Just Say No to Abstinence-Only Sex Education - Hasti Mehta

Teen sexual activity continues to remain a prevalent problem for the United States (U.S). Although the proportion of high school students who reported ever having sexual intercourse has remained steady since 2001, it is still nearly half population (47%) (1). Approximately 47% of adolescents aged 14-18 are sexually active, defined as having sex in the past three months (1). Early sexual activity is associated with teen pregnancy, increased risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and a multitude of other physical and mental problems. The U.S. still has the highest teen birth rate amongst comparable countries even though teen pregnancy rates are at the lowest levels since the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) began tracking them in the 1940s (2,3). Despite these unnerving statistics, the majority of states continue to implement abstinence-only education and the U.S. continues to predominantly fund abstinence-only education.

Abstinence-Only Education

    For a program to be considered an abstinence-only education program, it must accomplish specific goals as put forth by section 510 (b) of Title V of the Social Security Act (4). The goal of abstinence-only education is to create a social environment in which abstinence from sexual activity before marriage is the norm. Abstinence-only sex education also aims to teach students the importance of healthy, monogamous relationships (namely marriage), the negative psychological impacts of sexual activity prior to marriage, and the importance of being self-sufficient before engaging in sexual activity. Overall, the program is designed as a way for youths to learn how to make sound decisions regarding sexual activity and long-term relationships. This paper seeks to address what are believed to be the primary flaws of the dominant, abstinence-only education program approach to sexual health education; namely, 1) the lack of proper communication between educators and students; 2) the role of individual level health belief models to account for context; 3) the perceived lack of control caused by abstinence-only education programs. Additionally, this paper will offer suggestions for how to improve upon current public health practices, specifically addressing each of the three criticisms outlined above.

Critique 1: Lack of Relatable Educators

            A significant obstacle in the success of the abstinence-only education programs is the difficulty that students have in connecting with the individuals conveying the message. In 2005, 42 percent of teachers in the United States were aged 50 or older compared to 11 percent of teachers who were under the age of thirty (5). In 2011, 31 percent of teachers were aged 50 or older compared to 22 percent of teachers who were under the age of thirty (5). Although the average age of teachers has been on the decline, the problem on connecting with the educator still remains. A message being delivered by someone who is liked, similar, and familiar greatly increases the chance that the message will be taken more positively (6).  Research has shown that a liked source can be more persuasive at times when the message is difficult to process (7). This concept of “liking” is an easy way for individuals to get others to comply with their requests (6). When the person delivering the message is a friend or a known person, it induces feelings of warmth and security and there is a smaller likelihood that the individual will reject the request (8). Liking the person who delivers a message increases the chances that those receiving the message will also agree with the message (9).

            Similarity is another important factor that influences an individual’s decisions. The effects of similarity, however superficial, can create an instant bond between two people (10). When presenters are similar to the audience, their credibility is increased and they have an easier time connecting with the audience. Experiments conducted by Paul J. Silvia about the effect of similarity and likeability on compliance and reducing resistance found that when the presenter’s level of similarity was low or unknown, there was a boomerang effect (9). However, when the presenter was highly similar to the audience the audience agreed with the presenter regardless of the message being delivered (9). The strength of similarity and its effects on persuasion can easily be seen in an experiment conducted at a fundraiser on a college campus where the contributions more than doubled when the phrase “I’m a student” was added to the request (11).

            The last characteristic, familiarity, is also a large influence on whether a message will be well accepted. Normally, individuals are fond of things that are familiar to them (12). Prior experiments have found that merely being exposed to the image of an individual in the past can increase the likelihood that a person will remember the individual and be more likely to be influenced by their statements (8). Although the abstinence-only message being delivered in schools is targeted towards teens, it can be difficult for them to be persuaded because they feel no connection with the teachers delivering the message.

           

Critique 2: Individual Level Health Models Failure to Account for Context

            The second significant obstacle in the success of abstinence-only education programs is that they do not consider context. The health belief model was developed to explain behavior at the individual level (13). According to the health belief model, individual behavior is influenced by four factors: perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits of an action, and perceived barriers to taking that action (13). Based on this model, an individual weighs the perceived benefits and the perceived costs of an action and makes a rational decision based on the given facts. The health belief model fails to factor in social or environmental influences. It also assumes that all individuals are rational and nothing will influence their decision once they have made it. This model treats individuals as though they are living in a vacuum, not in the real world. While the health belief model would work for one time quick decisions where the behavior will follow the reasoned thought process, it is unlikely to work in situations where the action must be sustained (14). Since the health belief model does not consider context, it is unable to effectively influence behavior. Sexual activity among adolescents has frequently been characterized as unplanned and impulsive (15), but these models are still used to insufficiently influence change amongst them.

            Recent research has shown that there is a definite difference in how individuals, specifically students, make decisions when they are aroused and when they are not. Ariely and colleagues conducted an experiment where they asked male undergraduate students to answer questions in a “cold state” (where they were not aroused) and a “hot state” (where they were aroused) (16). The research found that while in the “cold state” the students were very rational, always took the moral high ground, and predicted that they would use a condom during sexual activity (16). However, when the students were in the “hot state”, they themselves did not know what they would actually do and completely underestimated their actions (16). All thoughts of prevention, rationality, and morality disappeared and they were 25 percent more likely in the aroused state than in the cold state to predict that they would not use condoms (16). The research by Ariely et al. showed that the students who could recite all the risks and negative consequences of sexual activity in the cold state were simply irrational and unpredictable in the face of passion. Teens know the risks that sexual activity can lead to while they are in school or at home, but when it comes to an intimate setting, their perceived benefits and risks can drastically change, thus leading to the very behavior the programs are trying to prevent.

Critique 3: Perceived Threat to Personal Freedom

            The third significant obstacle in the success of abstinence-only education programs is that it specifically urges students to abstain from sex entirely rather than teach them safe-sex alternatives (4). It is common knowledge that freedom of behavior is an important part of human life. In order to make decisions, people normally weigh their wants and needs with the dangers and benefits and decide on ways to get what they want (17). When a person’s behavioral freedom is reduced or threatened, the person will begin to get agitated and look for ways to rebel (17). This need to recover their lost freedom and ensure loss of further freedom is known as psychological reactance (17). This is the problem plaguing the abstinence-only education programs. Research conducted by Sharon Brehm has indicated that children as young as two understand that their freedom is being threatened and will try to restore that freedom (18). Brehm’s study concluded that this behavior demonstrates psychological reactance because the children could not accept that they were not in control and they had to assert their control even though it was not physically possible (18).

            Another example of psychological reactance and its effects can be seen in the experiment conducted on the effect on couples relationships based on negative parental interference (19). The study found that the more the parents had a negative impact, the more the couple stayed together (19). This experiment proves that the more individuals are told not to do something, the more they crave the opposite in order to assert their control. People are very intuitive and can figure out when individuals who approach them do not agree with their point of view. Kevin Hogan, author of “Covert Persuasion” states in his book that “People are quickly receptive to information and attitudes that agree with their point of view. People will formulate arguments on the spot against any point of view that disagrees with their currently held belief” (20). The concepts taught in abstinence-only education programs are stated in a way that causes students to feel as though their personal freedom of choice is being threatened.

Proposed Intervention

            As public health professionals continue to devise different interventions to combat high teen pregnancy birth rates, it is critical they realize the importance of implementing a program to which students can relate. The proposed intervention will consist of three major changes to the current model.

The first major change will be a shift from teachers to peer educators as the main individuals who will convey the message of abstinence-only education programs. Many studies have proven the importance of having someone who is relatable when intending to convey a message. In order to increase the chances of getting the message of abstinence-only being the best way to prevent teen pregnancy across, peer educators will be likeable, similar, and familiar (6,7). It will be important to find students who are familiar with the student body and are well known.

The second change will include implementing group level health models to introduce new behavior and encourage change. Current individual level health models do not address societal factors and the notion that individuals are inherently irrational when making decisions (13,16). In order to reach the student body more widely, it is important to implement alternative models that have the ability to affect change in large groups of people and account for factors such as irrationality and social norms (21). By implementing a group level health model it will be easier to change the social norms and get a greater group of students to practice abstinence.

The third change consists of changing the way the abstinence-only model is currently framed and turning it into a comprehensive sex education model to reach more students and create a more effective program. With the current model threatening the students’ control, it is important to develop a model that allows students to understand that they have choices and it is up to them how they choose to be safe when it comes to sexual activity. By creating a comprehensive sexual health education program, the goal is to frame abstinence in a way that it shows the students that they have more control when they abstain than when they have safe sex.

Solution 1: Shift from Teachers to Peer Educators

            To be able to create an effective campaign that will be able to spread the message of abstinence-only education programs it is imperative to have likeable, similar, and familiar individuals presenting the information to their peers. By placing peers who are well liked and familiar in the role of educators, the students will be more likely to listen and accept the message the students are putting forth. This concept of liking and its positive effects in terms of influencing people was documented in Cialdini’s book, in reference to the Tupperware party. He believes the Tupperware party is the “quintessential American compliance setting” because it uses the idea of liking to sell products (8). Simply because the request to buy the Tupperware does not come from a stranger, the attendees are more likely to actually buy the products (8). This proves that if the student educating his or her peers is well liked, they will have the power to influence the thoughts of their peers.

            Another characteristic that must be present in the peer educators is that they must be similar to the group they are trying to teach. Similarities do not have to be glaringly obvious, but something as trivial as having the same style of clothing as their peers can place a positive spin on the message being delivered (8). This theory was tested out at an antiwar campaign in the 1970s where one female volunteer was dressed as a “hippie” and the other was dressed “straight” and it was found that each of the women attracted more signatures for their petitions from similarly dressed individuals (22). This example proves that dressing the same way and being able to blend in with the crowd that you are trying to persuade can play a huge role in how the message you deliver is perceived. Peer educators would be at much higher advantage than teachers when informing students about abstinence-only education because they are very similar to their peers.

            The final characteristic that is beneficial in efficiently persuading the students to understand the importance of abstinence is to ensure the peer educator’s familiarity. From the first two requirements we understand that the peer educator should be well-liked and similar to the target audience. Guaranteeing that the peer educators are also familiar to a majority of the study body is the last step. It would be beneficial to choose an individual who is involved with student government or an accomplished athlete that is well-known and liked by the students. An experiment conducted during an Ohio election in which a man with little chance of winning changed his last name to “Brown”, a family name of much of Ohio’s political tradition, ended up victorious (8). From the previous examples it is evident that choosing a well-liked, similar, and familiar student to educate his or her peers, the acceptance of abstinence-only message amongst teens can go up significantly.  

Solution 2: Institute Group Level Alternative Models

            In order to combat the flaws the individual model, which include not accounting for social norms, context, and irrational behavior, it is recommended that an alternative model be used. The alternative model will account for the group dynamic, unplanned behavior, visceral drives, and irrational behavior (21). The idea of the “tipping point” as outlined by Malcolm Gladwell would be effective in creating the intended effects. The implementation of the group-level changes in a “hot state” rather than a “cold state” would be another change that would bring about the intended effects of abstinence-only education.

             By creating situations in which students are placed in a “hot state” of mind as mentioned before, the message of abstinence may translate better when the students are in a situation where they must make a sound decision (16). In order to make sure that students are in a “hot state” of mind which can consist of fear, jealousy, anger, or arousal, if would be important to invoke those feelings when the message of abstinence-only education is being presented (16). In order to invoke these feelings, several strategies can be used, including giving the students reading exercises, having them watch videos, or having conversations that invoke the feelings associated to the “hot state”. By giving the message to the student when they are in the “hot state”, it is more likely that they will remember the message when they are engaging in sexual activity.

Gladwell has written about “tipping point”, which is the moment of critical mass, the inflection point, the boiling point at which widespread change occurs (22) and this tipping point is applicable to the diffusion of innovations theory. His book uses the example of Hush Puppies, the well-known American shoe, which were dying out in early 1994 (22). The process by which they became a popular accessory again emphasizes the approach to be taken in order to make abstinence-only more socially accepted. In early 1994, Hush Puppies were dying out and the manufacturers were planning on discontinuing the shoes, but they found that Hush Puppies were beginning to become a fashion statement again in the clubs and bars in downtown Manhattan (22). Soon fashion designers were asking the company to use the Hush Puppies in fashion shoots and other high profile individuals were asking for a pair as well (22). Soon after there was a huge increase in sales and the Hush Puppies once again became a hot trend (22). This example demonstrates that there was a time when only a few people wore the Hush Puppies, precisely because no one else was wearing them, but after the shoe was picked up by two fashion designers, there came a certain point where the shoes became a fashion statement unintentionally (22). By applying the concept of the tipping point to abstinence-only education, a few early adopters can fuel the trend, which will eventually be adopted by the rest of their peers. In this way, abstinence will become the norm rather than something students are resistant to.

             

Solution 3: Emphasizes Freedom of Choice  

Abstinence-only programs are very difficult to frame in a way that does not intrude on the students’ personal freedom of choice, thus the proposed intervention should include resources for students who choose to engage in sexual activity to do so safely.

Applying advertising theory to the abstinence program is another way to enact change in teens and frame the idea in a way that is appealing to the intended audience. The three main components of advertising theory are the promise, the support, and the core value (23). The idea of advertising theory is to speak to the deepest aspirations that people possess and deliver a message that addresses those aspirations. The promise will be adequately supported by images, sounds, and stories that invoke certain core values that the intended audience holds dear to them (23). Advertising theory emphasizes the desired behavioral change rather than the individual’s current action (23). Advertising theory touches on the idea that people are irrational and can be easily persuaded to change their opinion if the right techniques are employed. In order to induce change by using advertising theory, it is important to create a promise that the teen population can relate to and may actually want. Once the promise is created, it would be important to support the promise with related music and images that speak to teens. It is imperative to ensure that the advertisement speaks to the core values that teens hold dear, one of the main ones being freedom. By emphasizing the promise of freedom of choice or freedom from burden at such a young age, advertising theory can be effectively used to convey the message of abstinence-only to a larger audience.

The next piece would be to market and brand the idea in a way that would be appealing to teens. Appropriate use of marketing theory includes researching what people want and applying those findings to create and package the message in a way that fulfills the needs and wants of the target population (24). From the Florida “truth” campaign it was found that students wanted “the facts” and then they wanted to be left alone to make their own decisions (25). The “truth” campaign found that if they wanted to be successful they would have to give alternate options instead of just “don’t” (25). By defining freedom as one of the most prevalent core values in teens, the abstinence-only education programs need to be replaced by comprehensive safe-sex education programs that give teens the freedom of choice and the chance to make an educated decision if they choose to engage in sexual activity. In order to reach teens effectively, they need to receive honest, effective sex education which helps them understand the options available to them should they choose to engage in sexual activity, thus the intervention should be amended to include a comprehensive sex education component.

Conclusion

In summary, although there are good intentions behind the abstinence-only education programs, research has shown that they are not effective at producing favorable results when it comes to delaying early sexual activity and decreasing teen pregnancy rates. The most obvious flaws include the lack of familiarity and similarity between the educators and teens learning about abstinence, the lack of a group level intervention that accounts for irrational behavior, and the threat to teens’ freedom of choice at such a rebellious age. Through this intervention, the flaws of the abstinence-only program can be seen and the proposed solutions of adding a group-level, peer educated abstinence program with a comprehensive sex education component can gain support.

References

1. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (2012, July). Teen Sexual Behavior and Contraceptive Use: Data from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, 2011. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/resources/pdf/FastFacts_YRBS2011.pdf
2. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (2012, October). Summary of 2011 Preliminary Birth Data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://(2) www.thenationalcampaign.org/resources/pdf/FastFacts_NCHSBirthData2011.pdf
3. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (2012, March). Teen Birth Rates: How Does the United States Compare? The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/resources/pdf/FastFacts_InternationalComparisons.pdf
4. Advocates for Youth (n.d.). 8-Point Definition of Abstinence-Only Education. Advocates for Youth. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/topics-issues/abstinenceonly/132?task=view
5. Emily Feistritzer, C., Griffin, S., & Linnajarvi, A. (2011). Profile of Teachers in the U.S. 2011. National Center for Education Information. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.ncei.com/Profile_Teachers_US_2011.pdf
6. MajorLeagueBusiness (2011, September 20). Robert Cialdini - The 6 Principles of Influence [Video File]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4ZcStMsss8
7. Knowles, E. S., & Linn, J. A. (2004). 9: Narrative Persuasion and Overcoming Resistance. In Resistance and Persuasion (p. 179). Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Cialdini, R. B. (2007). Liking: The Friendly Thief. In Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York, NY: Collins.
9. Silvia, P. J. (2005). Deflecting reactance: The role of similarity in increasing compliance and reducing resistance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27, 277-284. Retrieved from http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/P_Silvia_Deflecting_2005.pdf.
10. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2002). The Science and Practice of Persuasion. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 40-50. Retrieved from http://www.influenceatwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Cornell-HotelRestAdminQrtly.pdf.
11. Aune, K. R., & Basil, M. D. (1994). A Relational Obligations Approach to the Foot-in-the-mouth Effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(6), 554-556. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00598.x/abstract.
12. Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987 . Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 265-289. Retrieved from http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/36895350/exposure-and-affect-overview-and-meta-analysis-of-research-1968-1987.
13. Edberg, M. C. (2007). Individual health behavior theories. In Essentials of health behavior: Social and behavioral theory in public health (1st ed., pp. 35-49). Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett.
14. Siegel, Michael. “Health Belief Model.” SB721. Boston University, Boston. 11 Oct. 2012. Lecture.
15. Moore, K. A., Miller, B. C., Glei, D., & Morrison, D. R. (1995, June). Adolescent Sex, Contraception, and Childbearing: A Review of Recent Data. Child Trends. Retrieved December 9, 2012, from http://www.childtrends.org/Files/Child_Trends-1995_01_01_ES_AdolSexContracept.pdf
16. Ariely, D. (2008). The Influence of Arousal. In Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York, N.Y: HarperCollins Publishers.
17. Burke, W. W., Lake, D. G., & Paine, J. W. (2009). A Theory of Psychological Reactance. In Organization change: A comprehensive reader. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18. Brehm, S. S., & Weinraub, M. (1977). Physical barriers and psychological reactance: 2-yr-olds' responses to threats to freedom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(11), 830-836. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.11.830.
19. Driscoll, R., Davis, K. E., & Lipetz, M. E. (1972). Parental interference and romantic love: The Romeo and Juliet effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(1), 1-10. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1973-04399-001.
20. Hogan, K., & Speakman, J. (2006). Covert Persuasion Begins in the Mind. In Covert persuasion: Psychological tactics and tricks to win the game (p. 6). Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons.
21. Siegel, Michael. “5 Premises of the Alternative Model.” SB721. Boston University, Boston.  25 Oct. 2012. Lecture.
22. Gladwell, M. (2000). Introduction. In The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference (pp. 3-14). Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
23. Siegel, Michael. “Advertising Theory.” SB721. Boston University, Boston. 1 Nov. 2012. Lecture.
24. Siegel, Michael. “Marketing Paradigm.” SB721. Boston University, Boston. 29 Nov. 2012. Lecture.
25. Hicks, J. J. (2001). The strategy behind Florida's “truth” campaign. Tobacco Control, 10(1), 3-5. Retrieved from http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/10/1/3.full.

The Government’s Anti-Bullying Campaign Is Failing and The Children Are Paying For It - Edriss Yassine

           Bullying has become a huge part of American society and is harming the health of our children. The National Institutes of Health defines bullying as the act of repeatedly trying to harm someone who is perceived to be weaker either by direct attacks, such as hitting or taunting, or indirectly, such as spreading rumors (1).  Every 7 minutes a child is bullied on a school playground, every months 3 million students are absent from school because they feel unsafe and an estimated 18 million children will be bullied in the United States this year alone (2).  There are four main types of bullying: verbal bullying, name-calling or teasing, relational bullying, spreading rumors or social isolation, physical bullying, hitting or being pushed, and cyber bullying though social media and the internet (3). In order to try to stop these harmful events, the United States government has poured millions of dollars into its anti-bullying campaign called stopbullying.gov but has not accomplished the goal it has set out to do. On its website, the campaign gives an overview of the bullying crisis, how to look for it, and most importantly, how to try to prevent it. However, the advice and techniques suggested by the campaign are flawed and are not working because bullying is still a huge issue today.  The stopbullying.gov campaign emphasizes three main points to stop bullying. First, they suggest that parents should act as role models to their children and set a good example for their children to follow. They hope that the children will mimic their parents and bullying will stop. Second, they suggest that parents and teachers set a bully report system and simply tell them to stop it when they see it. Lastly, they suggest that parents, teachers and the community try to change the bully’s attitude by using peer groups and interventions. The three main points that the campaign emphasizes in order to stop bullying are failing because they employ the individual level behavior change models called the Social Learning Theory, the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Transtheoretical Model.  These theories are flawed and tend not to work because they try to predict behavior on an individual level and assume that people are rational, however we know that is not the case and that we behave in fundamentally irrational ways as presented in the book Predictably Irrational (4).  This paper will explain why the stopbullying.gov campaign is not working and propose new suggestions on how to improve the campaign using group level behavior change models such as the Social Expectations Theory, the Psychological Reactance Theory and the Diffusion of Innovations Theory and the power of social media, television and celebrities.

Parents Are Not As Good Of Role Models As They Think

            The first suggestion to stop bullying by the stopbullying.gov campaign states that if parents get more involved in their children’s lives and act as role models by teaching them how to be nice to others and show compassion, then their children will mimic them and do the same, helping eliminate bullying. This rational is based on the individual behavior change model known as The Social Learning Theory. The SLT was developed in 1977 by Albert Bandura and is based on the concept of modeling and states that individuals will model what they see others doing (5).  The campaign is under the impression that this individual model will work because parents are good role models to their children and they will teach them important core values when it comes to showing compassion to others. However, psychologist Richard Weissbourd tells us that parents who are obsessed with their children’s happiness usually ignore important values like goodness, empathy, appreciation and caring (6).  Therefore, if parents are ignoring to teach their children the critical core values needed to show compassion to others and help stop bullying, their children cannot mimic them and bullying will continue. Furthermore, a study conducted by researchers at the University of California San Diego in the Journal of Moral Education show that parents constantly lie to their children while teaching them that lying is unacceptable (7). This further supports the claim that parents are not good role models to their children because they are hypocritical and most of the time the children know about it. If the SLT is followed and the children learn and mimic their parents, then the children will not learn good core values that will help stop bullying, instead they will learn their parents’ bad habits. Due to the campaign’s flawed assumptions that parents are good role models so children will mimic their good behaviors and will show compassion toward others and the fact that the SLT is weak because it is an individual level behavior model, the first suggestion by the campaign will not work to change the bully’s behavior. 

Reporting Systems and Telling Kids to Just Stop It Will Not Change Their Behavior

            The second suggestion to stop bullying by the stopbullying.gov campaign states that if parents and teachers create a bully reporting system and tell the bullies to just stop it when they see bullying happening will create an atmosphere where bullying will stop due to the adult telling them to. This rationale is flawed and will not work because it is based on the individual level behavior model known as The Theory of Reasoned Action. The TRA was developed in the late 1970’s by Ajzen and Fishbein and states that behavior can be predicted because it is a balance between outcome expectancies and social norms. Once the balance is tipped one way or the other and it leads to intention, behavior will always happen (8,9).  The campaign does not take into consideration certain things that heavily influence the TRA like the child’s need to fit in, peer pressure, social norms and the fact that children tend to act as groups and not individuals, which influence the outcome expectancies and the social norms in the TRA scale.  Psychotherapist Dr. Russell Hyken shows that as early as kindergarten, children understand the concept of social norms and begin to form cliques and also because of expectations and peer pressure, they begin to exclude certain people from their groups (10).  Furthermore, once the children belong to a clique, they are protected from the torment of others and they will do anything to stay in the clique, even if it means not reporting one of their friends for fear of retaliation or the fear of being bullied themselves. Andrew Matthews, a successful author and public speaker on attitude, success, happiness and prosperity, states that for every ten children who are being bullied, only one tells their parents (11). With statistics like these, the bully reporting system proposed will not work because not enough kids will be reporting bullying in order to make a difference.  Also, telling a bully to just stop will not elicit an effect especially in front of their friends because they will act out against it to stay popular. Because the TRA is an individual model and children tend to stick together as groups, the use of this model will not work to stop bullying because one must try to change the group as a whole and not just the individual.

Bullies Are Not Like Drug Addicts

            The third suggestion to stop bullying proposed by the stopbullying.gov campaign states that the bully’s mind can be changed with the use of peer groups and interventions. This rationale is flawed and will not work because it is based on the individual level behavior model known as the Transtheoretical Model. The Transtheoretical Model was developed in the early 1990’s by Prochaska and DiClemente and states that a health behavior is adopted through stages that people go through one step at a time. Those stages are pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action and maintenance (12). Using the TTM, A person starts from the beginning and goes through each stage, one at a time, until they reach the end. Because this model is predominantly used to treat drug addiction, I believe that this approach singles out the bullies and treats them like drug addicts.  The effects of isolating someone out may be drastic and potentially harmful. According to the Mayo Clinic, isolation may worsen the situation and make the person feel attacked, more isolated and resistant to treatment (13).  Furthermore, another downside to the Transtheoretical Model is that if people slip and fall off, they may not just fall one step, they may fall all the way back down to the beginning. This is dangerous because sources have showed that relapse is common with TTM and should be expected (14).  When a bully relapses, they may be even more aggressive than the first time in order to take out their aggressions and the victims will get the blunt of the force. Due to these reasons, this type of intervention will not work to change the behavior of bullies.

Intervention With The Use of Social Media, Television and Celebrities

            The current intervention put forth by the United States government in their stopbullying.gov campaign is failing and in order to save children from the future torment of bullying and in order to make their lives better, a new intervention must be put in place. My proposed intervention to replace the current one is the launch of a new campaign that focuses on bullying through the use of group level alternative models, social media and television using celebrities. According to the Nielsen Co., the largest television rating and research company in the world, an average person spends 20% of their day watching television (15).  If you do the math, in a 24-hour day, a person watches television for 4.8 hours of it and that is a lot. Furthermore, according to an article in the Bloomberg Report, Americans spend an average of 6.5 hours a day online, mainly on social networks (16). Thirdly, the influential power of celebrities cannot be underestimated. Usually, when a celebrity backs something, the population follows. For example, in a recent article, Forbes talked about the power of persuasion that celebrity comic Conan O’Brien has over the public. Conan announced his national tour via Twitter with a single tweet and within 2 hours, the 32 city, national tour was completely sold out (17).  Therefore, by using these enormously popular media outlets and celebrities, we can move away from changing the individual directly to changing the individual though changing the masses. The three new interventions will incorporate the group level alternate models of behavior of the Social Expectations Theory, the Psychological Reactance Theory, and the Diffusion of Innovations Theory by having children mimic the popular children at school instead of their parents, using psychological reactance to get kids to report bullies by reducing peer pressure and changing social norms, and finally, using the influential power of the masses to change the bully’s mind instead of singling them out. The first campaign that we will launch will be called “New Friend For The Day”, followed by the use of psychological reactance and lastly, a campaign called “No More Pain”.

Popular Kids Stop Bullying By Example, Not Parents

            The government’s first way to stop bullying, by having parents set a good example and kids mimicking them is not working. As an alternative, my first proposed intervention that will work in the prevention of bullying uses a group level alternative model called the Social Expectations Theory and the use of social media by the more popular kids in school. The SET was developed by Perkins and Berkowitz in the late 1980’s and states that we can create massive change by changing social norms (18).  Changing the behavior of the masses by changing the social norms is much more powerful than having the children try to mimic their parents who are not good role models in the first place. In this intervention, we will launch a “New Friend For The Day” campaign on Facebook and target it toward the popular kids at school like the athletes. The goal of this campaign will be to have the popular athletes befriend a bullied kid in order to change the stigma that these bullied kids are different and by hanging out with them for a day, that these kids will become friends with them for a longer period of time. On this Facebook page the popular kids can share their stories of what they learned after befriending one of these kids. We can have people like the captains of the football and basketball team start posting to this site and then eventually when others read the stories of these kids, they will be inspired to do the same. This will eventually change the masses and therefore change the mindset of the bullies by changing the social norm. We can see that popular kids befriending bullied kids stops bullying by looking at the example at Queen Creek High School that occurred a couple of months ago. At this high school there was a young girl with a brain disorder who was tormented at school everyday and always went home crying. The quarterback of the Queen Creek football team befriended her after seeing what these bullies were doing and she has not been bullied ever since (19).  The whole football team eats lunch with her and keeps an eye on her while she is at school. She was quoted in the news by saying “They’re not mean to me anymore, because all my boys love me” (19). The high school football team changed the minds of the masses and the bullies by changing the social norm and making it acceptable to have friends with disabilities. Since it worked in situations like Queen Creek High School, it will work at an even larger scale using a highly frequented site like Facebook and the “New Friend For The Day” campaign.

Report Bullies By Telling Kids Not To Do Anything

            The government’s second way to stop bullying by creating a bully report system and telling kids to just stop it is not working. As an alternative intervention, I propose that we use the Psychological Reactance Theory teamed up with television and celebrities to tell kids to not do anything when they see bullying happening.  The PRT was developed by J.W Brehm in 1966 and states that when peoples’ sense of control is taken away from them, they are programmed to get that control back (20). For example, when people are told what to do, they perceive it as their freedom being taken away, so in order to regain their freedom, they do the opposite of what they are told.  We can see the use of psychological reactance in the commercial for the 2008 elections in order to try to get people to vote. In this commercial, famous celebrities continuously tell people that they should not vote for various reasons (21). However, this commercial used psychological reactance to help do the complete opposite and helped influence the public to vote and voter turnout was pretty high for the elections. We can use the same concept in our campaign by using famous musicians and actors that children look up to. These commercials can be aired during the shows that’s kids watch the most in order to make sure that they see them and we will have the actors and musicians tell the kids not to do anything and not to report it when they see bullying happening no matter how badly the bullied kids are being hurt. This, in turn, will invoke psychological reactance because they are being told what not to do and they will do the opposite and start reporting bullying and will help teachers and parents resolve the bullying issue.  Because their freedom is being taken away, their minds will not focus on their cliques and fitting in, instead they will be trying to get their freedom back no matter what the consequences. We can see the results of trying to get ones freedom back at any cost in an article by Doob and Zabrack (22). In their experiment, the people whom were sent a questionnaire along with $20 and were forcibly told to finish the questionnaire did just the exact opposite and returned a blank questionnaire and the $20. Those who were kindly asked to fill it out without any money offered, did so without question. Therefore, if these people returned free money that they could have kept just because of psychological reactance, then the children will not think about the consequences of reporting a bully as long as they get their freedom back.  By using psychological reactance instead of the originally proposed intervention using the TRA, We will be able to implement an intervention that will really work and take the kids’ mind’s off of what will happen if they report bullying.

Change Bullies By Changing The Masses

            The government’s third way of dealing with the bully situation by using peer groups and interventions is not working because it is singling out the bullies and treating them like drug addicts. As an alternative intervention, I propose that we use the Diffusion of Innovations theory along with more social media and television ads using celebrities in order to change the stigma about bullying. The Diffusion of Innovations theory was proposed by Rogers in 1962 and states that you don’t have to worry about changing an individual, instead if you can reach a critical mass, the masses will tip and change the group as a whole (23). The theory uses the key concepts of knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation and confirmation. Although it was originally used for situations like vaccinations, it can also be applied to bullying. The campaign will be called “No More Pain” and will air in prime time on television and use social media to spread the word about the pain that bullying is causing and to help change the stigma about bullying. According to the Anti-Bullying blog, there are a lot of famous and influential people who were bullied as children (24). The campaign will use these famous actors and musicians that the kids look up to and aspire to be and they can spread the message about working together to change the stigma about bullying. We will also have these actors who were bullied during childhood share their stories in order to give the bullied kids hope that they can be successful despite bullying. According to the theory, as the celebrities’ message sinks in and the public’s opinion slowly starts to change, it will reach a tipping point and then dramatically increase and change the mindset of the group as a whole and not have to worry about the individual. We can see an example of this in the mental health campaign called “Bring Change 2 Mind” (25).  This campaign is using famous celebrities in advertisements to help change the stigma of mental illness. Their use of commercials has helped to start a dramatic change in the public opinion about mental illness and it is working effectively. If this campaign is using this technique to help bring change and it is effective, then the same can be said about using it for our bullying campaign. This intervention has a tremendous advantage over the original one in that it has no risk of bullies falling off the plan and reverting back to their old ways because it eliminates the step-by-step process of the Transtheoretical Model. Furthermore, it does not single out anyone and will not make them feel defensive in anyway and help prevent retaliation.

Conclusion

            The government’s stopbullying.gov campaign is not effective and is failing. It proposes that bullying be stopped by children mimicking bad role models, face the potential consequences of reporting bullying individually and trying to change bully’s minds by singling them out and treating them like drug addicts. It is because of their use of individual behavior models such as the Social Learning Theory, the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Transtheoretical Model that their resolutions are not effective. Overall these models are weak and will not help bring change because they assume that behavior is rational and reasoned and that they can change the individual. Instead, a new program should be implemented that uses group level alternative models that will work, for example, the Social Expectations Theory, the Psychological Reactance Theory and the Diffusion of Innovations Theory. These models are strong and more effective than the individual models because they take into consideration that people are not rational and behavior is better changed using groups instead of individuals. The alternative propositions like the “New Friend For The Day” campaign, telling kids not to do anything and the “No More Pain” campaign will use the power of social media, television and celebrities to influence and change the stigma of bullying as a mass instead of individually. The influential power of famous celebrities cannot be taken lightly. Due to people spending so much time a day sitting in front of their televisions or on the internet, they are more familiar with celebrities and what is going on with them than any other thing going on in the world currently. Therefore, harnessing that power and using it for the greater good is the way to go. I believe that if the original propositions are laid to rest and the new proposed ideas are implemented, then bullying will significantly decrease and the lives of millions of children will be much better than they are now and the world will be a better place because of it.

References

1.      "Bullying: MedlinePlus." U.S National Library of Medicine. U.S. National Library of Medicine, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/bullying.html

2.      "National Association of Elementary School Principals: Serving All Elementary and Middle-level Principals." Bullying Prevention Resources. http://www.naesp.org/bullying-prevention-resources


3.      Wayne, J.,  Ionnatti, R.J. & Nansel, T.R. (2009) School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health. 45:4, 368-75.

4.      Ariely, Dan. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2008. Print.


5.      McLeod, S. A. (2011). Albert Bandura | Social Learning Theory. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html

6.      Weissbourd, Rick. The Parents We Mean to Be: How Well-intentioned Adults Undermine Children's Moral and Emotional Development. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2009. Print.


7.      Heyman G. et al. Parenting by lying. Journal of Moral Education. Vol 38(3), 353-369

8.      Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and
        predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
         
9.      Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

10.  Hyken, Russell. "Bullying Knows No Age |." EPS. N.p., 2012. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://ed-psy.com/2012/10/26/bullying-knows-no-age/


11.  Matthews, Andrew. "Cyber-Bullying: Why Bullied Kids Dont Tell Their Parents." Andrew Matthews. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2012, http://www.andrewmatthews.com/bullying-articles.php

12.  Prochaska, J.O., DiClemente, C.C., & Norcross, J.C. (1992). In Search of How People Change. Applications to Addictive Behaviors. American Psychologist, 47, 1102-1113.


13.  Mayo Clinic Staff. "Intervention: Help a Loved One Overcome Addiction." Mayo Clinic. Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 23 Aug. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2012.

14.  http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/intervention/MH00127


15.  "Sports Psychology: The Importance of Long-term Behaviour When Creating a Nutrition Plan." Peak Performance Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/sports-psychology-the-importance-of-long-term-behaviour-when-creating-a-nutrition-plan-41837.

16.  "Television Measurement." Nielson Company. Nielson Company, n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/measurement/television-measurement.html


17.  "Facebook U.S. User Tally, Time Spent Online Rises." Bloomberg. N.p., 11 June 2012. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-11/facebook-u-s-user-tally-time-spent-rose-in-june-comscore-says.html

18.  Cohen, Reuven. "Marketing Influence: The Power of Persuasion." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 22 May 2012. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://www.forbes.com/sites/reuvencohen/2012/05/22/marketing-influence-the-power-of-persuasion/


19.  H. Wesley Perkins and Alan Berkowitz. "Perceiving the community norms of alcohol use among students: Some research implications for campus alcohol education programming." International Journal of the Addictions, 1986:21, 961-976.

20.  Dicker, Ron. "Queen Creek High School Football Players Protect Chy Johnson, Bullied Student With Special Needs." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 29 Oct. 2012. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/29/queen-creek-football-players_n_2039212.html


21.  Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.

22.  "WARNING: DON'T VOTE." YouTube. YouTube, 02 Oct. 2008. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8y1e-z1JA0


23.  Doob, Anthony N.; Zabrack, Merle. The effect of freedom-threatening instructions and monetary inducement on compliance. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science vol 3. Oct 1971. Pg 408-412

24.  Rogers, Everett Mitchell. Diffusion of Innovations. N.p.: Free P. of Glencoe; Macmillan (N.Y.), 1962. Print


25.  "Celebrities Who Were Bullied As Kids." The Anti-Bullying Blog. N.p., 06 Jan. 2010. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://antibullyingblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/celebrities-who-were-bullied-as-kids.html

26.   "Take the Bring Change 2 Mind Pledge." Bring Change 2 Mind. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. http://bringchange2mind.org/

D.A.R.E. To Take A New Direction – Alan Breaud

Drug abuse in the United States continues to be an issue that is being inappropriately addressed.  According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the most recent statistics show that close to 22.6 million Americans abused a psychotherapeutic medication or used an illicit drug in 2010 (1).  It is also pointed out, unfortunately, that this drug usage typically begins when people are in their teenage years (under 18 years old) and hits its peak in their late teen years or early twenties (1).  Given that the most prevalent use of these drugs is highest among this particular age group, it would seem logical to develop effective drug resistance programs that target pre-teens.

            One method of addressing this issue has become popular over the past few decades in the form of the D.A.R.E. program.  This program seeks to educate kids on the harmful effects of illegal drugs, tobacco, and abuse of prescription drugs and alcohol.  D.A.R.E., or Drug Abuse Resistance Education, began in 1983 as a result of a collaborative effort between the Los Angeles Unified School District and the Los Angeles Police Department (2).  It is a program that is highly endorsed by law enforcement nationwide, in addition to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of Defense and the Department of State (3)(4).  However, the program comes with a heavy cost.  Ten years after its inception in 1983, it was reported that the cost of the program, as a whole, across the country was around $750 million by 1993 (2).  

D.A.R.E. is a school-based education system with a curriculum taught almost entirely by police officers   Their mission, according to the official website, “is to provide children with the information and skills they need to live drug-and-violence free lives” (3).  They delve a little more into this by explaining how important it is to “equip kids with the tools that will enable them to avoid negative influence” and instead focus on their individual talents and gifts (3). 

            While this seems to be excellent intervention geared toward keeping kids off of drugs, research in the field of health communication tends to point to a different conclusion.  Many researchers have found that the D.A.R.E. program is hardly effective at all, despite the overwhelming support it receives from law enforcement nationwide (2).  Results looking at the short-term effects of the program show that the D.A.R.E program had no effect on illegal drug use, alcohol abuse, or even selling and dealing drugs (2).  Long-term studies echo these same results.  A longitudinal study of the program’s effectiveness reported limited success of the program and determined that the curriculum’s effects decay significantly over time (6) .  In the American Journal of Public Health, Drs. Steven West and Keri O’Neal of the Virginia Commonwealth University state very blatantly that “Project D.A.R.E. is ineffective” (7).    

            Because drug abuse is climbing among teenagers and young adults alike, the D.A.R.E. program needs to be completely revamped in order to provide an effective and lasting message that reaches its estimated 300,000 classrooms (3), possibly even by removing the classroom element altogether.  In its current format, the program is almost like an intellectual exercise.  The D.A.R.E. officers are instructed to provide a strict curriculum that includes in-class exercises and homework (4).

The purpose of this paper is to look at several problems in the design of the D.A.R.E. program that are undermining its effectiveness.  First, the framing used by D.A.R.E. will be analyzed, followed by the issues of contributing to misperceptions of social norms and creating psychological reactance that can potentially be causing prevention efforts to backfire.  Then, the paper will look at a new intervention effort and how it will address these problems in order to have a much more effective campaign.

Critique #1 - Improper Framing of the Issue

            One key issue that plagues the D.A.R.E. program is its improper framing of the issues the campaign is trying to address.  Framing refers to the way in which a message is “packaged” (5).  It is more than just a way of arguing a point.  It employs images, symbols, catch phrases, and a strong core position that complements the key core value the communicator is wishing to get across (5).  The key goal of framing, from a health perspective, is to provide a message that encourages one type of behavior over another (8).  In a health context, messages are typically framed to present gains or losses (8).  However, gain frames have been seen to be much more effective in preventative behavior (8). 

            The problem with the D.A.R.E. campaign is that it appeals to the core value of health and make use of loss frames.  They simply relate the risk factors associated with different products and trust that kids and adolescents are going to make the right choice, given that information.  This same idea, for example, is used to try and get people to stop drinking soda.  Everyone knows from his or her doctor or the news that sodas are bad for you because they contain too much sugar and provide empty calories.  However, soda remains widely available because people still like to drink it.  Vending machines are ubiquitous, and soda can be purchased at practically any restaurant and convenience store.  Appealing to the core value of health is just not enough to prevent people from drinking soda.     

The messages coming from D.A.R.E. are always ones of how dangerous various illicit substances are for one’s body.  For example, on the drug information section of their website, all the drug information comes with a “dangers and effects” section that relate the negative consequences of use (3).  While this information is important, it is simply presenting the negatives associated with use, while giving no information on the benefits of non-use.  As Jeffery Hicks points out, youth already know the dangers associated with drugs, alcohol, tobacco, etc. (9).  They want to be left to their own faculties to make a decision for themselves. 

Positive frames, or information presented in a positive light, have a more substantial impact on preventive health behavior (10) compared to negative frames.  For example, a message of self-esteem that was packaged in a positive way has been shown to increase intentions to exercise more often.  When information is given in a positive manner, this gives individuals a more risk averse option and gain-oriented choice (11).  Therefore, while the D.A.R.E. campaign is interested in preventative behavior, they are using the incorrect tone of frames to achieve that goal.    

Critique #2 - Kids Will Try What Their Friends Are Trying

            One of the key problems at the heart of the D.A.R.E. program is that it is conveying a message that illegal drug usage is highly prevalent throughout the school system.  The instruction in the curriculum informs students what to say when offered drugs from their peers and how to avoid negative peer pressure.  Consequently, this turns the issue into a scenario of not if children will be offered illegal drugs, but when it will happen.  This type of language leads to the idea that drugs are much more common than they may actually be.  In fact, several papers have looked at how teenagers and young adults are significantly overestimating the amount of substance abuse that their peers are engaging in.  One study out of Addictive Behaviors journal looked at how college students often overestimate their peers’ drinking habits by as much as 76% (12), a trend that was also seen in middle school and high school students (13).  These inaccurate perceptions can also be extended to tobacco and illicit drug use.  Researchers found that on 100 college campuses, perceived drug and tobacco use was highly exaggerated compared to actual self-reported use (14).  

Unfortunately, since D.A.R.E. is continuously relating a message that drugs are a highly prevalent problem within the school system and social setting, their curriculum may be inadvertently creating a problem that causes more drug use rather than preventing it.  Research out of the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan found that peer usage of alcohol and drugs is positively associated with individual usage of these substances (12).  Studies looking into social norms have shown repeatedly that even perceived prevalence of substance use is an excellent predictor of an individual’s likelihood of experimenting or using that same substance (16) (17).  Likewise, researchers out of the University of Washington, Seattle found that perceptions of friends’ use and descriptive norms regarding marijuana were “most strongly associated with marijuana use” (18).  Therefore, direct exposure is not needed to have a substantial influence.    

            So, beyond seeing friends or peers using marijuana or alcohol, even the perception that a large number of members in a school or social network are using illicit substances can lead to individual usage. Unfortunately, as previously seen, overestimation of drug and substance use is quite substantial.  Therefore, if kids have a skewed idea of the actual amount of drug use their peers are engaging in, then statistically they are going to be more likely to try these substances.  A look into the D.A.R.E. resources and curriculum shows that this skewed idea is exactly what is being relayed to kids and their parents.  According to the D.A.R.E. program’s own website, among other messages, they say “fifty percent of young people have used an illegal drug by the time they leave high school” and there are “over 50 factors that might put someone at risk for drug use” (19).  In terms of alcohol, they claim that 90% of kids graduating from high school have experimented with alcohol (19).  If these kids that are exposed to the D.A.R.E. program are seeing these statistics, they are receiving the message that the prevalence of drug and alcohol use is incredibly high, causing these substances to be perceived as a social norm.  And, as stated earlier, social norms are one of the best predictors of drug and alcohol consumption.   

Critique #3 – There is Possible Reaction to Threats to Freedom

            The D.A.R.E. program curriculum teaches kids skills to avoid the peer pressure of using drugs, alcohol, and even the dangers of involvement in gangs.  According to Jack Brehm, continuously telling an individual not to engage in a particular behavior only encourages that individual to attach a greater importance to that given behavior (20).  When a free behavior, such as the ability to use drugs or smoke tobacco, is taken away or threatened, especially in a situation where an outsider eliminates the choice instead of the individual, then that behavior instead becomes more desirable (20).  The elimination of a perceived freedom creates a state of “psychological reactance,” a psychological state where an individual seeks to re-establish the eliminated freedom (20).  A police officer standing in front of a classroom full of children or young adults who is reiterating the idea over and over again not to engage in marijuana or alcohol use may actually be giving that behavior a greater value in his or her audiences’ minds.  Taking away the freedom to make that choice to engage in the behavior of using a drug or drinking alcohol, for example, can contribute to an individual wanting to, as Dr. Brehms’ theory contests, re-establish the ability to make that choice.    

Research in the Journal for Social Psychology indicates that this psychological reactance tends to be greater in younger subjects compared to older ones (21).  The authors of this theory even noticed this phenomenon in children as young as two years old (22).  The rationale is that the younger population tends to view more situations and behaviors as freedom-threatening (21).  Additionally, these young people also tend to question more, including adult authority (23).  This is problematic for the D.A.R.E. campaign, given that it is taught in a classroom atmosphere by a police officer in uniform to young children.  These officers are trained to teach children how to completely avoid drugs and alcohol.  Additionally, as part of the program, D.A.R.E. highly encourages parents to get involved by setting “no-use” rules regarding alcohol and tobacco and set strict rules regarding their children’s social activities (19).  Unfortunately, research regarding reactance theory would indicate that emphasizing a message of not engaging in a particular behavior to a young audience could actually be counter-productive to the D.A.R.E. mission. 

New Intervention - The D.A.R.E. 75 program: A New Start Tackling One Issue          

In order to address the issues surrounding the effectiveness of the D.A.R.E. campaign, I would propose a new strategy that involves focusing not so much on the individual harms and direct consequences of drugs, alcohol, etc., but rather a design that includes individual as well as group-level factors that appeal to the emotional side of the individual and tries to create a social change rather than an individual one.  This type of approach should be modeled after the Florida “Truth” campaign, which has seen success in getting youth in that state to quit smoking (9).  “Truth” was an anti-tobacco marketing campaign that resulted from a tobacco industry settlement and began in 1998 (9).  The Truth campaign was successfully able to re-frame tobacco use as an issue of the tobacco industry putting limits on kids’ freedom and independence (9).  According to Jeffery Hicks, youth already knew the harmful effects of tobacco.  What youth wanted is to be left to make their own decision after being given the facts (9). 

These implications can be translated to D.A.R.E. in a new, re-vamped media campaign called the D.A.R.E. 75 campaign that re-frames the use of illicit substances as putting restrictions on freedom, as opposed to providing more freedom.  The “75” is a response to a National Survey on Drug Use and Health report that found 25% of kids aged 12 to 20 years old reported drinking alcohol in 2011 (24).  The 75 focuses on the 75% of kids not using alcohol, which can hopefully begin to create a social norm that alcohol prevalence is not what many may think it is.

            This new approach would tailor the D.A.R.E. campaign to look at the use of alcohol only, as opposed to taking up a cause against a variety of harmful substances or behaviors such as drugs, gang violence, tobacco or any other issues.  This would allow D.A.R.E. to focus all their energy on effectively reducing the number of youth who currently use or are thinking about using alcohol in the future.  Part of the Truth campaign success is their ability to focus all their energy simply on reducing tobacco use prevalence in youth (9).  Their interests were not spread out across an array of different causes.       

            Comparable to the Truth campaign, this new approach would be a mass advertising campaign that depicts the alcoholic beverage industry as one that thrives and makes enormous profits off of youth continuing to buy their product.  It would make use of TV slots, billboards, and social media.  This message is intended to relate the idea that alcohol beverage companies are in the business of increasing profit margins.  They thrive on the ability to make a profit off of their customers.  For example, a billboard could be used that shows money going from a young teenager’s pocket to the pockets of well-dressed executives sitting around a conference room with a big “Budweiser” or “Miller-Lite” plaque above their head, indicating they work at that respective company.   

            This approach can address all three issues previously laid out.  It changes the whole issue of alcohol use as not one about how alcohol has detrimental effects on the growing brain, or showing alcohol-related fatalities, but about how the alcohol-producing companies are strictly in the business of providing an alluring product that will undoubtedly bring in a large profit margin.  Thus, the main frame coming across to the youth audience has completely changed to one of empowerment of their individual freedom, while hopefully creating some psychological reactance against the alcohol companies instead of the communicator of the health message.

Defense of Intervention #1 - A Change in Frame

The new campaign would shift the core value of health that D.A.R.E. traditionally uses to the core value of freedom.  As previously seen, the frame is the way information is packaged to convey an underlining meaning of what the message is all about (5).  In the new approach, the core value is taking a dramatic shift from one of health to one of individual freedom (from the alcoholic beverage industry).  As Dr. Siegel points out, the tobacco industry has been really effective in creating a message to the public that has a frame that appeals to individual freedom, an intuitively American core value (5).  This new approach takes that core value over to the D.A.R.E. 75 campaign so they can craft their own message around it, as seen in the Truth campaign.  This new campaign can make use of images depicting rich executives and how they may see youth as just another customer, not a friend or someone they have any invested interest in beyond making money.  In addition, a series of catch phrases, such as “pocket to pocket” or “my good time is not worth giving them my dime,” can be used to support the frame of individual autonomy from the alcohol companies. 

            The key, then, is to provide an emotional appeal to youth so they will refuse to submit to peer pressure and so they will turn away from the harmful effects of alcohol at such a young age.  Kids know they are not supposed to use alcohol.  They have all the information about it, but again, they want to be left to their own faculties as to whether or not to make decisions based on that information (9). Here, the goal of the frame is to tap into youth’s desire to have control, a gain-frame that potentially can appeal more to them and be more effective (8).  Kids are constantly being told what to and what not to do and this is providing that ability to make their own choice, even if the message is making an attempt to sway that decision.            

Defense of Intervention #2 - It’s not as Popular As You Might Think

            The name of the new campaign would be entitled the D.A.R.E. 75 campaign.  Again, this is a play on the statistic that in 2011 it is estimated that 25% of adolescents were using alcohol (24).  As shown previously, social norms can play a significant role in predicting whether or not an individual will choose to adopt a behavior.  In fact, one study looking at college students found social norms to be the biggest predictor of alcohol use (16).  For some reason, young people have a very skewed idea of the actual drinking habits of their friends and peers (17).  Dr. H. Wesley Perkins of Hobart and William Smith Colleges points out how misperceptions can have a strong influence on an individual to drink heavily (12).  He goes on to explain how showing actual drinking rates and numbers are likely to lessen misperceptions help those abstaining from drinking or engaging in healthy drinking habits feel better about their decision (12). 

            Therefore, the key idea in the name is to turn around the misperception of actual drinking rates.  If social norms are a significant predictor of use, then this should be the first key issue to address in the new program.  Kids at a young age are always eager to fit in somewhere.  If the prevailing belief is that all the kids in school are experimenting with alcohol, then research has shown that this belief is very likely to encourage an individual who is contemplating using alcohol.  With this in mind, D.A.R.E. 75 seeks to relate the fact to youth that 75% of adolescents are not using alcohol.  This will hopefully, as Dr. Perkins points out, help those in that tricky youth decision whether to drink or not, feel more at ease in choosing the route of not to drink.

Defense of Intervention #3 - Providing Freedom to Make Their Own Decisions

Driving home the message of the dangers of an illicit substance and telling children not to do something counter-intuitively can create an allure of that substance through psychological reactance (9).  For example, telling a child not to watch a certain range of channels on a television can create an enormous amount of curiosity that can drive that child to see exactly what is on those channels that the adults do not want him or her to see.  This approach of explicitly telling kids exactly what they can and cannot do puts restriction on their freedom.  And as previously found, Hammock and Brehm show that reactance leads to an attempt to re-establish that eliminated freedom (20).  Therefore, a campaign that seeks to show the use of illicit substances putting limits on freedom, as opposed to providing more freedom, should greatly reduce the amount of reactance from the message. 

    According to Jefferey Hicks, what’s important in a message is the tone of what you are trying to get across.  Youth do not want to be preached to with a series of “do’s” and “do nots” (9).  As one could see, a police officer in uniform standing in front of a classroom or auditorium full of young people could easily give off that paternalistic and preaching tone.  Hicks found that youth were using tobacco as a tool of rebellion because they were continuously being told not to do it (9).  The Truth campaign was successfully able to use that tool of rebellion against the big tobacco industry.  The D.A.R.E. campaign needs to show a message that relates drugs, alcohol, or tobacco to be substances that limit their freedom in life.   

            In addition to creating a better tone for the overall messages related by D.A.R.E., Paul Silvia points out that similarity is a good tool to “deflect” reactance (25).  He found through a series of experiments that similarity can have multiple effects that increase effectiveness of the communication of a message, including reducing the negative force towards reactance and increasing positive force by increasing the likeability of the communicator (25).

            This all relates back to D.A.R.E.’s use of a police officer to provide information to young people.  Police officers are people who represent law and authority.  They have very little in common with a classroom full of kids.  Therefore, kids see this situation as an authority figure telling them what not to do.  The communicator needs to be youth providing information to youth.  These communicators also need to be people that youth can relate to and who are going through the same set of social situations and life decisions.  This can immediately provide a more similar communicator that can be more relatable to youth.  Using young people to provide the message of standing up against the alcohol companies has the potential to significantly deflect any reactance to the message.          

Conclusion - A New Step Forward

            The D.A.R.E. 75 campaign can be a significant improvement upon the existing D.A.R.E. model.  While the current program does an excellent job at providing information on a variety of different substances and behaviors, that is simply all it may be doing.  Because of programs such as D.A.R.E, young people are very aware of the dangers of drugs or alcohol, but have not given them the right push to act accordingly.  The D.A.R.E. 75 campaign addresses these issues that have been potential barriers to effectively communicating with the younger generation.  It is a definite improvement and step in the right direction for the D.A.R.E. program.    

REFERENCES

1.  National Institute on Drug Abuse. DrugFacts: Nationwide Trends. http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/nationwide-trends

2.  Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, R. B. (1997). How D.A.R.E. Works: An Examination of Program Effects on Mediating Variables. Health Education & Behavior. 2007. 24(2), 165–176.

3.  D.A.R.E. America. The D.A.R.E. Mission. http://www.dare.com/home/THEDAREMISSION.asp

4.  U.S. Department of Justice (Office of Justice Programs). Implementing Project DARE: Drug Abuse Resistance Education. 2007

5.  Menashe, C. L., & Siegel, M. The power of a frame: an analysis of newspaper coverage of tobacco issues--United States, 1985-1996. Journal of health communication 1998(4), 307–325.

6.  Clayton, R. R., Cattarello, A. M., & Johnstone, B. M. The Effectiveness of Drug Abuse Resistance Education (Project DARE): 5-Year Follow-Up Results. Preventive Medicine 1996. 25(3), 307–318.

7.  West, S. L. O. Project D.A.R.E. Outcome Effectiveness Revisited. American Journal of Public Health 2004. 94(6), 1027–1029.

8.  Myers, R. E. Promoting healthy behaviors: How do we get the message across? International Journal of Nursing Studies 2010. 47(4), 500–512.

9.  Hicks, Jeffrey. The strategy behind Florida's "truth" campaign.  Tobacco Control 2001. 10: 3-5.   

10.  Moorman, M., & van den Putte, B. The influence of message framing, intention to quit smoking, and nicotine dependence on the persuasiveness of smoking cessation messages. Addictive Behaviors 2008. 33(10), 1267–1275.

11. Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. The Influence of Message Framing on Intentions to Perform Health Behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1993. 29(5), 408–433.

12.  Perkins, H. Wesley. Misperceptions of peer drinking norms in Canada: Another look at the “reign of error” and its consequences among college students. Addictive Behaviors 2007. 32(11), 2645–2656.

13. Thombs, D. L., Wolcott, B. J., & Farkash, L. G. E. Social context, perceived norms and drinking behavior in young people. Journal of Substance Abuse 1997. 9(0), 257–267.

14. Perkins, H. WesleyMeilman. Misperceptions of the Norms for the Frequency of Alcohol and Other Drug Use on College Campuses. Journal of American College Health 1999. 47(6), 253.

15.  Stoddard, S. A., Bauermeister, J. A., Gordon-Messer, D., Johns, M., & Zimmerman, M. A. Permissive norms and young adults’ alcohol and marijuana use: the role of online communities. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs 2012. 73(6), 968–975.

16.  Neighbors, C., Lee, C. M., Lewis, M. A., Fossos, N., & Larimer, M. E.  Are Social Norms the Best Predictor of Outcomes Among Heavy-Drinking College Students? Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs. 2007. 68(4), 556.

17.  Geisner, I. M., Larimer, M. E., Lee, C. M., Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. Social motives and the interaction between descriptive and injunctive norms in college student drinking. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 2007. 68(5), 714+.

18.  Neighbors, C., Geisner, I. M., & Lee, C. M. Perceived marijuana norms and social expectancies among entering college student marijuana users. Psychology of addictive behaviors: journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors 2008. 22(3), 433–438.

19.  D.A.R.E. America. Resources. http://www.dare.com/parents/Parents_Resources/Defaultbe87.asp?N=Parents_Resources&M=26&S=0

20.  Hammock, T., & Brehm, J. W. The attractiveness of choice alternatives when freedom to choose is eliminated by a social agent1. Journal of Personality 1966. 34(4), 546–554.

21.  Sung-Mook HongGiannakopoulos, E. Psychological Reactance: Effects of Age and Gender. Journal of Social Psychology 1994. 134(2), 223–228.

22.  Brehm, S. S., & Weinraub, M. Physical barriers and psychological reactance: 2-yr-olds’ responses to threats to freedom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1977. 35(11), 830–836.

23.  Miller, C. H., Burgoon, M., Grandpre, J. R., & Alvaro, E. M. (2006). Identifying Principal Risk Factors for the Initiation of Adolescent Smoking Behaviors: The Significance of Psychological Reactance. Health Communication 2006. 19(3), 241–252

24.  CDC - Fact Sheets-Underage Drinking - Alcohol. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control.  http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/underage-drinking.htm

25.  Silvia, Paul. Deflecting Reactance: The Role of Similarity in Increasing

Compliance and Reducing Reactance 2005. 27(3). 277-284.