EFFECTS OF A NATIONAL PUBLIC SERVICE INFORMATION CAMPAIGN
ON CRIME PREVENTION:
PERSPECTIVES FROM SOCIAL LEARNING AND SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY
Edward J. Lordan, Ph.D.
and
Joongrok Kwon, Ph.D.
mailing address:
Edward J. Lordan
Communication Arts Department
Room 243
St. Augustine Center for the Liberal Arts
Villanova University
Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085
(610) 519-4793
This research paper submitted to the Mass Communication and Society
division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication for the 1995 convention in Washington, D.C.
ABSTRACT
This study examined the effects of public service advertising
through a two-way analysis of variance of secondary data related
to the "Take a Bite Out of Crime" campaign. It found that the
effectiveness of PSA's is tied to interpersonal communication
within a community. Individually, these campaigns rarely achieve
the intended attitudinal or behavioral results, but they can
function as a catalyst for transmitting this information through
interpersonal channels, and, possibly, creating intended
changes.
EFFECTS OF A NATIONAL PUBLIC SERVICE INFORMATION CAMPAIGN
ON CRIME PREVENTION:
PERSPECTIVES FROM SOCIAL LEARNING AND SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY
I. INTRODUCTION
The public service advertising (PSA) arena has huge financial resources,
and significant financial resources have been used to deliver public
service advertising via the mass media (Bazozzi & Moore, 1994). However,
it
is commonly held that PSA is not well received by mass media owners
(Hanneman, McWen & Coyne, 1973). In the 1980s and 1990s, public service
advertising grew substantially not only in its sheer volume but also in
the
number of topics addressed, which included such issues as drug use
(Schmeling et al, 1980; Black, 1991; Lorch et al., 1994), fund raising
(Armstrong, 1983), and public health (Mazzoni, 1985; Wyatt, 1986).
This study applies social learning and social control theories to
investigate behavioral and cognitive effects of public service advertising
using data collected for the crime prevention campaign "Take a Bite
Out of
Crime." The major objectives of the campaign were (1) developing a
greater
sense of individual responsibility among citizens for reducing crime,
(2)
dispelling unwarranted feelings of frustration and hopelessness
regarding
crime and criminal justice, and (3) encouraging citizens to take
collective
preventive actions. Effects studied are crime prevention-oriented
activities; intent to prevent crime, perceived degree of helping to prevent
crime, confidence in self-protection, gain of knowledge about crime
prevention, and belief in effectiveness of precautionary measures.
Effectiveness of Public Service Campaigns:
Social Learning and Social Control Theory
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
Studies of Public Information Campaigns
What is a public information campaign and what are the effects of such an
endeavor? Paisley (1981, p.24) notes that definitions of a campaign
either
stress (1) the intention or (2) the process. Campaigns are mounted for
an
enormous variety of purposes, including but not limited to (1) the
purposiveness of a campaign (Cell, 1977 p.7), (2) targeting large audience
(Atkin, 1981 p.265), (3) specified time span (Rogers et al, 1979
p.60), and
organized set of communication activities (Schramm, 1964 p.155; Rogers,
1973 p.277; Hall, 1978,p.85; Flay & Cook, 1981 p.239; McQuail, 1983
p.180;
McGuire, 1984 p.299).
Studies of Public Service Advertising (PSA)
Public service advertising (PSA) may be successful at times, but
historically PSA designers have not been as interested in goal setting,
audience targeting, and media and message selection and research as
they
have been in impressing media colleagues and agency policy makers, and
in
maintaining their budgets (Schmeling & Wotring, 1980). Previous
research on
the effects of information dissemination via standard mass communication
channels is not only limited, but has produced conflicting results.
Some
authors have found that the dissemination does not have much effect in
changing attitudes (Klapper, 1960; MacQuail,1969; Weiss, 1969), while
others suggest that media information can affect consumers in terms of
the
perceived importance of issues (agenda setting effects), knowledge
gain
(information increase), and attitude and behavioral changes (Douglas et
al., 1970; Maccoby & Farquhar, 1975; Schmeling & Wotring, 1976; Eadie,
Hasting & Haywood, 1990; Aitken et al., 1991; Friestad & Wright, 1994;
Pechman & Ratneshwar, 1994). In the end, however, the overall study of
the
effect of PSA on target audiences has been largely neglected (Lynn,
1971;
McGuire, 1986).
Theoretical Background
The theoretical perspective of the present study combines insights from
social learning theory and the social control model.
Traditional social learning theory assumes that learning occurs by
subjects actually performing responses and experiencing their effects. The
main determinant of learning is reinforcement, or the extent to which
the
organism is rewarded (or punished) for performing the response.
Behavior is
considered to be externally regulated by the stimulus conditions that
elicit it and by the reinforcing conditions that maintain it (Berger &
Lambert, 1969). Social control theory is best expressed by Black, who
defines "social control" as "all practices by which people define and
respond to deviant behavior" (Black, 1984, xi). This perspective implies
that communities which fail to combat social changes like population
shifts, racial changes, business expansion and disinvestment will
experience increased fear (Skogan et al. 1982; Lavrakas & Lewis, 1980).
Researchers have determined that socially integrated members of a
neighborhood are more likely to participate in community activities than
are less integrated residents (Kasarda & Janowitz, 1974; Cornelius,
1975;
McCourt, 1977; Gamba & Oskamp, 1994; Logan & Spitze, 1994) Community
organizations play an important role in this conceptualization, for they
are a primary mechanism for asserting community values through
collective
action. Organizations do this by attempting to control "signs of
incivility" which appear in the community (Lewis, Grant & Rosenbaum, 1988,
Chapter 4).
Given what is known about the relationship between crime and social
control, it seems possible that a mass media crime prevention campaign
might combine with factors of social control to facilitate public
response
to such appeals, cognitive investment in such public issues, and
behavioral
change.
III. HYPOTHESES AND METHODOLOGY
Hypotheses
In this study attention is represented as recall, based on the assumption
that attention is the means by which a persuasive message creates an
impression. Cognitive psychologists have long known of two important
dimensions of recall: (1) attention at the time of exposure, and (2) the
ease of retrieval (Walker & Gonten, 1989).
The study tests the following hypotheses:
1. Crime prevention behavior, self-estimation of the likelihood of future
crime prevention behavior, and cognitive effects are associated with
recall
of crime prevention campaign advertising disseminated through mass media
and with knowing people in neighborhood (familiarity), conversations
with
neighbors, and length of residence as factors of neighborhood
integration.
2. Behavior, self-estimation of the likelihood of future crime prevention
behavior, and cognitive effects are associated with family structure,
trust
in government, belonging to social organizations as social control agents,
and recall of campaign advertising.
Methodology
The study is a secondary analysis of data from the "Take a Bite Out of
Crime" campaign, which features an animated detective dog, arrayed in a
trench coat and admonishing citizens to follow the example of "real
people"
prototypes who have helped "take a bite out of crime." The PSA, initiated
in 1979, was delivered by television, radio, newspapers and magazines.
The errors involving recall measurement can be reduced by increasing the
representativeness of the sample and using various (multiple) methods
for
the measurement of recall. In this study the representativeness of the
sample was increased by collecting the responses based on the Roper
Organization's master national probability sample of interviewing areas and
a fairly large number of respondents (over 1,400).
Data were collected through personal interviews of 1454 respondents, and
were based on a national probability sample of interviewing areas.
Interviewing was conducted April 12, 1980 through May 5, 1980. Multi-stage
probability sampling was employed in selecting respondents for the
interview.
The data are examined through a two-way analysis of variance, which
controls one variable over the other, and investigation of the interaction
effect between the two variables if any. To locate which level of each
variable has contributed to observed significance, the Tukey method of
multiple comparison procedure was applied (SAS User's Guide, 1985
Chapter
11; Hinkle et al., 1979 Chapter 12).
The primary model proposed for analysis takes the general form of:
(variance in) crime prevention behavior, self-estimation of likelihood of
future crime-prevention behavior, and cognitive effects = (is
attributable
to a combination of) recall of the media campaign plus variables of
social
control involving neighborhood integration and social control agents.
IV RESULTS
The two-way analysis of variance produced 6 permutations comprised of 54
dependent variables, and variance between variables was evaluated
against
the <.05 significance standard, with p<.05 +-.07 as the standard for
marginal significance.
Recall of the PSA and neighborhood integration factors (neighbor
familiarity, conversation with neighbors, and length of residence) when
significant were assumed to imply association, but not causation, with
behavior, estimation of the likelihood of future preventive behavior,
help
for crime prevention, interest in helping crime prevention and three
cognitive outcomes (confidence, information gain and precaution).
There are no interactions that suggest that campaign recall and any of
the socially facilitative variables function additively. The few
interactions that occur point to a role for media influence exclusive of
other variables. However, the data consistently display statistically
significant associations between the dependent variables and each of the
paired independent variables. Thus, the data recommend revised models
in
which each of the paired variables is independently associated with
the
specified dependent variables.
Neighbor familiarity, conversation with a neighbor, and length of
residence functioned in accord with this model, although the pattern was
weakest for length of residence. Further analysis of the results
provides
us with a clearer understanding of the associations between the
dependent
and independent variables. While behaviors such as have neighbor watch
and
neighbor joint prevention are not significantly associated with PSA
recall,
somewhat simpler behaviors (locking doors and notifying police), future p
revention behavior, help for crime prevention, and cognitive effects
are
significantly related to the PSA recall. On the other hand, collective
behavior (neighborhood joint prevention), have neighbor watch, future
behavioral intention, help for crime prevention and information gain are
significantly associated with the factor of neighbor familiarity
(Table 1).
Confidence in self-protection was not significantly related to neighbor
familiarity. However, it was associated with conversation with
neighbors
(Table 2). The rest of the outcomes for conversation are similar to
those
of the model of PSA recall and neighbor familiarity. The model of PSA
recall and length of residence has resulted in somewhat different
outcomes
from those of the first two (Table 3). Length of residence is
associated
with significant outcomes only for notifying police, have neighbor
watch,
collective behavior (joint prevention), and confidence.
Agents of social control resulted in a number of significant outcomes
(Table 4 through Table 6) different from those of the neighborhood
integration factors. Family structure (Table 4) produced statistical
significance only for locking doors and the likelihood of future behavior;
however, the direction of association for the first was opposite to
that
hypothesized. Trust in local government (Table 5) produced
associations
that were all significant except joint prevention and future behavior.
Number of social organizations to which respondents belong (Table 6) is
significantly associated with notifying police, having neighbor watch,
help
for prevention and all three cognitive outcomes. The only difference
between the outcomes for number of organizations and trust in government
is
that locking doors is significantly associated with the latter and not the
former.
TABLE 1. ANOVA FOR PSA RECALL & NEIGHBOR FAMILIARITY
RECALL NEBR. INTR.
LOCKING DOORS 10.62** 0.39 0.53
NOTIFYING POLICE 5.17* 8.47** 1.38
HAVE NEIGHBOR 0.29 14.27*** 0.29 WATCH
NEIGHBOR JOINT 1.00 20.08*** 0.30
PREVENTION
FUTURE BEHAVIOR 5.42* 5.23** 1.73
HELP FOR CRIME 9.37** 14.63*** 0.48
PREVENTION
CONFIDENCE 30.93*** 0.40 0.18
INFORMATION GAIN 16.54*** 5.30** 0.52
PRECAUTION 17.00*** 0.94 0.41
* p <0.05
** p < 0.01
*** p <0.001
MS: Marginally Significant
INTR.: Interaction
TABLE 2. ANOVA FOR PSA RECALL & CONVERSATION WITH NEIGHBOR
RECALL CONVSTN. TR.
LOCKING DOORS 10.56** 1.62 0.95
NOTIFYING POLICE 4.82* 3.11* 0.22
HAVE NEIGHBOR 0.27 32.88*** 0.74
WATCH
NEIGHBOR JOINT 0.91 19.04*** 0.64 PREVENTION
FUTURE BEHAVIOR 4.46* 4.37** 0.26
HELP FOR CRIME 12.07*** 12.96*** 0.29 PREVENTION
CONFIDENCE 32.77*** 5.19** 1.25
INFORMATION GAIN 17.93*** 7.52** 0.30
PRECAUTION 17.69*** 0.82 2.34 * p
<0.05
** p < 0.01
*** P < 0.001
MS: Marginally Significant
INTR.: Interaction
TABLE 3. ANOVA FOR PSA RECALL & LENGTH OF RESIDENCE
RECALL LENGTH INTR.
LOCKING DOORS 10.55** 0.52 0.19
NOTIFYING POLICE 3.81(MS) 9.92** 0.83
HAVE NEIGHBOR 0.00 14.80*** 1.82
WATCH
NEIGHBOR JOINT 0.64 3.24* 0.40
PREVENTION
FUTURE BEHAVIOR 3.81(MS) 1.41 2.83
HELP FOR CRIME 12.21*** 2.29 0.69
PREVENTION
CONFIDENCE 31.42*** 5.44** 1.78
INFORMATION GAIN 18.10*** 0.78 0.49
PRECAUTION 17.78*** 1.76 1.78
* p <0.05
** p < 0.01
*** p <0.001
MS: Marginally Significant
INTR.: Interaction
TABLE 4. ANOVA FOR PSA RECALL & NUMBER OF FAMILY
RECALL FAMILY INTR.
LOCKING DOORS 10.79** 3.02* 1.23
NOTIFYING POLICE 4.59* 0.15 0.11
HAVE NEIGHBOR 0.08 1.75 0.53
WATCH
NEIGHBOR JOINT 0.78 0.12 0.91
PREVENTION
FUTURE BEHAVIOR 3.25(MS) 3.93* 0.09
HELP FOR CRIME 11.11*** 2.50 0.35
PREVENTION
CONFIDENCE 31.48*** 0.33 0.48
INFORMATION GAIN 18.26*** 0.32 0.13
PRECAUTION 16.85*** 0.66 2.18
* p <0.05
** p <0.01
*** P <0.001
MS: Marginally Significant
INTR.: Interaction
TABLE 5. ANOVA FOR PSA RECALL & TRUST IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT
RECALL GOV'T. INTR.
LOCKING DOORS 12.35*** 2.69* 0.64
NOTIFYING POLICE 5.78* 7.89* 1.29
HAVE NEIGHBOR 0.02 3.10* 1.87
WATCH
NEIGHBOR JOINT 1.33 2.04 1.12
PREVENTION
FUTURE BEHAVIOR 5.31* 1.46 1.71
HELP FOR CRIME 10.14** 3.46* 1.22
PREVENTION
CONFIDENCE 29.99*** 4.54** 0.81
INFORMATION GAIN 17.25*** 4.62** 2.15
PRECAUTION 16.27** 4.06** 1.80
* p <0.05
** p <0.01
*** P <0.001
MS: Marginally Significant
INTR.: Interaction
TABLE 6. ANOVA FOR PSA RECALL & NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS
RECALL ORGZTN. INTR.
LOCKING DOORS 10.43** 1.07 2.17
NOTIFYING POLICE 4.95* 7.14** 1.63
HAVE NEIGHBOR 0.47 36.17*** 1.11
WATCH
NEIGHBOR JOINT 0.88 0.90 1.14
PREVENTION
FUTURE BEHAVIOR 4.27* 2.20 0.43
HELP FOR CRIME 11.08*** 19.10*** 0.00 PREVENTION
CONFIDENCE 31.47*** 4.80** 0.10
INFORMATION GAIN 16.63*** 20.92*** 0.96
PRECAUTION 16.84*** 8.91** 0.25
* p <0.05
** p <0.01
*** p <0.001
MS: Marginally Significant
INTR.: Interaction
V DISCUSSION
Hypothesis Tests The first
set of the hypotheses posited that recall of crime prevention campaign
advertising disseminated through the mass media plus factors of
neighborhood integration are associated with crime prevention behavior and
with cognitive effects (Tables 1, 2 and 3). PSA recall as an
independent
variable is not significantly associated with have neighbor watch or
collective behavior (neighborhood joint prevention) but is so associated
with locking doors, future behavioral intention, help for crime
prevention
and cognitive aspects.
Therefore, the null hypotheses regarding PSA recall and neighborhood
integration have been rejected by statistically significant associations
with locking doors, likelihood of future behavior, help for crime
prevention, confidence in self-protection, information gain on crime
prevention and precaution by PSA recall, and by the variables of
neighborhood integration for notifying police, having neighbor watch,
neighbor joint prevention, future behavior (not associated with length of
residence), help for crime prevention (not associated with length of
residence), information gain (associated only with neighbor familiarity
and
conversation), and confidence (associated only with conversation and
length of residence).
The second set of the hypotheses posited that the outcomes are associated
with family structure, trust in government and number of social
organizations belonged to as social control agents and the recall of the
campaign advertising. In terms of the second hypotheses (Tables 4, 5
and
6), differently from other agents of social control, family size did
not
show statistically significant positive associations with the
dependent
variables except for likelihood of future behavior (Table 4). In fact,
a
person who is from a small size of family was more likely to lock
doors
than a person who is from a large size of family. The results by trust
in
government appear to reveal that the more a respondent has trust in
local
government, the more likely he/she would do as follows: locking doors,
notifying police when away, have neighbor watch, help for crime
prevention,
confidence, information gain, and precaution. All of the
cognition-oriented dependent variables, notifying police, having
neighbor
watch, and help for prevention have statistically significant
associations
with the number of social organizations to which respondents belonged.
However, joint prevention with neighbor, future behavior and locking
doors
were not significantly associated with this variable. The null
hypothesis
in regard to social control agents is rejected except for family
structure.
PSA Recall
A simple behavioral act such as locking doors, and the likelihood of
future behavioral intention and cognitive effects-- confidence in
self-protection, information gain in regard to crime prevention, and level
of precaution-- appear to be functions of PSA recall. In contrast,
variance
in have neighbor watch and neighborhood joint prevention is not explained
by PSA recall. This suggests that collaborative acts for crime
prevention
need something more than mere message dissemination via mass media to
be
performed. This supports the rationale that message delivery through
media
plus intensive interpersonal instruction will be more likely to result
in
the behavioral changes intended by campaign designers than mere
dependence
on mass media (Maccoby and Solomon, 1981).
Information in the form of PSA may be relatively convincing in
facilitating simple behavioral acts and cognitive outcomes. The lack of
association of message recall with neighborhood-oriented behaviors
(have
neighbor watch or neighborhood joint prevention) indicates that
although
the PSA may be necessary in terms of information dissemination, it is
not
sufficient for the development of behavior involving others.
Numerous studies claim either a weak or lack of relationship between
recall of message arguments and persuasion (Ross, 1982; Gibson, 1983).
However, results of this study regarding possible effects of the recall
of
persuasive arguments on respondents' cognitive responses appear to
indicate
that recalling an argument is intrinsically linked to persuasion, at least
for cognitive effects. Recalled messages concerning relevant aspects of
current issues may influence an individual's motivation to carry out
acti
ons promoted by the messages or at least promote positive perception
of
message-related issues (Black, 1991; Bagozzi & Moore, 1994; Friestad &
Wright, 1994).
Social Control
The results suggest that social control factors may facilitate crime
prevention-oriented behaviors, intention to help reduce crime, the
likelihood of future implementation of preventive behaviors, confidence in
protecting, perceived efficacy of precaution, and gain in information
about
crime prevention.
How neighborhood ties facilitate preventive behaviors and the cognitive
aspects of campaign effects is of considerable theoretical and policy
interest. The extent to which people are integrated into their
communities
is strongly linked to participation in various activities intended to
promote community stability.
PSA recall and the level of conversation with people in the neighborhood
resulted in almost the same results as did factors of neighbor
familiarity
in terms of both behavioral and cognitive associations. However, while
neighbor familiarity was not statistically significant in terms of
"confidence in self-protection," conversation with people in neighborhood
was (F=5.19 p<0.01). "Talk" is more than mere speech. It embodies
every
human interaction that involves language or linguistic symbols.
Furthermore, although future behavioral intention and actual help in crime
prevention were predicted significantly by both neighbor familiarity and
conversation with neighbors, intention and help were not associated
with
length of residence. Confidence in self-protection was associated with
length of residence (F=5.44 p<0.01) and conversation with neighbors
(F=5.19
p<0.01) but not with the variable, neighbor familiarity. This pattern is
suggestive of a hierarchical influence in which length of residence is
a
necessary circumstance for neighbor familiarity and frequency of
conversations; familiarity is an imperfect representative of involvement
because knowledge of and integration with are hardly synonymous; and
conversation may be the best reflector in these data of integration
because
it implies regular, mutually positive association.
Regardless of family size, it is the family that acts as the primary agent
of social control. Therefore, the family has the capability to marshal
individual emotional and psychological drives for the sake of
preserving
common interests of family members more than any other social control
agent. Additionally, the family holds greater potential for shaping
behaviors and attitudes, compared to other groups.
The finding that trust in local government has statistically significant
associations with all dependent variables except for neighborhood
joint
prevention and future behavioral intention indicates that the public
generally perceives a significant association between crime control and
local government.
Findings for the variable of organizational membership are weaker but
largely similar to those for trust in government (Table 6). Belonging to
an
organization plays a significant role in the acquisition of information
and in the development of attitudes relevant to the individual's
effectiveness as a member of society via participation in social
institutions, a phenomenon that may be termed "organization properties."
This study suggests that exposure to the crime prevention PSA promoted
respondents' simple prevention-oriented behavior and facilitated
cognitive
effects such as confidence, information gain, and faith in precaution.
Although PSA spots used in broadcast media are at a disadvantage
compared
to product ads in terms of the time when aired, frequency of broadcast
and
length of exposure, and PSA in print media do not enjoy continuous
insertion, the messages' frequent repetition in the long run plus the
public's attentiveness to PSA issues may facilitate learning about the
issues and enhanced cognitive attitudes toward various social concerns.
Given the relative superiority of recall in the number and consistency of
positive, significant cognitive outcomes, and the superiority of the
social
control-related variables in regard to the more demanding behavioral
outcomes, we conclude that a mass media campaign concerning crime
prevention and implementation of community-based crime prevention efforts
are compensatory. Each type of campaign has unique advantages and
disadvantages. For instance, community networks cannot reach the large
audiences touched by mass media, but such networks capitalize upon
channels
of interpersonal communication which have been found to be more effective
than media in producing behavioral change. The results of this study
strongly suggest the goals of public information campaigns cannot be
achieved through mere dependence on the mass media. Even if there is a
causal link between cognitive effects and exposure to a campaign, there
remains the unceasing argument over any further connection between
cognition and behavior.
REFERENCES
Aitken, P.P. and Eadie, D.R. (1990). Reinforcing Effects of Cigarette
Advertising on Under-Age Smoking. British Journal of Addicition. 85:
399-412
Armstrong, Richard (1983, Jan.). How to turn humble public service ad into
a moneymaker.
Fund Raising Management. 13(11):20-25.
Atkin, C.K. (1981). Mass media information campaign effectiveness. In R.E.
Rice and W.J. Paisley (Eds.), Public communication campaigns. Newbury
Park,
CA: Sage.
Bagozzi, Richard P. & Moore, David J. (1994, Jan.). Public Service
Advertisements: Emotions and Empathy Guide Prosocial Behavior. Journal of
Marketing. 58 (1): 56-70
Berger, Seymour and Lambert, William (1969). Stimulus-response theory in
contemporary social psychology, In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.)
The
Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol.1 Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Black, Donald (1984). Toward a general theory of social control. Vol.1. New
York, NY: Academic Press, Inc.
Black, G.S. (1991). Changing Attitudes Toward Drug Use: The Effect of
Advertising. In L. Donohew, H.E. Sypher, & W.J. Bukoski (Eds.),
Persuasive
Communication and Drug Abuse Prevention (pp. 157-191).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Cell, C.P. (1977). Revolution at work. New York: Academic Press.
Cornelius, W. (1975). Politics and the migrant poor in Mexico city.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Douglas, Dorothy F., Westley, Bruce H. and Chaffee, S. H. (1970, Autumn).
An information campaign that changed community attitudes. Journalism
Quarterly. 47: 479-488.
Eadie, D.R., Hastings, G.B., and Haywood, A.J. (1991). Predisposing Effects
of Cigarette Advertising on Children's Intentions to Smoke When Older.
British Journal of Addiction. 86: 383-390.
Flay, B.R., & Cook, T.D. (1981). Evaluation of mass media prevention
campaigns. In R.E. Rice & W.J. Paisley (Eds.), Public communication
campaigns. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Friestad, Marian & Wright, Peter (1994, June). The Persuasion Knowledge
Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts. Journal of Consumer
Research. 21 (1): 1-31.
Gamba, Raymond J. and Oskamp, Stuart (1994, Sept.). Factors Influencing
Community Residents' Participation in Commingled Curbside Recycling
Programs. Environment and Behavior. 26(5): 587-612.
Gibbs, Jack P. (1985, Summer). Review symposium: Current issues in crime
and criminal justice. A very short step toward a general theory of
social
control.
American Bar Foundation Research Journal. 3: 607-618.
Gibson, L. D. (1983). "Not recall." Journal of Advertising Research. 23:
39-46.
Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning , cognitive response to
attitude change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock and T. M. Ostrom (Eds.),
Psychological foundations of attitudes. New York: Academic Press.
Hall, B. (1978). Mtu ni afya: Tanzania's health campaign. Washington, D.C.:
Academy for Educational Development.
Hanneman, Gerhard J., McEwen, William J., and Coyne, Sharon A. (1973, Fall)
Public service advertising on television. Journal of Broadcasting. 17(4):
387-404.
Hinkle, Dennis E., Wiersma, William and Jurs, Stephen G. (1979). Applied
statistics for the behavioral sciences. Boston, MA.: Houghton Miffin
Company.
Insko, C. A. (1964). Primary versus recency in persuasion as a function of
the timing of arguments and measures. Journal of Personality and
Social
Psychology. 82: 472-481.
Just, Marion, Crigler, Ann, and Wallach, Lori (1990 Summer). Thirty seconds
or thirty minutes: What viewers learn from spot advertisements and
candidate debates. Journal of Communication. 40(3): 120-133.
Kasarda, J. and Janowitz, M. (1974). Community attachment in mass society.
American Sociological Review. 39: 328-339.
Klapper, Joseph (1960). The effects of mass communication. New York: The
Free Press.
Korbin, S. (1959). The Chicago Area Project-a 25 year assessment. Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science. March: 19-29.
Lavrakas, P.J., and Lewis, D.A., (1980, July). The conceptualization and
measurement of citizens crime prevention behaviors. Journal of
Research in
Crime and Delinquency. 17: 254-272.
Lewis, Dan A., Grant, Jane A., and Rosenbaum, Dennis P. (1988). The social
construction of reform: crime prevention and community organizations.
New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Inc.
Lewis, D.A., Szoc, R., Salem, G. and Levin, R.(1979). Crime and community:
Understanding fear of crime in urban America. Volume 3. Evanstone, IL:
Center for Urban Affairs, Northwestern University.
Logman, John R. and Spitze, Glenna D. (1994, Sept.). Family Neighbors.
American Journal of Sociology. 100(2): 453-476.
Lorch, Elizabeth Pugzles et al., (1994, March). Program Context, Sensation
seeking, and Attention to Televised anti-Drug Public Service
Announcements.
Human Communication Research. 20 (3): 390-412.
Lynn, J.R. (1971). Audience perception of public service advertising. Ph.D.
Dissertation. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. P.2.
Maccoby, Nathan and Farquhar, J.W. (1975, Summer). Communication for
health: Unselling heart disease.
Journal of Communication. 25(3): 114-126.
Maccoby, N., Solomon, Douglas S. (1981). Heart disease prevention:
community studies. In Ronald E. Rice and William I. Paisley (Eds.) Public
Communication Campaigns. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Mazzoni, Robert F.(1985, Oct.). Virginia hospital's public service ads help
promote shock trauma center.
Modern Healthcare. 15(22):82-84.
McCourt, K. (1977). Working class women and grass roots politics.
Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press.
McGuire, William J. (1986). The myth of massive media impact: Savings and
salvagings. In Comstock, G.(Ed.), Public Communication and Behavior.
Vol.1.
New York, NY:Academic Press Inc.
McQuail, D. (1983). Mass communication theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
McQuail, D. (1969). Towards a sociology of mass communications. London:
Collier-MacMillan.
Paisley, W.J. (1981). Public communication campaigns: The American
experience. In R.E. Rice & W.J. Paisley (Eds.), Public communication
campaigns. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Papageorgis, D. (1963). Bartlett effect and the persistence of induced
opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 67: 61-67.
Pechman, Cornelia & Ratneshwar, S. (1994, Sept.). The Effects of
Antismoking and Cigarette Advertising on Young Adolescents' Perceptions of
Peers who smoke. Journal of Consumer Research. 21(2): 236-251.
Rogers, E.M., Solomon, D.S. & Adhikarya, R. (1979). Further directions for
USAID's communication policies in population. Stanford: Stanford
University
Institute for Communication Research.
Rogers, E.M. (1973). Communication strategies for family planning. New
York: Free Press.
Ross, H.L. (1982). Recall versus persuasion: An answer. Journal of
Advertising Research. 22: 13-16.
SAS User's Guide: Statistics (1985). Cary, NC.: SAS Institute Inc.,
Schmeling, David G., and Wotring, C. Edward. (1980, June)
Making anti-drug abuse advertising work. Journal of Advertising Research.
Vol.20(3): 33-37.
Schmeling, David G., and Wotring, C. Edward (1976, Winter). Agenda setting
effects of drug abuse public service Ads.
Journalism Quarterly. 53: 743-746.
Skogan, W.G., Lewis, D.A., Podolefsky, A., DuBow, F., and Gordon, M.T.,
(1982, May). The reactions to crime project. U.S. Department of
Justice.
National Institute of Justice.
Stern, Aimee (1986, June). Public service pays off for ad agencies. Dun's
Business Month. 127: 42-44.
Walker, David and Gonten, Michael F.V. (1989). Explaining related recall
outcomes: New answers from a better model.
Journal of Advertising Research. 29(3):11-21.
Watts, W. A., and McGuire, W. J. (1964). Persistence of induced opinion
change and retention of inducing message content. Journal of Abnormal
and
Social Psychology. 68: 233-241.
Weiss, Walter (1969). Effects of the mass media of communication. In G.
Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology.
Reading,
Mass: Addison-Wesley. Vol.5: 77-195.
Wilson, W., and Miller, H. (1968). Repetition, order of presentation, and
timing of arguments and measures as determinants of opinion change.
Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 9: 184-188.
Wyatt, John. (1986). A public service campaign.
Industrial Marketing Digest(U.K.). 11(3):77-86.
Young, S. (1972). Copy testing without magic numbers. Journal of
Advertising Research. 12(1): 3-12.
|
