Efficacy methods to evaluate health communication and marketing campaigns.

The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Journal of Health Communication (Impact Factor: 1.61). 07/2009; 14(4):315-30. DOI: 10.1080/10810730902872234
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Communication and marketing are growing areas of health research, but relatively few rigorous efficacy studies have been conducted in these fields. In this article, we review recent health communication and marketing efficacy research, present two case studies that illustrate some of the considerations in making efficacy design choices, and advocate for greater emphasis on rigorous health communication and marketing efficacy research and the development of a research agenda. Much of the outcomes research in health communication and marketing, especially mass media, utilizes effectiveness designs conducted in real time, in the media markets or communities in which messages are delivered. Such evaluations may be impractical or impossible, however, imiting opportunities to advance the state of health communication and marketing research and the knowledge base on effective campaign strategies, messages, and channels. Efficacy and effectiveness studies use similar measures of behavior change. Efficacy studies, however, offer greater opportunities for experimental control, message exposure, and testing of health communication and marketing theory. By examining the literature and two in-depth case studies, we identify advantages and limitations to efficacy studies. We also identify considerations for when to adopt efficacy and effectiveness methods, alone or in combination. Finally, we outline a research agenda to investigate issues of internal and external validity, mode of message presentation, differences between marketing and message strategies, and behavioral outcomes.

  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Communication to promote behaviours like energy saving can use significant resources. What is less clear is the comparative value of different approaches available to communicators. While it is generally agreed that ‘bottom-up’ approaches, where individuals are actively involved rather than passive, are preferable to ‘top-down’ authority-led projects, there is a dearth of evidence that verifies why this should be. Additionally, while the literature has examined the mechanics of the different approaches, there has been less attention paid to the associated psychological implications. This paper reports on an exploratory comparative study that examined the effects of six distinct communication activities. The activities used different communication approaches, some participative and others more top-down informational. Two theories, from behavioural studies and communication, were used to identify key variables for consideration in this field-based evaluation. The evaluation aimed to assess not just which activity might be most successful, as this has limited generalisability, but to also gain insight into what psychological impacts might contribute to success. Analysis found support for the general hypothesis that bottom-up approaches have more impact on behaviour change than top-down. The study also identified that, in this instance, the difference in reported behaviour across the activities related partly to the extent to which intentions to change behaviour were implemented. One possible explanation for the difference in reported behaviour change across the activities is that a bottom-up approach may offer a supportive environment where participants can discuss progress with like-minded individuals. A further possible explanation is that despite controlling for intention at an individual level, the pre-existence of strong intentions may have an effect on group success. These suggestive findings point toward the critical need for additional and larger-scale studies. The challenges associated with field-based evaluative research and the role of theory are discussed. The design approach and measures used in this study may be useful to other evaluations that seek to compare different communicative approaches.
    Energy Efficiency 01/2013; 6(1). · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of mobile phone technologies for health promotion and disease prevention has advanced rapidly in recent years. Text4baby is a theory-based mobile health (mHealth) program in which text messages are delivered to pregnant women and new mothers to improve their health care beliefs and behaviors and improve health status and clinical outcomes. Recent evaluations of Text4baby have found that it improves targeted health attitudes and beliefs, but effects on behavior have not yet been determined.
    Journal of Medical Internet Research 01/2014; 16(5):e131. · 3.77 Impact Factor


Available from
Sep 18, 2014