Evaluation of Social Norms Marketing Campaigns: Five Sites across 8 Years

1. Evaluation of Social Norms Marketing Campaigns: Five Sites across 8 Years Adrienne Keller, Ph.D. National Social Norms Institute University of Virginia akeller@virginia.edu

2. Social Norms Interventions • What they do NOT do • What they DO • Why they work • Characteristics • Evidence of effectiveness • Limitations • Conclusions

3. Social Norms Interventions What They Do NOT Do

4. Terrorize

7. Stigmatize

9. Accentuate the Negative

11. Normalize

13. Social Norms Interventions What They Do

14. Accentuate the Positive

15. Most (83%) Adults in Illinois Don’t Smoke* *Source: Centers for Disease Control, 2008 Tobacco Use in Illinois Adults

16. Teach

17. Promote Self-Efficacy

18. Why do social norms interventions change behavior? Think about “peer pressure” And how others’ choices influence our own…

19. Perceptions may not conform to reality BUT…

20. Q.: How many alcoholic drinks do you think the typical student at your school had the last time they “partied” or socialized? Q.: How many alcoholic drinks did you have the last time you “partied” or socialized? Source: NCHA, Spring 2008, n= 80,121

21. AND… We don’t like contradictions.

22. a MINORITY of our youth Are addicted to tobacco Do use drugs Do have a serious problem with alcohol. MOST of our youth Don’t smoke cigarettes Don’t do drugs Don’t use alcohol or have an alcohol problem.

23. IDENTIFIED ISSUES ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES DESIRED IMPACT INTERVENTION GOAL Personal alcohol misuse Harm Reduction: Decrease alcohol-related morbidity & mortality Social norms marketing campaign Decrease Alcohol Use Correct perception of norm Misperceived norm INTERVENTION STRATEGY Misperceived norm

24. Characteristics of Social Norms Marketing

25. Positive • Inclusive • Empowering

28. Evidence of Effectiveness Good theory…great media… But does it work?

29. Participating Schools • Five universities • 4 public; 1 private • Thru-out USA • Between 14K to 46K students • Funding: Anhauser-Busch Fndtn • ACHA’s NCHA • 2002 through 2009: some years

30. Social Norms Campaigns • Each university developed its own campaign using the five step model

31. Five Step Model Choose the Audience Gather & Evaluate Data Develop & Test Message Implement Campaign Evaluate Effectiveness

33. Sample Characteristics

34. But did the samples change over the years?

35. YES for 1 and 2 • Schl 1: Race/Ethnicity only • % White  • % Hispanic  • Schl 2: Everything! • Age  • % Female  • % White  • % in Res Hall  • % Frat/Soro 

36. YES for 3 and 4 • Schl 3: Residence only • % in Res Hall  • Schl 4: Sex, Race, Residence • % Female  • % White  • % in Res Hall 

37. and YES for 5 • Schl 5: Everything! • Age  • % Female  • % White  • % in Res Hall  • % Frat/Soro  • So, we controlled for everything in our analyses.

38. Linear Mixed Effects Models • Did perceptions change across years? • Perception: ACHA-NCHA question • Controlled for demographics • Within each school • Did use change across years? • Use: ACHA-NCHA question • Controlled for demographics • Within each school • By perception

39. Results for Perception Changes

40. Results for Actual Drinks Changes

41. Duh…Beautiful Stats… But what do they mean?

42. Mean Perceived Drinks 2002-2009

43. Mean Actual Drinks 2002-2009

44. Mean Perceived-Actual Drinks 02-09

45. Limitations • Internal Validity • Exposure not included in analysis • Other interventions not included • Related events not included • Moderate to low sample response rates • External Validity • Population characteristics • Environmental characteristics • Implementation fidelity

46. Conclusions  Misperceptions in all 5 schools • Real world settings • Diverse schools • Actual drinks decreased in 4 of 5 • “Gap” decreased in 2 of 5 • Importance of longitudinal data • Single year results unclear • Effects & relationship only become clear over the years

47. Thank You Questions, Comments ???