Problem/Objective: This laboratory study examined the role of emotion in the effectiveness of antismoking media messages. Previous research suggests ads that elicit negative emotion appear to be more effective than other ads (e.g., Wakefield et al. 2003). This theorized mechanism has not been tested in college students. This study tested two primary hypotheses. First, it was hypothesized that there would be statistically significant differences in the types of emotional and evaluative responses to different ads. It was also predicted that these differences would relate to measures of free recall and engagement (thought or discussion) of the ads at a one-week follow-up. Methods: Participants were college students aged 18 to 25 years (N=74). Participants viewed six randomly presented antismoking advertisements and filled out questionnaires assessing responses to each advertisement. Participants' physiological responses were also measured. Results: As predicted, repeated measures analyses of variance revealed differences in participants' emotional and evaluative responses to the six ads on the following measures: sadness, anger, happiness, fear, unpleasantness, overall emotional arousal, and a good antismoking ad. Post hoc pairwise tests revealed numerous statistically significant comparisons. Three ads (Artery, Voicebox, and Still Can't Quit) elicited the most negative emotion and evaluative responses. These results were consistent with follow-up data suggesting that the most salient impact was elicited by Artery (43.2%), followed by Voicebox (36.5%), and Still Can't Quit (12.2%). Conclusions: Physiological correlates and the relevance of these results for tobacco prevention campaigns will be discussed.