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-1.1Table 7.36. Overall effects of road safety campaigns on seatbelt use according to explicitbasis of campaign. Results are given after accounting for publication bias. Each overall effectis based on n individual effects (excluding any artificial effects generated by trim-and-fill).campaigns with basiscampaigns without basisbasiseffect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)theory ormodel +31 (+6;+61) 27 yes +24 (+17;+30) 104 yespreviouscampaigns +33 (+22;+44) 77 yes +52 (+29;+80) 24 yesconsultationwith target +50 (+35;+67) 13 yes +28 (+20;+35) 89 yesIt is important for any campaign designer to consider how the appeal will bemade to the target group. According to attitude theory one can use emotionalcontent to address the feeling component of an attitude, and more rationalcontent to try and address the cognitive component (see Road User Model,Work Package D1.4). This theory predicts that those campaigns that manageto use both emotional and rational content together would tend to be moreeffective.Therefore, where enough information was available, we made a judgement asto whether the content of the campaign was emotional, rational or both (Table7.1). Emotional content is that which tends not to persuade through facts andfigures, but uses appealing images or stories of individuals, for example.Rational content is information that tends to present logical reasons why thetarget should change their behaviour. Table 7.37 reports overall effects forboth accidents and seatbelt use.Table 7.37. Overall effects of road safety campaigns on road accidents and seatbelt useaccording to nature of appeal used in campaign. Results are given after accounting forpublication bias. Each overall effect is based on n individual effects (excluding any artificialeffects generated by trim-and-fill).AccidentsSeatbelt usemediumeffect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)emotionalappeal 3 +26 (+14;+39) 12 yesrational appeal -11 (-4;-17) 51 yes +13 (+3;+24) 47 yesemotional andrational appeal -15 (-21; -7) 28 yes +66 (+35; +104) 7 yesCampaigns with combined content had an overall accident-reducing effect of15 per cent, and increased seatbelt use by 66 per cent. The latter effect wassignificantly better than the overall effect of campaigns that used exclusively84
Campaigns and awareness raising strategies in traffic safety — Deliverable D-1.1rational appeals. These results somewhat support the hypothesis thatcampaigns combining a rational and emotional appeal are more effective thanthose focusing on one or the other.Along with feelings and cognitions, perception of perceived social norms isalso thought to be an important component of attitude that any attempts tochange attitude should consider (see Road User Model, Deliverable 1.4).Where there was sufficient information about the campaign content, asubjective assessment was therefore made as to whether the campaignaddressed the social norm or not. A campaign addressing descriptive socialnorms attempts to convey to the target individual the accepted and unwrittenrules to which valued others willingly adhere. For example, a campaign thatattempts to convey to male youths that attractive girls find speeding a turn-offis one that addresses social norms. The analysis based on social norms isshown in Table 7.38. Although there are no significant differences, the trendsuggests that campaigns benefit from attempts to address the social norm.Table 7.38. Overall effects of road safety campaigns on road accidents and seatbelt useaccording to whether campaign addresses social norm. After accounting for publication bias.Each overall effect is based on n individual effects (excluding any artificial effects generatedby trim-and-fill).AccidentsSeatbelt useSocial normaddressed?effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)yes -12 (-19;-4) 27 yes +33 (+16;+52) 26 yesno -4 (-10;+2) 53 no +24 (+16;+32) 77 yesAnother dimension on which campaign content can vary is in theconsequences of unsafe behaviour conveyed. For those campaigns that doshow the consequences, they can show them in a shocking or non-shockingway. This aspect of content has relevance to the debate about fear campaignsdealt with in Deliverable 1.4 of this Work Package.Table 7.39. Overall effects of road safety campaigns on road accidents and seatbelt useaccording to way campaign addresses the consequences of unsafe action. Results are givenafter accounting for publication bias. Each overall effect is based on n individual effects(excluding any artificial effects generated by trim-and-fill).AccidentsSeatbelt usemediumeffect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)effect(%)95%confidenceinterval (%)nSig.?(p < 0.05)shockingconsequences shown -4 (-10;+2) 8 no -- -- 4 --non-shockingconsequences shown -9 (-16;-2) 47 yes +14 (+5;+24) 29 yes85
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: Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 83: Campaigns and awareness raising str
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151:
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?