1

Published by the Chair and Department of Business Administration, Public & Nonprofit Management, University of Mannheim Prof. Dr. Bernd Helmig

L 5, 4 D-68161 Mannheim

Phone: +49 621 / 1 81-1727 Fax: +49 621 / 1 81-1728 Mail: sekretariat@oebwl.bwl.uni-mannheim.de http://helmig.bwl.uni-mannheim.de

Discussion Paper No. 2/2010

On the Effectiveness of Social Marketing – What Do We Really Know?

Prof. Dr. Bernd Helmig, University of Mannheim

Julia Thaler, University of Mannheim

On the Effectiveness of Social Marketing – What Do We Really Know?

Bernd Helmig und Julia Thaler ABSTRACT:

Social marketing continues playing an important role as social problems within society are

omnipresent even though they may vary with regards to issues. Therefore, scientific findings

on the effectiveness of social marketing are particularly interesting. A rigorously elaborated

structured state of the art covering two aspects – not only the currently observed restricted

focus on health campaigns but the whole spectrum of topics and the diversity of applied

methodologies – is needed. Accordingly, this paper aims to identify and categorize relevant

findings on the effectiveness of social marketing in a tentative holistic model with a main

focus on framing determinants. A research agenda – which includes research propositions on

framing determinants in social marketing effectiveness – to enhance scientific progress in the

field, is deduced from this state of the art.

KEYWORDS: Social marketing campaign, effectiveness, framing, state of the art

SHORT TITLE: On the Effectiveness of Social Marketing

2

INTRODUCTION

While sociologists already focused on social marketing in the 1950s (Wiebe, 1951), the

marketing perspective of social issues has firstly been taken into consideration since the late

1960s due to the debate on broadening the concept of marketing (Kotler & Levy, 1969).

Currently, social marketing reflects “the use of marketing principles and techniques to

influence a target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or abandon a behavior for the

benefit of individuals, groups or society as a whole” (Kotler, Roberto & Lee, 2002, p. 5). As

social marketing deals with diverse campaigns, e.g. on social change in diverse fields, such as

health prevention or environment protection, a multitude of scholarly literature can be found

in health research, psychology, sociology and marketing. This multidisciplinary approach

leads to a fragmented research with diverse findings (Lefebvre, 2001). In recent times “social

marketing increases in visibility and acceptability, [consequently] funders and policy-makers

are increasingly asking for hard evidence of its effectiveness. Providing this evidence is

challenging, not least because it is difficult to prove that many kinds of complex social

interventions work” (Gordon, McDermott & Hastings, 2008, p. 334). Furthermore, social

marketing effectiveness is indeed the most important aspect of social marketing in order to

derive managerial implications for improving the attempts to solve social issues. Although

first reviews on existing findings on effectiveness have recently been elaborated, these

scientific contributions are restricted. Researchers did not strictly focus on applied

methodologies nor did they include findings from both practical campaigns and,

simultaneously, tested conceptual models. Methodologically elaborated reviews are content-

wise restricted to health campaigns (Gordon, McDermott, Stead & Angus, 2006; Stead,

Gordon, Angus & McDermott, 2007), e.g. anti-violence, pro-tolerance or pro-environment

campaigns are neglected. Additionally, an interdisciplinary approach has been applied to

elaborate a complete overview on the fragmented field of social marketing effectiveness.

3

Therefore, this paper focuses on a fundamental analysis of findings in social marketing

research. The research objectives are fourfold:

1) To provide a short overview of different research streams in the social marketing field

in order to thoroughly classify research on effectiveness.

2) To systematically review studies on social marketing effectiveness with regards to

descriptive dimensions.

3) To synthesize findings on independent, mediating, and outcome variables as well as

on control variables and moderators in a holistic model of social marketing

effectiveness.

4) To derive research propositions and implications for further research on the

effectiveness of social marketing by generating an instructive research agenda that

enhances scientific progress.

METHODOLOGY

A structured review of papers dealing with social marketing was completed1 identifying

203 articles of social marketing in a broader sense. In a next step the authors conducted an

unstructured search focusing on papers and books cited in the articles identified before2. The

conduction of this research step led to the identification of another 123 articles.3 In order to

avoid uncontrolled validity threats (Salipante, Notz, & Bigelow, 1982), the authors focused on

inclusivity according to Denyer and Tranfield (2009) which is shown by the wide range of

finally included journals and articles. This approach follows Boaz and Ashby (2003) who

focused on the selection of articles according to their fit to the review goal.

1 The authors searched for “(social) marketing”, “prevention” or “campaign” in the full text of articles published in scholarly journals of the marketing, nonprofit, health, psychology and sociology research relying on the VHB Jourqual2 ranking (http://pbwi2www.uni-paderborn.de/WWW/VHB/VHB-Online.nsf/id/DE_7EZGCN_Alphabeti-sche_uebersicht) and journals recommended by professors of the respective fields. 2 Including the practical oriented journal Social Marketing Quarterly which was screened for articles focussing on “effectiveness”, “evaluation” and “impact”. 3 A complete list of screened journals as well as identified articles can be ordered from the authors.

4

To systemize the total of 337 identified articles relevant to the field of social marketing, the

authors categorized the papers into three research streams that are illustrated in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1: Research streams in social marketing

Conceptual work has been conducted by focusing on what social marketing is or is not,

e.g. compared to social movements (Douglas, 2008) or education (Rothschild, 1999), on

definitions, development (e.g., Andreasen, 2003), and the social marketing process (e.g.,

Wymer, 2004). 187 articles followed this conceptual approach.

Researchers also analyzed the application of marketing tools to the social marketing

context and applied a descriptive approach using (single) case studies (e.g., Madill & Abele,

2007; Meyrick, 2007; Newton-Ward, 2007; Lavack et al., 2008). The descriptive approach

was found in 83 articles.

The third research field identified contains papers dealing with social marketing

effectiveness. With regards to this research stream, this paper adopts a new approach by

taking into consideration the evaluation of the effectiveness of certain campaigns (e.g.,

Darrow & Biersteker, 2008; El-Ansary & Kramer Jr., 1973; Lord, 1994) as well as social

marketing hypotheses and theoretical model testing, e.g. in experiments (e.g., Smith & Stutts,

2003). The analyzed social marketing campaigns were controlled for their fulfilment of

Andreasen’s inclusion criteria for social marketing campaigns (Andreasen, 1994; Andreasen,

2002; McDermott, Stead & Hastings, 2005). Andreasen’s benchmark criteria were judged as

fulfilled, when a campaign aimed to achieve behavioral change but in fact evaluated attitude

5

or intention change. Moreover, to identify all possible aspects of effectiveness in the field of

social marketing, analysis of pure social marketing advertisements were also included

although already Fox and Roberto classified social advertising as one single part of social

marketing (Fox & Kotler, 1980). Thus, 155 articles dealing with aspects relevant for the

effectiveness of social marketing could be identified.

Between the three very broad categories of social marketing papers, some articles were

identified as part of more than one category. For example, Bloom and Novelli (1981) focus in

a conceptual way on challenges and problems in social marketing. These challenges include

aspects on the effectiveness of social marketing, e.g. difficulties in defining effectiveness

measures and in measuring the campaign’s contribution to the achievement of certain

objectives (Bloom & Novelli, 1981). Fox & Kotler (1980)’s article is the only one that is part

of the conceptual, descriptive and effectiveness research stream at the same time. Firstly, the

authors discuss the development and critics of social marketing in a conceptual way.

Secondly, the application of social marketing in diverse fields such as family planning and

heart disease prevention is described. Thirdly, the authors focus on the evaluation of the

described social marketing campaigns even though not in detail.

The following systematic review focuses exclusively on social marketing effectiveness.

89.7% (n=139) of the 155 articles identified in the research stream of social marketing

effectiveness contain detailed information on variables and therefore constitute the basis of

the following analysis.

DESCRIPTIVE RESULTS

First of all, general results on academic papers dealing with social marketing

effectiveness are described. The authors put a focus on chosen social marketing topics, target

groups, applied methodology, outcome measurement methods and dependent measured

variables, as well as underlying theoretical models.

6

Social Marketing Topics

The analyzed articles cover the topics of smoking behaviour (28%), socially transmitted

diseases/aids prevention/condom use (18%), health behaviour (9.3%), drug use (8.7%),

alcohol use (7.3%), health prevention (7.3%), environment protection (6.7%), physical

activity (4.6%), healthy eating (2.7%), anti-violence (2%), not-specified (2%), drink and drive

(1.3%), safety belt use (0.7%), blood donation (0.7%), and attitude towards work (0.7%).

Target Groups

The variety of topics is reflected in a wide range of target groups. 47.5% of the studies

target adolescents or students. 14.2% target adults and 9.9% are aimed at children, school

children and/or their parents. 12.8% focus on (economically) disadvantaged, specific ethnic

groups or minorities. Households, smokers, and gender focused studies constitute together

and with equal contributions 12.8%.

Applied Methodologies

Another important aspect is to find out what methodologies are applied in the social

marketing context. Thus, academic findings are systemized according to the type of study

conducted in the research stream of social marketing effectiveness.

76.6% of the studies are experiments (22.7% field experiments including e.g. mass media

campaigns , 33.3% laboratory experiments and 20.6% quasi-experiments including e.g.

school-based interventions in the sense of campaigns designed as school- or community-

based interventions). 41.7% of the experiments included a control group. 10.6% of the papers

are based on reviews or meta-analysis. 5.7% of the studies have been conducted as focus

group discussions and 7.1% as case studies. 26.6% of the studies compared baseline and post-

campaign data. The relatively low number of case studies is due to the fact that very few case

studies include a detailed evaluation of the presented campaign and have therefore been

classified as part of the descriptive research stream on social marketing.

7

Outcome Measurement Methods and Dependent Variables

Besides the acquired knowledge on applied methodologies in included social marketing

studies it is of great interest to get information on applied measurement methods from which

outcome evaluation is derived.

Used outcome measurements are self-reporting via quantitative surveys (via telephone

or face-to-face) (24%) as well as questionnaires (49.3%). Additional outcome measurement

methods – that are strikingly less used – are observations (8%) and objective measurement

methods, i.e. biochemical (e.g., carbon monoxide readings) and physiological measures (e.g.,

Body Mass Index) (17.3%). Furthermore, secondary data (2%) has been used to measure the

studies’ outcomes as well as qualitative interviews (4%).

In order to assess whether social marketing is effective, it is crucial to figure out the

outcome measurement variables (e.g., Homburg, Kuester & Krohmer, 2009). Research

findings portray a multitude of dependent variables that are measured in papers dealing with

the effectiveness of social marketing in a broader sense, i.e. the analyzed papers. Due to this

multitude of variables a distinction between final outcome variables and mediating variables

is indispensable in order to figure out the level of measured effectiveness. Accordingly, the

authors identified the first three mentioned variables as outcome variables, whereas the other

variables serve as mediators.

Behavior change accounts for the highest percentage of measured final outcome

variables (43.8%), followed by intention change (33.7%) and attitude change (23.1%). These

three outcome variables are followed by the mediating variables knowledge (19,5%) and

recall (12.4%). Awareness was measured in 8.9% of the dependent variables. Beliefs and

personal risk perception account for 7.7% of the measured variables. Emotions and

perception of social risk constitute each 4.1% of dependent variables. 3% of dependent

variables are perceived credibility, campaign effectiveness, and interpersonal communication.

The achieved attention change serves as dependent variables in 7.1% of measured variables.

8

1.8% of dependent measurement variables are social norms and perceived severity. Perceived

susceptibility, physiological and psychosocial outcome, behavioral control as well as

comprehension account each for 1.2% of the dependent variables. Several other mediators are

analyzed in one single study, such as subjective norms and perceived benefits.

In conclusion, 72 of 139 (51.8%) analyzed papers on social marketing effectiveness

measure the final outcome goal that is behavior change. 41 (29.5%) of the remaining studies

base their final outcome evaluation on intention change. 26 (18.7%) studies stop their

evaluation on a lower level.

Underlying Theoretical Models

In order systemize the variety of independent and mediating variables as well as

moderators and control variables, the authors analyzed the underlying theoretical models on

which studies have been based or which have been tested for their appropriateness in the

specific context of one social marketing topic.

63.3% of the studies do not explicitly rely on existing theoretical models. Accordingly, in

36.7% of the studies the authors identified a variety of underlying models. Mostly mentioned

is the Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen & Madden, 1986) with 22.1% followed by the Social

or Observation Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) and Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura,

1991) with 16.2% as well as the Health Belief Model (Janz, Champion & Strecher, 2002) with

11.8%. Furthermore, the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991) and the Protection

Motivation Theory (Rogers, 1975) play a relatively great role with 10.3%. The

Transtheoretical Model of Change (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983) is used in 8.8% of the

studies mentioning their underlying model. The Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty,

Cacioppo & Schumann, 1983) as well as the Ordered Protection Motivation Theory (Tanner,

Hunt & Eppright, 1991) are used in 4.4% and followed by diverse underlying models each

used in one single study: the Precaution Adoption Process (Weinstein & Sandman, 2002),

9

Lazarus's General Theory of Emotion and Adaptation (Bagozzi & Moore, 1994), the

Extended Parallel Process Model (Witte, 1992), the Expectancy-Value Model (Bagozzi,

1981), the Triandis Model (Bagozzi, 1981), the Prospect Theory (Jones, Sinclair & Courneya,

2003), the Motivation, Opportunity, Ability Framework (Rothschild, 1999) and the Attention,

Interest, Desire, Action Model (Arulmani & Abdulla, 2007).

Due to the fragmented use of theories, the authors analyzed the most frequently

underlying models with regards to a marketing, psychological or health research perspective.

In marketing the Transtheoretical Model of Change, Social Learning and Protection

Motivation Theory play an equal role and account for 18.2% of the underlying models each.

In psychological research the Theory of Reasoned Action is the most used in this context

(31.8%), followed by Social Learning Theory (18.2%) and Theory of Planned Behavior

(13.6%).

From a health perspective the focus on theories is quite similar to the psychological

focus: Theory of Reasoned Action plays the most important role (54.5%) followed by the

Theory of Planned Behavior (27.3%).

TOWARDS A TENTATIVE HOLISTIC MODEL

Against the background of these descriptive results, the authors analyzed independent,

mediating and moderating variables as well as control variables, which contribute or are

supposed to contribute to the effectiveness of social marketing campaigns. Thus, a tentative

holistic model of social marketing effectiveness can be derived.

10

FIGURE 2: Tentative holistic model of social marketing effectiveness

General Campaign Characteristics

In the following section the authors discuss relevant general characteristics of social

marketing campaigns.

Concerning a social marketing campaign’s scope, findings show that in a comparison of

a state wide campaign to a community-based campaign the former revealed better results in

behavior change (Friend & Levy, 2002). Concerning targeting, the following findings are of

importance: Culturally sensitive messages and messages focused on a small target group are

important to increase awareness and intention change (Talbert, 2008). Nevertheless, existing

findings also support that through targeting the general population compared to only youths

increases the impact on behavior change (Friend & Levy, 2002). Furthermore, gender targeted

social marketing materials did not increase recall and behavior change to a greater degree than

gender neutral materials (McCulloch, Albarracin & Durantini, 2008). Additionally, smokers

or non-smokers react differently to anti-smoking messages, i.e. smokers belief in messages to

a greater extent but both groups have an equal level of recall (Hawkins & Hane, 2000).

11

Several studies discuss the relevance of diverse channels for social marketing (Doyleet

al., 2006; Lord, 1994; Schneider et al., 2001; Smith & Stutts, 2003). Mass media campaigns

impact positively on recall, awareness, and knowledge as well as on attitude and behaviour

change. Audio channels, i.e. radio spots, create a high level of behavior change (Schneider et

al., 2001). Exposure to media has been analyzed in several studies (Basil & Brown, 1997;

Bauman, Padgett & Koch, 1989; Bauman, LaPrelle, Brown, Koch & Padgett, 1991; Fishbein

et al., 1993; Karan, 2008; McCausland et al., 2009; Meyer et al., 2004). The impact of

exposure on social risk perception is contradictory. However, exposure to media increases

personal risk perception, awareness, attention, intention and behavior change. Furthermore,

the viewing context, e.g. confrontation of social marketing advertising spots within a romantic

comedy or an action thriller, has an impact on recall, attitude and intention change (Smith &

Stutts, 2003).

Interactive elements increase knowledge and are followed by greater attitude change

than in a non-interactive campaign (Tobler & Stratton, 1997). In the context of interactive

campaigns, feedback has a positive impact on behavior change (Komaki, Heinzmann &

Lawson, 1980). Personal messages have positive impact on behavior (Brinberg & Axelson,

2002). Additionally, group support versus one-to-one support in social marketing campaign

has been discussed with contradictory results (MacAskill et al., 2008; Meyer, Niemann &

Abel, 2004). Furthermore, the long term effects of campaign were discussed for two

campaigns with interesting findings indicating the necessity of repeated campaigns and the

need for longitudinal studies: the longer the remoteness, the lower the effects of recall and

perceived effectiveness (Biener, Ji, Gilpin & Albers, 2004). After only two weeks, results in

recall, thoughts and intentions did not differ (Jones, Sinclair & Courneya, 2003).

12

Framing Determinants

Besides these general campaign characteristics, framing aspects are of great importance

in the context of social marketing (e.g., Block & Keller, 1995; Jones, Sinclair & Courneya,

2003, Lindenmeier, 2008). Furthermore this is shown by the fact that 37% of the identified

studies on social marketing effectiveness cover aspects of framing. The framing paradigm has

been discussed by various authors and can be understood as the way information is

communicated including how and what kind of information is presented (e.g., Entnam, 1993;

Levin, Schneider & Gaeth, 1998; Scheufele, 1999). Thus, this paper discusses the relevance

of focus, direction, tonality, time horizon, and content as framing determinants. Figure 3

illustrates the identified framing determinants. Furthermore research propositions are derived

in order to foster future research in the respective field (Mazumdar, Raj & Sinha, 2005;

Simonson, 2005).

FIGURE 3: Framing determinants in social marketing effectiveness

First, papers deal with the focus of social marketing messages which includes the

subitems self vs. others, known vs. unknown testimonials, and ingroup vs. outgroup, i.e.

”stranger” vs. “friend” (King & Reid, 1989; Loroz, 2007; Newcomb, Mercurio & Wollard,

13

2000; Reardon & Miller, 2008; Samu & Bhatnagar, 2008; Wakefield et al., 2003). Self-

focused messages (i.e. “you can get cancer if moking”) have been found to contribute

positively in the context of drink & drive and smoking. Whereas in the context of

environmental protection self (other)-focused messages had a positive impact in combination

with positive (negative) messages. Testimonials, particularly well-known testimonials (i.e.

celebrities), were found to be effective in the context of smoking and drug-use. “Friends” (i.e.

a person who is likely to be perceived as similar to the target group of the campaign) instead

of “strangers” in a campaign contributed to its success in the context of smoking. Hence, we

put forward the following:

Research proposition 1a: The influence of other framing determinants (i.e.

direction, tonality, time horizon and content) in combination with self vs. other

focus on the effectiveness has to be tested.

Research proposition 1b: An analysis of the effectiveness of self vs. other has to be

conducted for diverse social marketing topics.

Secondly, direction, i.e. positive vs. negative messages, is analyzed (Austin, Mitchko,

Freeman, Kirby & Milne, 2009; Block & Keller, 1995; Jones, Sinclair & Courneya, 2003;

Lord, 1994; Loroz, 2007; Peracchio & Luna, 1998;Schneider et al., 2001; Steward, Schneider,

Pizarro & Salovey, 2003; Wilson, Wallston & King, 1990; Wong & McMurray, 2002; Zhao

& Pechmann, 2007). For diverse social marketing topics both messages that were framed

positively (i.e. protection of environment through a certain preserving behavior) or negatively

(i.e. horrific scenario due to bad environmental behavior is communicated) turned out to be

effective. The contradictory results can be explained by the interaction with other framing

determinants as well as by moderating variables such as perceived self-efficacy or level of

motivation. Therefore, we derive the following:

14

Research proposition 2: In order to generalize findings on framing direction, an

analysis with regards to a variety of moderating variables relevant in the context of

social marketing has to be conducted.

Thirdly, several authors studied the tonality of messages (Arthur & Quester, 2004;

Bennett, 1996; Bagozzi & Moore, 1994; Biener, Ji, Gilpin & Albers, 2004; Dickinson &

Holmes, 2008; Durkin & Wakefield, 2006; Flora & Maibach, 1990; Jones & Owen, 2006;

King & Reid, 1989; Milne, Sheeran & Orbell, 2000; Murray, Johnson, Luepker & Mittelmark,

1984; Murray et al., 1992; Reichert, Heckler & Jackson, 2001; Samu & Bhatnagar, 2008;

Schoenbachler & Whittler, 1996; Struckman-Johnson, Gilliland, Struckman-Johnson &

North, 1990; Tanner, Hunt & Eppright, 1991; Tanner Jr., Carlson, Raymond & Hopkins,

2008; Wakefield et al., 2003). According to these findings, normative and rational messages

have a smaller impact than emotional messages. Threatening messages (i.e. communication of

likeliness of death due to driving while intoxicated) impact on the effectiveness of a social

marketing campaign, however, findings on the impact of physically versus socially

threatening messages as well as on the level of threat are diverse within and between different

social marketing topics. Consequently, we state the following:

Research proposition 3a: Physical versus social threat has to be tested against the

background of different social marketing topics taking into consideration the level

of outcome variables.

Research proposition 3b: Level of threat has to be analyzed taking into

consideration moderators (i.e. gender, age of target group, personal

characteristics) and other framing determinants (i.e. focus, direction, time horizon

and content).

Another important framing determinant is the time horizon of communicated

consequences (i.e. possibility of the emergence of lung cancer as a result of smoking

behavior) (Murray, Johnson, Luepker & Mittelmark, 1984; Peracchio & Luna, 1998; Smith &

15

Stutts, 2003; Smith & Stutts, 2006). Time horizon has only been tested for smoking and

resulted in diverse findings due to the impact of moderating variables. As a result, we suggest

the following:

Research proposition 4: Time horizon has to be analyzed in its interaction with

moderating variables (i.e. gender, age of target group, personal characteristics) as

well as in further contexts other than smoking.

Concerning the content of social marketing messages multiple messages within one

campaign, the description of the recommended behavior, known and unknown as well as

quantitative and qualitative information can contribute to the effectiveness of social marketing

(Beltramini, 1988; Haldemann & Turner, 2009; Hawkins & Hane, 2000; Kalsher, Clarke &

Wogalter, 1993; Keller & Lehmann, 2008; Linn, Vining & Feeley, 1994; Pechmann &

Ratneshwar, 1994; Pechmann, Zhao, Goldberg & Reibling, 2003; Peracchio & Luna, 1998;

Ray & Ward, 1976; Slater, Karan, Rouner, Murphy & Beauvais, 1998; Snyder et al., 2004;

Struckman-Johnson & Struckman-Johnson, 1996; Tanner, Hunt & Eppright, 1991; Veer,

Tutty & Willemse, 2008; Whittam, Dwyer, Simpson & Leeming, 2006; Yzer, Cappella,

Fishbein, Hornik & Kirkland Ahern, 2003). Thus, we constitute the following:

Research proposition 5: Subitems of content have to be analyzed systematically

comparing their impacts on diverse social marketing topics.

MEDIATING VARIABLES

According to e.g. Vakratsas and Ambler (1999) firstly cognition or emotions, secondly,

the intention to change behavior, and thirdly, an obvious behavior change can be measured.

Moreover, a change in attitudes directly leads to an intention to change behavior and is

regarded as outcome variable in the context of social marketing (e.g., Bagozzi, 1981).

Consequently, the authors put a focus on the level of cognitive and emotional responses as

mediating variables that contribute to the outcome variables.

16

With regards to cognitive responses, recall, perceived campaign credibility, and

campaign effectiveness – in terms of created attention and awareness – are measured (e.g.,

Biener, Ji, Gilpin & Albers, 2004; Chaudhuri & Ray, 2004; Karan, 2008; Wakefield et al.,

2003).

Besides these cognitive responses, emotions such as fear, anger, sadness as well as

empathy and affect, are important mediators in the context of social marketing (Arthur &

Quester, 2004; Bagozzi & Moore, 1994; Basil & Brown, 1997; Chaudhuri & Ray, 2004; King

& Reid, 1989; Montaño, Thompson, Taylor & Mahloch, 1997; Morton & Duck, 2006).

The analyzed cognitive and emotional responses mediate between the independent and

outcome variables. Additionally, they enhance further mediators, such as interpersonal

communication (see e.g., Basil & Brown, 1997; Durkin & Wakefield, 2006; Fishbein et al.,

1993; Komaki, Heinzmann & Lawson, 1980; Morton & Duck, 2006; Tanner Jr., Carlson,

Raymond & Hopkins, 2008; Traeen, 1990), knowledge (see e.g., Givaudan, Van de Vijver,

Poortinga, Leenen & Pick, 2007; Hassan, Walsh, Shiu, Hastings & Harris, 2007; Kalsher,

Clarke & Wogalter, 1993), beliefs and perception of consequences.

With regards to the role of beliefs in the context of social marketing the following

findings are of interest: Behavioral beliefs influence attitude (Albarracin, Fishbein &

Goldestein de Muchinik, 1997; Blue, 1995; Bogart, Cecil & Pinkerton, 2000; Bosompra,

2001; Fisher, Fisher & Rye, 1995; Montaño, Thompson, Taylor & Mahloch, 1997).

Normative beliefs influence social or subjective norms (Albarracin, Fishbein & Goldestein de

Muchinik, 1997; Blue, 1995; Bogart, Cecil & Pinkerton, 2000; Bosompra, 2001; Fisher,

Fisher & Rye, 1995). Perceived social norms either directly influence intention or behavior

change or they mediate between normative beliefs and changed intentions (Artz & Cooke,

2007; Bogart, Cecil & Pinkerton, 2000; Goldberg, Niedermeier, Bechtel & Gorn, 2006;

Haldemann & Turner, 2009; Millstein, 1996; Montaño & Taplin, 1991). The same is true for

subjective norms (Albarracin, Johnson, Fishbein & Muellerleile, 2001; Blue, 1995;

17

Bosompra, 2001; Craig, Goldberg & Dietz, 1996; Fisher, Fisher & Rye, 1995; Gastil, 2000;

Givaudan, Van de Vijver, Poortinga, Leenen & Pick, 2007; Goldberg, Niedermeier, Bechtel

& Gorn, 2006; Marcoux & Shope, 1997; Montaño, Thompson, Taylor & Mahloch, 1997;

Steen, Peay & Owen, 1998). Control beliefs influence perceived behavioral control as part of

self-efficacy (Blue, 1995).

Furthermore, the perception of consequences contributes as important mediator to the

effectiveness of social marketing. This mediator includes perceived severity of harm (e.g.,

Arthur & Quester, 2004; Beltramini, 1988; Desvousges, Smith & Rink III, 1992; Fishbein et

al., 1993; Gastil, 2000; Harrison, Mullen & Green, 1992; Tanner, Hunt & Eppright, 1991),

perceived probability of harm (e.g., Arthur & Quester, 2004; Chaudhuri & Ray, 2004; Gastil,

2000; Harrison, Mullen & Green, 1992; Stacy, MacKinnon & Pentz, 1993; Tanner, Hunt &

Eppright, 1991), expectations of physical and psychosocial outcomes (e.g., Du, Sen &

Bhattacharya, 2008) as well as perceived benefits and costs and social and personal risk

(Argo & Kelley, 2004; Harrison, Mullen & Green, 1992; Montaño & Taplin, 1991; Reardon

& Miller, 2008).

MODERATING AND CONTROL VARIABLES

Moderating variables influence the impact of independent variables on mediating

variables as well as the effects of mediating variables on outcome variables. The authors

classify personal characteristics as moderators. Findings on personal characteristics include

demographics, prior experience, involvement, level of motivation to change and sensation

seeking and are diverse (Chaudhuri & Ray, 2004; Smith & Stutts, 2006). For example, gender

has a significant influence on communication and awareness as well as on reactions to low

versus high fear arousing messages with regard to perceived probability of harm and intention

to not change behavior in the recommended way. Low fear arousing increases men’s

favourable intentions, whereas females are influenced by high fear arousing messages.

18

Prior trail behavior has been discussed by several authors (Arthur & Quester, 2004; Basil &

Brown, 1997; Beltramini, 1988; Best et al., 1984; Chaudhuri & Ray, 2004; Montaño &

Taplin, 1991; Tangari, Burton, Andrews & Netemeyer, 2007; Traeen, 1990). The influence of

prior trial behavior on beliefs and intentions is discussed controversially. Literature suggests a

positive influence on changes in behaviour as it enhances the effect on recall and attitude

changes.

In addition, the stage of the targeted persons and thus the motivation level has an impact

on intention and behaviors, e.g. persons in a preparation and contemplation stage react to

campaigns with more favourable attitudes (Berger & Rand, 2008; Wilson, Wallston & King,

1990; Wong & McMurray, 2002). Sensation seeking is another characteristic with impact on

social marketing effectiveness (Palmgreen, Donohew, Lorch, Hoyle & Stephenson, 2001).

High sensation seeking moderates the effect of negative emotional response on behavior

change. Besides sensation seeking involvement in the subject has to be considered (Flora &

Maibach, 1990; O'Cass & Griffin, 2006). Both high and low involvement moderate the impact

of messages on recall. High involvement has a positive impact on attention and attitude.

Besides the analyzed moderating variables in the context of social marketing

effectiveness, the authors studied control variables. Social marketing topic and environmental

impact characteristics, e.g. general exposure to wrong behaviour, and social influence (e.g.,

Andrews, Netemeyer & Durvasula, 1990; Artz & Cooke, 2007; Basil & Brown, 1997;

Bauman, Padgett & Koch, 1989; Bauman, LaPrelle, Brown, Koch & Padgett, 1991; Best et

al., 1984; Evans et al., 1981; Fishbein, Middlestadt & Trafimow, 1993; Samu & Bhatnagar,

2008; Smith & Stutts, 2006), have been identified as control variables. For example, the

acculturation of a family has an impact on behavior change (Du, Sen & Bhattacharya, 2008).

In addition, e.g. general smoking exposure impacts on outcome variables (Tangari, Burton,

Andrews & Netemeyer, 2007).

19

DISCUSSION AND AVENUES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

The authors elaborated a state of the art on the research field of social marketing based

on multidisciplinary and a multitude of social marketing topics covering findings. An attempt

has been made to systemize diverse and sometimes even controversy findings in a tentative

model. Due to the fact that findings do not only have a multidisciplinary background but are

also based on a variety of theoretical underlying models, the elaboration of such a more or

less holistic model contributes to the scientific progress in this field. In addition, the state of

the art serves to generate a research agenda as the need for further research is obvious.

First of all, content-wise further research is needed in the currently highly relevant topic

of violence-related issues. From a methodological viewpoint, experiments should be carried

out more rigorously with regards to control groups. Moreover, case studies could be used for

research on social marketing effectiveness if they contained consequently evaluation details.

With regards to outcome measurement methods, the dominance of data based on self-

reporting should be decreased. More studies on social marketing effectiveness aiming at

measuring behavior change are needed. Little focus has been put on delayed post-campaign

evaluation. This research gap could be filled by researching the long-term impact on social

marketing campaigns instead of focussing merely on short-term effectiveness.

As the authors synthesized findings based on the variety of underlying theoretical

models as well as findings from diverse research disciplines in a tentative holistic model of

social marketing effectiveness, further research concerning this model is needed: As it is a

holistic model no empirically validation of the whole model can be achieved in a first step.

Nevertheless, the model should be tested partially regarding the existing links among

mediating variables as well as the relevance of mediating variables for different social

marketing topics in detail. Moderating and control variables have been deduced from the

fragmented existing findings and have to be completed as well as tested for their relevance.

20

Besides these general implications for further research in the field of social marketing,

the authors focused on the elaboration of concrete research propositions regarding framing

determinants. The authors’ focus on framing determinants is due to the fact that these

independent variables constitute a particularly fruitful field for further research from a

marketing perspective – particulary from a nonprofit and public marketing perspective.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, I. & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453-474.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.

Albarracin, D., Fishbein, M. & Goldestein de Muchinik, E. (1997). Seeking social support in old age as reasoned action. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(6), 463-476.

Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., Fishbein, M. & Muellerleile, P. A. (2001). Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 142-161.

Andreasen, A. R. (1994). Social marketing: Its definition and domain. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 13(1), 108-114.

Andreasen, A. R. (2002). Marketing social marketing in the social change marketplace. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(1), 3-13.

Andreasen, A. R. (2003). The life trajectory of social marketing: Some implications. Marketing Theory, 33(3), 293-303.

Andrews, J. C., Netemeyer, R. G. & Durvasula, S. (1990). Believability and attitudes toward alcohol warning label information: The role of persuasive communications theory. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 9(1), 1-15.

Argo, J. J. & Kelley, J. M. (2004). Meta-analyses of the effectiveness of warning labels. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 23(2), 193-208.

Arthur, D. & Quester, P. (2004). Who's afraid of that ad? Applying segmentation to the protection motivation model. Psychology and Marketing, 21(9), 671-696.

Artz, N. & Cooke, P. (2007). Using e-mail listservs to promote environmentally sustainable behaviors. Journal of Marketing Communications, 13(4), 257-276.

Arulmani, G. & Abdulla, A. (2007). Capturing the ripples: Addressing the sustainability of the impact of social marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly, 13(4), 84-107.

Austin, L., Mitchko, J., Freeman, C., Kirby, S. & Milne, J. (2009). Using framing theory to unite the field of injury and violence prevention and response. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15(1), 36-54.

Bagozzi, R. P. & Moore, D. J. (1994). Public service advertisements: Emotions and empathy

21

guide prosocial behavior. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 56-70. Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of some key hypotheses.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(4), 607-627. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248-287. Basil, M. D. & Brown, W. J. (1997). Marketing AIDS prevention: The differential impact

hypothesis versus identification effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6(4), 389-411.

Bauman, K. E., LaPrelle, J., Brown, J. D., Koch, G. G. & Padgett, C. A. (1991). The influence of three mass media campaigns on variables related to adolescent cigarette smoking: Results of a field experiment. American Journal of Public Health, 81(5), 597-604.

Bauman, K. E., Padgett, C. A. & Koch, G. G. (1989). A media-based campaign to encourage personal communication among adolescents about not smoking cigarettes: Participation selection and consequences. Health Education Research, 4(1), 35-44.

Beltramini, R. F. (1988). Perceived believability of warning label information presented in cigarette advertising. Journal of Advertising, 17(1), 26-32.

Bennett, R. (1996). Effects of horrific fear appeals on public attitudes towards AIDS. International Journal of Advertising, 15(3), 183-202.

Berger, J. & Rand, L. (2008). Shifting signals to help health: Using identity signaling to reduce risky health behaviors. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 509-518.

Best, J. A., Flay, B. R., Towson, S. M. J., Ryan, K. B., Perry, C. L., Brown, K. S., Kersell, M. W. & D'Avernas, J. R. (1984). Smoking prevention and the concept of risk. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14(3), 257-273.

Biener, L., Ji, M., Gilpin, E. A. & Albers, A. B. (2004). The impact of emotional tone, message, and broadcast parameters in youth anti-smoking advertisements. Journal of Health Communication, 9(3), 259-274.

Block, L. G. & Keller, P. A. (1995). When to accentuate the negative: The effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), 192-203.

Bloom, P. N. & Novelli, W. D. (1981). Problems and challenges in social marketing. Journal of Marketing, 45(2), 79-88.

Blue, C. L. (1995). The predictive capacity of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior in exercise research: An integrated literature review. Research in Nursing & Health, 18(2), 105-121.

Boaz, A. & Ashby, D. (2003). Fit for purpose? Assessing Research Quality for Evidence Based Policy and Practice. London: University of London.

Bogart, L. M., Cecil, H. & Pinkerton, S. D. (2000). Intentions to use the female condom among African American adults. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(9), 1923-1953.

Bosompra, K. (2001). Determinants of condom use intentions of university students in Ghana: An application of the theory of reasoned action. Social Science & Medicine, 52(7),

22

1057-1069. Brinberg, D. & Axelson, M. L. (2002). Improving the dietary status of low-income pregnant

women at nutritional risk. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(1), 100-104. Chaudhuri, A. & Ray, I. (2004). The effect of AIDS awareness on condom use intention

among truck drivers in India: The role of beliefs, feelings and perceived vulnerability. Journal of Marketing Communications, 10(1), 17-33.

Craig, S., Goldberg, J. & Dietz, W. H. (1996). Psychosocial correlates of physical activity among fifth and eighth graders. Preventive Medicine, 25(5), 506-513.

Darrow, W. W. & Biersteker, S. (2008). Short-term impact evaluation of social marketing campaign to prevent syphilis among men who have sex with men. American Journal of Public Health, 98(2), 337-343.

Denyer, D. & Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a systematic review. In D. A. Buchanan, & A. Bryman (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods (pp.671-689). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Desvousges, W. H., Smith, V. K. & Rink III, H. H. (1992). Communicating radon risks effectively: The Maryland experience. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 11(2), 68-78.

Dickinson, S. & Holmes, M. (2008). Understanding the emotional coping responses of adolescent individuals exposed to threat appeals. International Journal of Advertising, 27(2), 251-278.

Douglas, H. (2008). Creating knowledge: A review of research methods in three societal change approaches. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 20(2), 141-163.

Doyle, P. A., Bird, B. C., Appel, S., Parisi, D., Rogers, P., Glaros, R., Brandt, N., Barber, V., Salmon, C. A. & Birkhead, G. (2006). Developing an effective communications campaign to reach pregnant women at high risk of late or no prenatal care. Social Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), 35-50.

Du, S., Sen, S. & Bhattacharya, (2008). Exploring the social and business returns of a corporate oral health initiative aimed at disadvantaged hispanic families. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 483-494.

Durkin, S. & Wakefield, M. (2006). Maximizing the impact of emotive antitobacco advertising: Effects of interpersonal discussion and program placement. Social Marketing Quarterly, 12(3), 3-14.

El-Ansary, A. I. & Kramer Jr., O. E. (1973). Social marketing: The family planning experience. Journal of Marketing, 37(3), 1-7.

Entnam, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.

Evans, R. I., Rozelle, R. M., Maxwell, S. E., Raines, B. E., Dill, C. A., Guthrie, T. J., Henderson, A. H. & Hill, P. C. (1981). Social modelling films to deter smoking in adolescents: Results of a three-year field investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(4), 399-414.

Fishbein, M., Middlestadt, S. E. & Trafimow, D. (1993). Social norms for condom use: Implications for HIV prevention interventions of a KABP survey with heterosexuals in the Eastern Caribbean. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 292-296.

23

Fishbein, M., Trafimow, D., Francis, C., Helquist, M., Eustace, M. A., Ooms, M. & Middlestadt, S. E. (1993). AIDS knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices (KABP) in two Caribbean Countries: A comparative analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23(9), 687-702.

Fisher, W. A., Fisher, J. D. & Rye, B. J. (1995). Understanding and promoting AIDS-preventive behavior: Insights from the theory of reasoned action. Health Psychology, 14(3), 255.

Flora, J. A. & Maibach, E. W. (1990). Cognitive responses to AIDS information: The effects of issue involvement and message appeal. Communication Research, 17(6), 759-774.

Fox, K. F. & Kotler, P. (1980). The marketing of social causes: The first 10 years. Journal of Marketing, 44(4), 24-33.

Friend, K. & Levy, D. T. (2002). Reductions in smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption associated with mass-media campaigns. Health Education Research, 17(1), 85-98.

Gastil, J. (2000). Thinking, drinking, and driving: Application of the theory of reasoned action to DWI prevention. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(11), 2217-2232.

Givaudan, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Poortinga, Y. H., Leenen, I. & Pick, S. (2007). Effects of a school-based life skills and HIV-prevention program for adolescents in Mexican high schools. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(6), 1141-1162.

Goldberg, M. E., Niedermeier, K. E., Bechtel, L. J. & Gorn, G. J. (2006). Heightening adolescent vigilance toward alcohol advertising to forestall alcohol use. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25(2), 147-159.

Gordon, R., McDermott, L. & Hastings G., (2008). Critical issues in social marketing: A review and research agenda. In A. Sargeant & W. W. Wymer (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Nonprofit Marketing (pp. 333-346). Abingdon, Oxon; New York, N.Y.: Routledge.

Gordon, R., McDermott, L., Stead, M. & Angus, K. (2006). The effectiveness of social marketing interventions for health improvement: What's the evidence? Public Health, 120(12), 1133-1139.

Haldemann, T. & Turner, J. W. (2009). Implementing a community-based social marketing program to increase recycling. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15(3), 114-127.

Harrison, J. A., Mullen, P. D. & Green, L. W. (1992). A meta-analysis of studies of the health believe model with adults. Health Education Research, 7(1), 107-116.

Hassan, L. M., Walsh, G., Shiu, E. M. K., Hastings, G. & Harris, F. (2007). Modeling persuasion in social advertising: A study of responsible thinking in antismoking promotion in eight Eastern EU (European Union) member states. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 15-31.

Hawkins, K. & Hane, A. C. (2000). Adolescents' perceptions of print cigarette advertising: A case for counteradvertising. Journal of Health Communication, 5(1), 83-96.

Homburg, C., Kuester, S. & Krohmer, H. (2009). Marketing Management: A Contemporary Perspective. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education.

Janz, N. K., Champion, V. L. & Strecher, V. J. (2002). The health belief model. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer & F. M. Lewis (Eds.), Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory,

24

Research, and Practice (pp. 45-65). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Jones, L. W., Sinclair, R. C. & Courneya, K. S. (2003). The effects of source credibility and

message framing on exercise intentions, behaviors, and attitudes: An integration of the elaboration likelihood model and prospect theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(1), 179-196.

Jones, S. C. & Owen, N. (2006). Using fear appeals to promote cancer screening: Are we scaring the wrong people? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(2), 93-103.

Kalsher, M. J., Clarke, S. W. & Wogalter, M. S. (1993). Communication of alcohol facts and hazards by a warning poster. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 12(1), 78-90.

Karan, K. (2008). Impact of health communication campaigns on health behaviors in Singapore. Social Marketing Quarterly, 14(3), 85-108.

Keller, P. A. & Lehmann, D. R. (2008). Designing effective health communications: A meta-analysis of experimental results. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 27(2), 117-130.

King, K. W. & Reid, L. (1989). Fear arousing anti-drinking and driving PSAs: Do physical injury threats influence young adults? Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 12(1), 155-175.

Komaki, J., Heinzmann, A. T. & Lawson, L. (1980). Effect of training and feedback: Component analysis of a behavioral safety program. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(3), 262-270.

Kotler, P. & Levy, S. J. (1969). Broadening the concept of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 33(1), 19-15.

Kotler, P., Roberto, N. & Lee, N. (2002). Social Marketing – Improving the Quality of Life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lavack, A. M., Magnuson, S. L., Deshpande, S., Basil, D. Z., Basil, M. D. & Mintz, J. H. (2008). Enhancing occupational health and safety in young workers: The role of social marketing. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13(3), 193-204.

Lefebvre, R. C. (2001). Theories and models in social marketing. In P. N. Bloom & G. T. Gundlach (Eds.), Handbook of Marketing and Society (pp. 506-518). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L. & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188.

Lindenmeier, J. (2008). Promoting volunteerism: Effects of self-efficacy, advertisement-induced emotional arousal, perceived costs of volunteering, and message framing. Voluntas, 19(1), 43-65.

Linn, N., Vining, J. & Feeley, P. A. (1994). Toward a sustainable society: Waste minimization through environmentally conscious consuming. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(17), 1550-1572.

Lord, K. R. (1994). Motivating recycling behavior: A quasiexperimental investigation of message and source strategies. Psychology and Marketing, 11(4), 341-358.

25

Loroz, P. S. (2007). The interaction of message frames and reference points in prosocial persuasive appeals. Psychology and Marketing, 24(11), 1001-1023.

MacAskill, S., Lindrige, A., Stead, M., Eadie, D., Hayton, P. & Braham, M. (2008). Social marketing with challenging target groups: Smoking cessation in prisons in England and Wales. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13(3), 251-261.

Madill, J. & Abele, F. (2007). From public education to social marketing: The evolution of the Canadian heritage anti-racism social marketing program. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 17(1/2), 27-53.

Marcoux, B. C. & Shope, J. T. (1997). Application of the theory of planned behavior to adolescent use and misuse of alcohol. Health Education Research, 12(3), 323-331.

Mazumdar, T., Raj, S. P. & Sinha, I. (2005). Reference price research: Review and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 84-102.

McCausland, K. L., Allen, J. A., Duke, J. C., Xiao, H., Asche, E. T., Costatino, J. C. & Vallone, D. M. (2009). Piloting EX, a social marketing campaign to prompt smoking cessation. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15(1), 80-101.

McCulloch, K. C., Albarracin, D. & Durantini, M. R. (2008). A door to HIV-prevention interventions: How female-targeted materials can enhance female participation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(5), 1211-1229.

McDermott, L., Stead, M. & Hastings, G. (2005). What is and what is not social marketing: The challenge of reviewing the evidence. Journal of Marketing Management, 21(5/6), 545-553.

Meyer, C. M., Brun, C., Yung, B., Clasen, C., Cauley, K. & Mase, W. A. (2004). Evaluation of social marketing efforts designed to increase enrollment in the children’s health insurance program (CHIP). Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 12(2), 87-104.

Meyer, K., Niemann, S. & Abel, T. (2004). Gender differences in physical activity and fitness: Association with self-reported health and health-relevant attitudes in a middle-aged Swiss urban population. Journal of Public Health, 12(4), 283-290.

Meyrick, J. d. (2007). The internet in social marketing research. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 17(1), 103-120.

Millstein, S. G. (1996). Utility of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior for predicting physician behavior: A prospective analysis. Health Psychology, 15(5), 398-402.

Milne, S., Sheeran, P. & Orbell, S. (2000). Prediction and intervention in health-related behavior: A meta-analytic review of protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(1), 106-143.

Montaño, D. E. & Taplin, S. H. (1991). A test of an expanded theory of reasoned action to predict mammography participation. Social Science & Medicine, 32(6), 733-741.

Montaño, D. E., Thompson, B., Taylor, V. M. & Mahloch, J. (1997). Understanding mammography participation and utilization among women in an inner city public hospital clinic. Preventive Medicine, 26(6), 817-824.

Morton, T. A. & Duck, J. M. (2006). Enlisting the influence of others: Alternative strategies

26

for persuasive media campaigns. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(2), 269-296. Murray, D. M., Johnson, C. A., Luepker, R. V. & Mittelmark, M. B. (1984). The prevention

of cigarette smoking in children: A comparison of four strategies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14(3), 274-288.

Murray, D. M., Perry, C. L., Griffin, G., Harty, K. C., Jacobs Jr, D. R., Schmid, L., Daly, K. & Pallonen, U. (1992). Results from a statewide approach to adolescent tobacco use prevention. Preventive Medicine, 21(4), 449-472.

Newcomb, M. D., Mercurio, C. S. A. & Wollard, C. A. (2000). Rock stars in anti-drug-abuse commercials: An experimental study of adolescents' reactions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(6), 1160-1185.

Newton-Ward, M. (2007). North Carolina’s social marketing matrix team: Using social marketing concepts to institutionalize social marketing capacity in a state health department. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 17(1/2), 55-82.

O'Cass, A. & Griffin, D. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of social issue advertising believability. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 15(1/2), 87-104.

Palmgreen, P., Donohew, L., Lorch, E. P., Hoyle, R. H. & Stephenson, M. T. (2001). Television campaigns and adolescent marijuana use: test of sensation seeking targeting. American Journal of Public Health, 91(2), 292-296.

Pechmann, C. & Ratneshwar, S. (1994). The effects of antismoking and cigarette advertising on young adolescents' perceptions of peers who smoke. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 236-251.

Pechmann, C., Zhao, G., Goldberg, M. E. & Reibling, E. T. (2003). What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 1-18.

Peracchio, L. A. & Luna, D. (1998). The development of an advertising campaign to discourage smoking initiation among children and youth. Journal of Advertising, 27(3), 49-56.

Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.

Prochaska, J. O. & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(3), 390-395.

Ray, M. L. & Ward, S. (1976). Experimentation for pretesting public health programs: The case of the anti-drug abuse campaigns. Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1), 278-286.

Reardon, J. & Miller, C. (2008). Smoking prevention messages for adolescents: How intensity, valence, and recipient of consequences affect attitude toward the ad and intent to smoke. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 16(1), 67-77.

Reichert, T., Heckler, S. E. & Jackson, S. (2001). The effects of sexual social marketing appeals on cognitive processing and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 13-27.

Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 93-114.

Rothschild, M. L. (1999). Carrots, sticks, and promises: A conceptual framework for the management of public health and social issue behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 63(4),

27

24-37. Salipante, P., Notz, W. & Bigelow, J. (1982). A Matrix Approach to Literature Reviews.

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Samu, S. & Bhatnagar, N. (2008). The efficacy of anti-smoking advertisments: The role of

source, message, and individual characteristics. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13(3), 237-250.

Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122.

Schneider, T. R., Salovey, P., Pallonen, U., Mundorf, N., Smith, N. F. & Steward, W. T. (2001). Visual and auditory message framing effects on tobacco smoking. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(4), 667-682.

Schoenbachler, D. D. & Whittler, T. E. (1996). Adolescent processing of social and physical threat communications. Journal of Advertising, 25(4), 37-54.

Simonson, I. (2005). Determinants of customers’ responses to customized offers: Conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Marketing, 69(1), 32-45.

Slater, M. D., Karan, D., Rouner, D., Murphy, K. & Beauvais, F. (1998). Developing and assessing alcohol warning content: Responses to quantitative information and behavioral recommendations in warnings with television beer advertisements. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 17(1), 48-60.

Smith, K. H. & Stutts, M. A. (2003). Effects of short-term cosmetic versus long-term health fear appeals in anti-smoking advertisements on the smoking behaviour of adolescents. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3(2), 157-177.

Smith, K. H. & Stutts, M. A. (2006). The influence of individual factors on the effectiveness of message content in anti-smoking advertisements aimed at adolescents. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40(2), 261-293.

Snyder, L. B., Hamilton, M. A., Mitchell, E. W., Kiwanuka-Tondo, J., Fleming-Milici, F. & Proctor, D. (2004). A meta-analysis of the effect of mediated health communication campaigns on behavior change in the United States. Journal of Health Communication, 9(Supplement 1), 71-96.

Stacy, A. W., MacKinnon, D. P. & Pentz, M. A. (1993). Generality and specificity in health behavior: Application to warning-label and social influence expectancies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 611-627.

Stead, M., Gordon, R., Angus, K. & McDermott, L. (2007). A systematic review of social marketing effectiveness. Health Education, 107(2), 126-191.

Steen, D. M., Peay, M. Y. & Owen, N. (1998). Predicting Australian adolescents' intentions to minimize sun exposure. Psychology & Health, 13(1), 111-119.

Steward, W. T., Schneider, T. R., Pizarro, J. & Salovey, P. (2003). Need for cognition moderates responses to framed smoking-cessation messages. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(12), 2439-2464.

Struckman-Johnson, C. J., Gilliland, R. C., Struckman-Johnson, D. L. & North, T. C. (1990). The effects of fear of AIDS and gender on responses to fear-arousing condom advertisments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20(17), 1396-1410.

Struckman-Johnson, D. & Struckman-Johnson, C. (1996). Can you say condom? It makes a

28

difference in fear-arousing AIDS prevention public service announcements. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(12), 1068-1083.

Talbert, P. Y. (2008). Using social marketing to increase breast cancer screening among African American women: Perspectives from African American breast cancer survivors. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13(4), 347-362.

Tangari, A. H., Burton, S., Andrews, J. C. & Netemeyer, R. G. (2007). How do antitobacco campaign advertising and smoking status affect beliefs and intentions? Some similarities and differences between adults and adolescents. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 26(1), 60-74.

Tanner Jr., J. F., Carlson, L. A., Raymond, M. A. & Hopkins, C. D. (2008). Reaching parents to prevent adolescent risky behavior: Examining the effects of threat portrayal and parenting orientation on parental participation perceptions. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 27(2), 149-155.

Tanner, J. F. J., Hunt, J. B. & Eppright, D. R. (1991). The protection motivation model: A normative model of fear appeals. Journal of Marketing, 55(3), 36-45.

Tobler, N. S. & Stratton, H. H. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analysis of the research. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(1), 71-128.

Traeen, B. (1990). Awareness of an AIDS campaign directed at Norwegian adolescents. Health Policy, 16(1), 33-41.

Vakratsas, D. & Ambler, T. (1999). How advertising works: What do we really know? Journal of Marketing, 63(1), 26-43.

Veer, E., Tutty, M. & Willemse, J. (2008). It's time to quit: Using advertising to encourage smoking cessation. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 16(4), 315-325.

Wakefield, M., Durrant, R., Terry-McElrath, Y., Ruel, E., Balch, G. I., Anderson, S., Szczypka, G., Emery, S. & Flay, B. (2003). Appraisal of anti-smoking advertising by youth at risk for regular smoking: A comparative study in the United States, Australia, and Britain. Tobacco Control, 12(3), 82-86.

Weinstein, N. D. & Sandman, P. M. (2002). The precaution adoption process model. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer & F. M. Lewis (Eds.), Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 121-143). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Whittam, K. P., Dwyer, W. O., Simpson, P. W. & Leeming, F. C. (2006). Effectiveness of a media campaign to reduce traffic crashes involving young drivers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(3), 614-628.

Wiebe, G. D. (1951). Merchandising commodities and citizenship on television. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 679-691.

Wilson, D. K., Wallston, K. A. & King, J. E. (1990). Effects of contract framing, motivation to quit, and self-efficacy on smoking reduction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20(7), 531-547.

Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extend parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59(4), 329-349.

29

30

Wong, C. O. & McMurray, N. E. (2002). Framing communication: Communicating the antismoking message effectively to all smokers. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(4), 433-447.

Wymer, W. W. (2004). Using social marketing strategies to reform social policy: A lesson from British history. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 12(2), 149-158.

Yzer, M. C., Cappella, J. N., Fishbein, M., Hornik, R. & Kirkland Ahern, R. (2003). The effectiveness of gateway communications in anti-marijuana campaigns. Journal of Health Communication, 8(2), 129-143.

Zhao, G. & Pechmann, C. (2007). The impact of regulatory focus on adolescents’ response to antismoking advertising campaigns. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(4), 671-687.