Deliverable D 1.3 RESULTS OF META-ANALYSIS ... - cast-eu.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Campaigns and awareness raising strategies in traffic safety — Deliverable D-1.19. CONCLUSIONS FROM ANALYSIS OF THE CAST DATABASERoad safety campaigns workBased on a conservative meta-analytical summary of an extensive database,we can say that not only do road safety campaigns work, but they work well.This assertion is based on a number of different outcome measures, includingrisk comprehension (16 per cent increase), yielding behaviours (37 per centincrease), speeding (16 per cent reduction), seatbelt use (25 per centincrease) and accident reduction (6 per cent decrease).We do not find that campaigns are significantly effective at reducing drinkdrivingbehaviour, possibly because there is a remarkably wide range ofeffects evident for campaigns using this measure. A summary of 39 resultsalso shows no significant overall effect of campaigns on attitude.Several factors can be associated with campaign effectivenessBivariate (subgroup) analyses were reported mainly to provide the campaigndesigner with an idea of the size of overall effect that can be expected forcertain types of campaigns. Such analyses also give crude indications thateffects on both accident counts and seatbelt use are on the whole better forthose campaigns identifying a target group, using personal communication,combining emotional and rational content, addressing the social norm orfocusing on the risk of detection rather than risk of harm (if risk is addressed).There is no evidence from bivariate analyses of a link between campaigneffect and campaign scale, or the use of humour. The influence ofenforcement on campaign effect is discussed in a separate section below.Results from bivariate analyses were used to help construct models for moresophisticated multivariate analyses (meta-regression). Testing of thesemodels suggests several factors are associated with improved effect ofcampaigns on accident levels. Those that are amenable to manipulation bycampaign designers are on-road delivery, personal communication andaccompanying enforcement.Several factors were also identified as being associated with positivecampaign effects on seatbelt use. These were on-road delivery of campaigns,carrying out the campaign in a limited area, personal communication andaddressing the risk of harm.Because they are more representative of the real world situation, theconclusions drawn below are based mainly on the results from multivariateanalysis.Campaigns achieving intimacy and immediacy could be more effectiveBoth bivariate and multivariate analyses suggest that campaigns using someform of personal communication with the target audience have somewhatimproved effects, both on accidents and behaviour (seatbelt use). Thevariable personal communication, according to our definition, encompassedthe use of lesson, seminars or other sessions delivered in person, two-way orgroup discussions with a peer, teacher, safety expert or deliverer of campaignmedia, or personally addressed letters. The use of a personal element or the112
Campaigns and awareness raising strategies in traffic safety — Deliverable D-1.1use of other people as channels for the delivery of the campaign messageimplies that an increased level of intimacy with the target could be important,possibly because it increases the likelihood that the target attends andprocesses the campaign message (Vaa et al., 2004; also see Work PackageDeliverable 1.4).According to multivariate models, on-road delivery is also positivelyassociated with campaign effects, on both accidents and seatbelt use. Onroaddelivery involves the use of billboards, or other fixed or variable messagesigns placed at the side of the road. This suggests that delivery of themessage to drivers at a place that is in terms of space and time proximal tothe target behaviour is beneficial in terms of campaign effect. In other words,achieving immediacy in the delivery of a campaign message might beimportant.In terms of accident counts, short campaign duration is also beneficialaccording to multivariate analyses, and this also implies a sense ofimmediacy. In shorter, more intense campaigns, the message may be morelikely to be received at a time that is proximal to carrying out of the targetbehaviour.Taken together, intimacy and immediacy suggest that those campaigns thatmake the target person think carefully about the message in the context of thedriving behaviour would tend to be more successful at achieving effects duringor after the campaign. In this light, it is interesting to consider that the carryingout of campaigns in a limited area, such as an organisation or car park, waspositively associated with improvements in seatbelt use, since suchcampaigns would presumably be more likely to use personal communicationand deliver the message to the driver at a time that is proximal in space andtime to the context of the targeted driving behaviour.But mass media methods are still importantLack of evidence linking mass-media methods such as television or radio toimprovements in campaign effects (whether accident counts or seatbelt use isthe outcome measured) is in line with the idea that intimacy and immediacyare beneficial to campaign outcomes. To this we can add those findings frombivariate analysis that selection for campaigns using mass-media results ineither the same or reduced overall effects, across several behaviouraloutcome measures. While we cannot conclude from bivariate analyses thatuse of mass-media has less effect at the local level, than at regional ornational levels, it does seem that within a small area, where a much morefocused campaign is possible, those methods which are difficult to carry outon a larger scale (e.g. rewards, pledge cards) are particularly effective andtherefore worth considering.Targets receive campaign messages delivered by television or newspapers inways that are often removed in space and time from the actual (on-road)target behaviour. These targets would also often be in a situation in which it iseasy to ‘switch off’ or ignore the campaign message. Despite this, werecommend that campaign designers continue to consider mass-media for thefollowing reasons.113
Page 1 and 2:
Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62: Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 111: Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 151: Campaigns and awareness raising str
show all

Deliverable D 1.3 RESULTS OF META-ANALYSIS ... - cast-eu.org

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?