Anti-Smoking Media Campaign Messages: Theory and Practice

Abstract

This study examined televised anti-smoking advertisements that were designed to discourage adult and teen smoking. A content analysis of 399 television advertisements catalogued in the Media Campaign Resource Center (MCRC) database were evaluated to determine (a) whether the advertising content reflected core health communication theories used in the design of health campaign messages to change behavior and (b) the affective presentation of tobacco-control advertisements aimed to decrease smoking. The results revealed that anti-smoking advertising relied overwhelmingly on appeals to attitudes. Although the benefits of not smoking were mentioned in 61% of advertisements, barriers were mentioned in only 17% of advertisements. Advertisements emphasized the consequences of smoking more than the viewer's self-efficacy. Finally, advertisements were more likely to use informational and humor appeals, rather than sadness, fear, or anger appeals. The research identifies the types of advertisements that are most likely to be utilized and underutilized in national and statewide anti-smoking advertising campaigns catalogued in the MCRC database.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Kristen Anderson (M.A., Saint Louis University), for her research assistance, and Teresa Thompson, for her editorial support.

Notes

¹The theory of reasoned action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) is a general theory of persuasion. For clarity, we describe the theory in the context of preventive behavior, although it certainly is not the only context in which it has been used.

²A second mechanism that a social norm may be reinforced in an advertisement is through modeling. In our study, multiple mechanisms are under consideration for evaluation, however, for purpose of analyzing the persuasive verbal message, we treat the verbal appeal present in the advertisement separately from the image (the models) that may reinforce behavior.

³“A Mother's Keeper” focuses on one source of normative influence, a child. The theory of reasoned action's “social norms” refers to influences from several sources important to an individual.

⁴Although all of these theoretically grounded persuasive health messages may influence intention and behavior, it is important for researchers and practitioners alike to know which mechanisms are being utilized in current MSA anti-smoking advertisements. Smoking self-efficacy based studies (Dino et al., 2004; Droomers et al., 2004; Siegel, 2002; Wakefield et al., 2003) and smoking studies based on the theory of reasoned action (Cuerrier et al., 1992; Faucher & Carter, 2001; McGahee et al., 2000; Unger et al., 2001) have shown both theories as having power in predicting smoking behavior, but the extent to which their generative mechanisms are features in post-MSA anti-smoking advertisements is unknown and worthy of exploration.

⁵These theories were prominent in the health communication literature (Rice & Atkin, 2001; Slater, 1999) and were employed in health message development and texts on health education (Glanz, Lewis, & Rimer, 1990; Maibach & Parrott, 1995) during the time period in which anti-smoking advertisements were created.

⁶Consistent with Stephenson's (2002) research, we found it was rare for anti-smoking advertisers to use the HBM in their advertisement per se. During preliminary analysis, when only 3 out of 399 television advertisements were coded with dominant health belief frames, secondary analysis questions were posed about the advertisements.

⁷Two additional persuasive health messages were considered in our initial coding scheme, but dropped from final analysis. The first was a fear persuasive health message. There was poor discrimination both conceptually and operationally between fear and attitude persuasive health messages. These two categories were combined and the operational definition of attitude persuasive health message was modified (researchers separately considered the affective, e.g., fear, dimension of any persuasive health message). The second additional persuasive health message examined the benefits of not smoking against the consequences of smoking. Due to the low number of advertisements (n = 3, 0.8%) casting the benefits of not smoking to the consequences of smoking, no further analysis was conducted with this persuasive health message.