THC products more often had names with cannabis (12%, <i>n</i> = 10 THC-only; 18%, <i>n</i> = 23 THC and CBD; 8%, <i>n</i> = 3 CBD-only) and spiritual/mystical (9%, <i>n</i> = 7 THC-only; 9%, <i>n</i> = 12, THC and CBD; 0%, CBD-only) subthemes. Food type subthemes were also more common among brands marketing THC products (19%, <i>n</i> = 15 THC-only; 21%, <i>n</i> = 27 THC and CBD; 8%, <i>n</i> = 3 CBD-only). Unconventionality (6%, <i>n</i> = 5 THC-only; 2%, <i>n</i> = 2 THC and CBD; 0% CBD-only) and names and places (16%, <i>n</i> = 13 THC-only; 5%, <i>n</i> = 8 THC & CBD; 5%, <i>n</i> = 2 CBD-only) were subthemes more common among brands only marketing THC products. <b>Conclusions:</b> This study identified distinct cannabis edibles brand name marketing strategies for THC versus CBD products that may affect consumer appeal and perceptions of harm, underscoring the need to monitor and potentially regulate cannabis edibles marketing to ensure that it does not mislead consumers or downplay potential risks.

Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchVol. 10(5)
Boston University (US), University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), Wake Forest University (US)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 83%
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.