Understanding Media and Influence in Public Communication Campaigns, Study notes of Communication

Download Understanding Media and Influence in Public Communication Campaigns and more Study notes Communication in PDF only on Docsity! C H A P T E R 1 Theory and Principles of Public Communication Campaigns Charles K. Atkin and Ronald E. Rice 3 Public communication campaigns can be defined as purposive attempts to inform or influence behaviors in large audiences within a specified time period using an organized set of communication activities and featuring an array of mediated messages in multiple channels generally to produce noncommercial benefits to individuals and society (Rice & Atkin, 2009; Rogers & Storey, 1987). The campaign as process is universal across topics and venues, utilizing systematic frameworks and fundamental strategic principles developed over the past half century. Campaign designers perform a situational analysis and set objectives leading to develop- ment of a coherent set of strategies and implement the campaign by creating informational and persuasive messages that are disseminated via traditional mass media, new technolo- gies, and interpersonal networks. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF CAMPAIGNS Although no specific theory has been developed to explain and predict public commu- nication campaigns, a number of theoretical perspectives are regularly invoked to guide campaign strategies. The most comprehensive applicable conceptualizations are the social marketing framework and the Communication-Persuasion Matrix. Campaigns across the spectrum of health, prosocial, and environmental domains share some similarities to commercial advertising campaigns. Thus, it is useful to apply social marketing, which emphasizes an audience-centered consumer orientation and calculated attempts to attractively package the social product and utilize the optimum combination of campaign components to attain pragmatic goals (Andreasen, 1995, 2006; Kotler, Roberto, & Lee, 2002; McKenzie-Mohr, 2011). Social marketing offers a macro perspective, combin- ing numerous components, notably the multifaceted conceptions of product, costs, and benefits, as well as audience segmentation, policy change, and competition (see Bracht & Rice in Chapter 20 and Rice & Robinson in Chapter 16). OVERVIEW AND HISTORY4 In McGuire’s (Chapter 9) classic Communication-Persuasion Matrix, or input–output model, the communication input variables include source, message, channel, and audi- ence; these factors, which are central to most communication models, will be discussed at length in subsequent sections. The output process posits audience responses to cam- paign stimuli as proceeding through the basic stages of exposure and processing before effects can be achieved at the learning, yielding, and behavior levels. Exposure includes the simple reception of a message and the degree of attention to its content. Processing encompasses mental comprehension, pro- and counterarguing, interpretive perceptions, and cognitive connections and emotional reactions produced by the campaign message. Learning comprises information gain, generation of related cognitions, image forma- tion, and skills acquisition. Yielding includes acquisition and change in attitudes, beliefs, and values. Behavior in the campaign context involves the bottom-line enactment of the actions recommended in messages. Specific central theories that are applicable to various aspects of public communication campaign strategies, processes, and implementation include: Agenda setting (McCombs, 2004). The phenomenon of topical salience applies to cam- paign impact on the perceived importance of societal problems and the prominence of policy issues. Diffusion of innovations (Rogers, 2003). This theory introduces the ideas of relative advan- tage and trialability of recommended behaviors, and the individual adoption decision pro- cess, as well as opinion leadership that shapes diffusion through interpersonal channels and social networks via multistep flows. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) and Heuristic Systematic Model (HSM) (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993). ELM and HSM highlight the role of audience involvement level as it shapes cognitive responses, thought generation, and central versus peripheral routes to persuasion. Extended Parallel Process Model (Stephenson & Witte, 2001). Effectiveness of fear appeals is enhanced by understanding cognitive processes that control danger versus emotional processes, which control the fear via denial or coping; perceived efficacy influences type of response. Health Belief Model (HBM) (Becker, 1974). Several concepts from HBM pertain specifically to the potency of health threat appeals: susceptibility multiplied by seriousness of consequences and the self-efficacy and response efficacy of performing the recommended behavior. Instrumental learning (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). As adapted to mediated communi- cation, this learning mechanism features message-related concepts of source credibility, reinforcement incentives, and repetition of presentation. Integrative Theory of Behavior Change (Cappella, Fishbein, Hornik, Ahern, & Sayeed, 2001). The multifaceted model integrates HBM, Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), and Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) to specify how external variables, individual differences, and underlying beliefs contribute to differential influence pathways for outcome behaviors, intentions, attitudes, norms, and self-efficacy. CHAPTER 1 Theory and Principles of Public Communication Campaigns 7 to be more effective than campaign messages directly targeted to the focal segment (Rogers, 2003). Interpersonal influencers can impact behavior through activities such as dispensing positive and negative reinforcement, exercising control via rule making and enforcement, facilitating behavior with reminders at opportune moments, and serving as role models. A major advantage of the interpersonal relationships is that the influencer can customize the messages to the unique needs and values of individuals in a more precise and context- relevant manner than most media messages. The effectiveness of social network-oriented media campaigns, typically targeted to friends and family members of the focal individuals to be influenced, is reviewed in the health domain by Abroms and Maibach (2008). In a third effects strategy, the campaign may seek to alter the environment indirectly by providing messages to societal and organizational policy makers who are responsible for devising constraints and creating opportunities that shape focal individuals’ decisions and behaviors. Individuals’ decisions are strongly shaped by the constraints and opportu- nities in their societal environments, such as monetary expenses, laws, industry practices, entertainment role models, commercial messages, social forces, and community services. Policy makers in government, business, educational, medical, media, religious, and com- munity organizations can initiate interventions that alter the environment. Some reformers combine community organizing and media publicity to advance healthy public policies via media advocacy. The media advocacy approach seeks to frame public health issues to emphasize policy-related environmental solutions rather than the usual focus on individual responsibility for good health. Media advocacy is “the strategic use of mass media in combination with community organizing to advance healthy pub- lic policies” (Dorfman & Wallack, Chapter 23). It explicitly attempts to associate social problems with social structures and inequities, change public policy rather than individual behavior, reach opinion leaders and policy makers, work with groups to increase involve- ment in the communication process, and reduce the power gap instead of simply provid- ing more information. The four primary activities involved in media advocacy include 1) develop an overall strategy, which includes formulating policy options, identifying the stakeholders that have power to create relevant change, applying pressure to foster change, and developing messages for these stakeholders, 2) set the agenda, including gaining access to the news media through stories, news events, and editorials, 3) shape the debate, includ- ing framing the public health problems as policy issues salient to significant audiences, emphasizing social accountability, and providing evidence for the broader claims, and 4) advance the policy, including maintaining interest, pressure, and coverage over time. Activists generate news media coverage to mobilize the public to influence policy makers to enact reforms to address health problems, particularly relating to smoking and drinking. Gaining consistent visibility in the news media is a key to achieving an agenda-setting effect, which is particularly important in media advocacy strategies tar- geted to opinion leaders and policy makers in society. Through agenda setting on health issues, news coverage can mold the public agenda and the policy agenda pertaining to new initiatives, rules, and laws. An important element involves strengthening the public’s beliefs about the efficacy of policies and interventions that are advanced, which leads to supportive public opinion (and direct pressure) that can help convince institutional leaders to formulate and implement societal constraints and opportunities. OVERVIEW AND HISTORY8 A related means of integrating media and interpersonal communication is to organize campaign activities at the community level (Bracht & Rice, Chapter 20). Community- based campaigning can engage stakeholders at all stages of the process, from contributing design inputs to assisting in implementation to active involvement in consequences; some campaigns explicitly seek to empower communities and activate voluntary associations, government agencies, schools, or businesses to achieve short-term success and help attain sustainability and institutionalization of campaign initiatives. Organizing commu- nity campaigns encompasses assessing assets and capacities, developing a collaborative organizational structure, generating cooperation of multiple partners and broad citizen participation, and consolidating program maintenance. CAMPAIGN MESSAGES AND MEDIA Strategic Approaches: Prevention Versus Promotion In seeking to influence behavior, campaigners may decide to promote positive behaviors (e.g., eat fruit, buckle safety belts, recycle paper) or to prevent problematic behaviors (e.g., consuming fats, driving while intoxicated, burning forests). Traditionally, prevention cam- paigns present fear appeals to focus attention on negative consequences of a detrimental practice rather than promoting the desirability of a positive alternative. This approach is most potent in cases where harmful outcomes are genuinely threatening or positive prod- ucts are insufficiently compelling. The social marketing perspective is especially applicable to promoting desirable behav- ior, which involves offering rewarding gains from attractive “products” (such as tasty fruit, the designated driver arrangement, or staircase exercising). In developing behavioral rec- ommendations in promotional campaigns, designers can draw upon an array of options from the “product line.” These target responses vary in palatability associated with degree of effort, sacrifice, and monetary expense; a central strategic consideration in determin- ing the degree of difficulty is receptiveness of the focal segment. The prolonged nature of campaigns enables the use of gradually escalating sequential approaches over a period of months or years. Message Content: Informational Versus Persuasive In many campaign situations, informational messages that seek to create awareness or provide instruction play an important role. Awareness messages present relatively simple content that informs people what to do, specifies who should do it, or provides cues about when and where it should be done. Even superficial messages can stimulate the audience to seek out richer, in-depth content from elaborated informational resources such as web- pages, books, and opinion leaders. The more complex instruction messages present how-to- do-it information in campaigns that need to produce knowledge gain or skills acquisition, including enhancing personal efficacy in bolstering peer resistance and acquiring media literacy skills. CHAPTER 1 Theory and Principles of Public Communication Campaigns 9 However, the central type of content in campaigns features persuasive messages. Most campaigns present persuasion appeals emphasizing reasons why the audience should adopt the advocated action or avoid the proscribed behavior. For audiences that are favorably inclined, the campaign has the easier persuasive task of reinforcing existing predispositions: strengthening a positive attitude, promoting postbehavior consolida- tion, and motivating behavioral maintenance over time. Because a lengthy campaign generally disseminates a broad array of persuasive messages, strategists often develop a variety of appeals built around motivational incentives designed to influence attitudes and behaviors. Message Appeals: Persuasive Incentives Persuasive messages in public communication campaigns frequently utilize a basic expec- tancy-value mechanism by designing messages to influence beliefs regarding the subjective likelihood of various outcomes occurring; attitudinal and behavioral effects are contingent upon each individual’s valuation of these outcomes. The operational formula for prevent- ing risky behaviors is susceptibility multiplied by severity, using a loss frame to motivate the audience with a high likelihood of suffering painful consequences. The incentive appeals often build on existing values of the target audience, so the messages tend to reinforce the predispositions or change beliefs about the likelihood of experiencing valued consequences. For campaigns in the health domain, the primary incentive dimensions are physical health, time and effort, economic, moral, legal, social, and psychological. Rather than over- emphasizing the narrow dimension of physical health threats (e.g., death, illness, injury), campaigners are increasingly diversifying loss-framed incentive strategies to include other negative appeals (e.g., monetary expense, psychological regret, social rejection), as well as emphasizing gain-framed positive incentives (e.g., valued states or consequences, such as physical well-being, saving money, social attractiveness). Message Design and Implementation: Qualitative Dimensions Designing messages involves the strategic selection of substantive material and the creative production of stylistic features. In developing the combination of message components, the campaign designer seeks to emphasize one or more of five influential message quali- ties. First, credibility is primarily conveyed by the trustworthiness and competence of the source and the provision of convincing evidence. Second, the style and ideas should be presented in an engaging manner via selection of interesting or arousing substantive con- tent combined with attractive and entertaining stylistic execution. The third dimension emphasizes selection of material and stylistic devices that are personally involving and relevant, so receivers regard the behavioral recommendation as applicable to their situa- tions and needs. The fourth element is understandability, with simple, explicit, and detailed presentation of content that is comprehensive and comprehensible to receivers. For per- suasive messages, the fifth factor is motivational incentives, as described above. Atkin and Freimuth (Chapter 4) provide much greater detail on the formative evaluation stage of message design. OVERVIEW AND HISTORY12 Voice response systems, interactive video, DVD, CD-ROM, mobile phones, and computer games can be effective in reaching young people. Lieberman (Chapter 19) recommends that computer-mediated campaigns feature youthful genres, support information seek- ing, incorporate challenges and goals, use learning by doing, create functional learning environments, and facilitate social interaction. Video game learning relevant to campaigns includes skill acquisition from interactive games, improved self-efficacy through success in vicarious experiences, and role-playing and modeling. Baranowski, Buday, Thompson, & Baranowski (2008)’s meta-analysis of 25 studies of using video games to affect health behavior (chronic disease management, exercise, and diet) found improvements in nearly all outcomes. To maximize quantity, campaigners seek to gain media access via monetary support from government and industry (to fund paid placements and leveraged media slots), aggressive lobbying for free public service time or space, skillful use of public relations techniques for generating entertainment and journalistic coverage, and reliance on low- cost channels of communication such as websites and social media. The Ad Council helps develop a select number of nonprofit messages each year, both responding to and influ- encing campaign agenda items. For example, its current public service campaign topics include 11 community issues (from energy efficiency to pet shelters), eight education issues (from college access to lifelong literacy), and 27 health and safety issues (from autism awareness to nutrition education) (see http://www.adcouncil.org/default.aspx?id=15). Moreover, the reach of a campaign is often boosted by sensitizing audiences to appropri- ate content already available in the media and by stimulating information seeking from specialty sources. Quantitative Dissemination Factors Five major aspects of strategic message dissemination are the total volume of messages, the amount of repetition, the prominence of placement, the scheduling of message pre- sentation, and temporal length of the campaign. A substantial volume of stimuli helps attain adequate reach and frequency of exposure as well as comprehension, recognition, and image formation. Message saturation also conveys the significance of the problem addressed in the campaign, which heightens agenda setting and salience. A certain level of repetition of specific executions facilitates message comprehension and positive affect toward the product, but high repetition produces wear out and diminishing returns. Placement prominence of messages in conspicuous positions within media vehicles (e.g., newspaper front page, heavily traveled billboard locations, or highly ranked search engine websites) serves to enhance both exposure levels and perceived significance. Another quantitative consideration involves the scheduling of a fixed number of presentations; depending on the situation, campaign messages may be most effectively concentrated over a short duration, dispersed thinly over a lengthy period, or distributed in intermittent bursts of flighting or pulsing. In terms of the calendar, there are critical timing points when the audience is more likely to be attentive or active in information seeking. Regarding the overall length of the campaign, the realities of public service promotion and problem prevention often require exceptional persistence of effort over long periods CHAPTER 1 Theory and Principles of Public Communication Campaigns 13 of time to attain a critical mass of exposures. In many cases, perpetual campaigning is necessary because focal segments of the population are in constant need of influence as newcomers enter the priority audience, backsliders revert to prior misbehavior, evolvers gradually adopt practices at a slow pace, and vacillators need regular reinforcement. CAMPAIGN EVALUATION METHODS Formative Evaluation The applicability of general campaign design principles depends on the specific context (espe- cially types of audiences to be influenced and types of product being promoted), so effective design usually requires extensive formative evaluation inputs (Atkin & Freimuth, Chapter 4). In the early stages of campaign development, designers collect background information about the focal segments and interpersonal influencers using statistical databases and custom surveys to learn about audience predispositions, channel usage patterns, and evaluations of prospective sources and appeals. As message concepts are being refined and rough versions are created, qualitative reactions are obtained in focus group discussion sessions, and supple- mental quantitative ratings can be measured in message testing laboratories. Process Evaluation While the campaign is underway, process evaluation assesses the extent to which designed elements are actually implemented and ways in which the campaign program can be improved for subsequent designers and implementers (Steckler & Linnan, 2006). Process evaluation is useful for determining effectiveness of campaign management and identify- ing lessons for overcoming social and structural obstacles. Summative or Outcome Evaluation After a campaign has been implemented (but planned and integrated from the beginning), summative evaluation research is performed to assess outcomes. Valente and Kwan (Chapter 6) summarize the basic methodologies, including field experimental, cross-sectional, cohort, panel, time-series, or event-history designs, although qualitative components and mixed- methods evaluations provide unique, additional, and triangulated insights. Summative research can be conducted both during and after major campaign phases. Campaign Effectiveness Research findings suggest that campaigns are capable of generating moderate to strong influences on cognitive outcomes, less influence on attitudinal outcomes, and still less influence on behavioral outcomes (Atkin, 2001; Snyder & LaCroix, Chapter 8). Further, behavioral outcomes tend to vary in proportion to such factors as the dose of information, qualitative potency of messages, integration of mass and interpersonal communication OVERVIEW AND HISTORY14 systems, and integration of social-change strategies (enforcement, education, and engi- neering; see Paisley & Atkin, Chapter 2). A campaign may not attain a strong impact for many reasons. Audience resistance bar- riers arise at each stage of response from exposure to behavioral implementation. A major problem is simply reaching the audience and attaining attention to the messages (Hornik, 2002). Exposed audience members are lost at each subsequent response stage due to defensive responses such as misperception of susceptibility to threatened consequences, denial of applicability of message incentives to self, defensive counterarguing against per- suasive appeals, rejection of unappealing behavioral recommendations, and sheer inertial lethargy. Public communication campaign outcomes tend to diminish for receivers who regard messages as offensive, disturbing, boring, stale, preachy, confusing, irritating, mis- leading, irrelevant, uninformative, useless, unbelievable, or uninspiring. Salmon and Murray-Johnson (Chapter 7) make distinctions among various types of cam- paign effectiveness, including definitional effectiveness (e.g., getting a social phenomenon defined as a social problem or elevating it on the public agenda), contextual effectiveness (e.g., impact within particular contexts such as education vs. enforcement vs. engineering), cost-effectiveness comparison (e.g., prevention vs. treatment, addressing certain problems over others), and programmatic effectiveness (e.g., testing campaign outcomes relative to stated goals and objectives). FUTURE CHALLENGES Despite considerable progress in recent years, a variety of theoretical and practical chal- lenges and tensions remain to be addressed. Future research is needed to better under- stand the issues pertaining to campaign design, implementation, and resource allocation outlined in this section. What is the optimum mix of message incentives? Most campaigns use multiple persua- sive appeals, but not enough is known about the most effective combination of gain-frame versus loss-frame messages and of fear appeals versus other negative appeals. What should be the relative emphasis on short-term versus long-term objectives and effects, and how can campaigns achieve longer-term outcomes? How can campaigns successfully promote a prevention approach in order to avoid the more expensive treatment approach typically favored by organizations, government agencies, and the electorate? What is the most effective balance of direct versus indirect strategies in various contexts? Campaigns increasingly rely on messages targeted to interpersonal influencers and on media advocacy approaches aimed at the general public and policy makers, but the appro- priate blending of these approaches has not been identified. Beyond the predominant focus on individual benefits, campaigns must address important social problems involving community and collective benefits. What are the relative influences of individual differ- ences versus social structure on the problems motivating communication campaigns? How can campaigns communicate effectively with young people who exhibit fundamentally different evaluations of risk and future consequences, who are using radically different interactive and personal media, and who are deeply embedded in peer networks? CHAPTER 1 Theory and Principles of Public Communication Campaigns 17 Ajzen, I., Albarracin, D., & Hornik, R. C. (2007). Prediction and change of health behavior: Applying the reasoned action approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Andreasen, A. (1995). Marketing social change: Changing behavior to promote health, social development, and the environment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Andreasen, A. (2006). Social marketing in the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Atkin, C. K. (2001). Theory and principles of media health campaigns. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (3rd ed., pp. 49–68). Thousand Oaks, CA: Jossey-Bass. Atkin, C. K., & Salmon, C. (2010). Communication campaigns. In C. Berger, M. Roloff, & D. Roskos- Ewoldsen (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (2nd ed., pp. 419–435). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Atkin, C. K., & Wallack, L. (1990). Mass communication and public health: Complexities and conflicts. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Backer, T., Rogers, E. & Sopory, P. (1992). Designing health communication campaigns: What works? Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. Baranowski, T., Buday, R., Thompson, D. I., & Baranowski, J. (2008). Playing for real: Video games and stories for health-related behavior change. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(1), 74–82. Becker, M. H. (1974). The health belief model and personal health behavior. San Francisco: Society for Public Health Education. Cappella, J., Fishbein, M., Hornik, R., Ahern, R. K., & Sayeed, S. (2001). Using theory to select mes- sages in anti-drug media campaigns: Reasoned action and media priming. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (3rd ed., pp. 214–230) . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cole-Lewis, H., & Kershaw, T. (2010). Text messaging as a tool for behavior change in disease pre- vention and management. Epidemiologic Reviews, 32 (1), 59–69. Retrieved from http://epirev. oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/mxq004v1 Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1993). Psychology of attitudes. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Edgar, T., Noar, S., & Freimuth, V. (2007). Communication perspectives on HIV/AIDS for the 21st century. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Green, G., & Tones, K. (2010). Health promotion: Planning and strategies (2nd ed.). London: Sage. Hornik, R. (2002). Public health communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifica- tions research (pp. 19–32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Kotler, P., Roberto, N., & Lee, N. (2002). Social marketing: Improving the quality of life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lundgren, R. E., & McMakin, A. H. (2009). Risk communication: A handbook for communicating environ- mental, safety, and health risks. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Maibach, E., & Parrott, R. (1995). Designing health messages: Approaches from communication theory and public health practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McCombs, M. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Malden, MA: Blackwell. McKenzie-Mohr, D. (2011). Fostering sustainable behavior: An introduction to community-based social marketing. Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers. Noar, S. M., Harrington, N. G., & Aldrich, R. (2009). The role of message tailoring in the development of persuasive health communication messages. In C. S. Beck (Ed.), Communication yearbook 33 (pp. 73–133). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. OVERVIEW AND HISTORY18 O’Keefe, D. J. (2002). Persuasion : Theory and research . Thousand Oaks CA : Sage . O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed mes- sages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 623–644. Parker, J. C., & Thorson, E. (2009). Health communication in the new media landscape. New York: Springer. Perloff, R. M. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Petty, R., & Cacioppo, J. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag. Portnoy, D. B., Scott-Sheldon, L. A. J., Johnson, B. T., & Carey, M. P. (2008). Computer-delivered inter- ventions for health promotion and behavioral risk reduction: A meta-analysis of 75 randomized controlled trials, 1988–2007. Preventive Medicine, 47 (1), 3–16. Prochaska, J., & Velicer, W. (1997). The Transtheoretical Model of health behavior change. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12, 38–48. Quick, B., & Bates, B. (2010). The use of gain- or loss-frame messages and efficacy appeals to dis- suade excessive alcohol consumption among college students: A test of psychological reactance theory. Journal of Health Communication, 15, 603–628. Randolph, W., & Visnawath, K. (2004). Lessons learned from public health mass media campaigns: Marketing health in a crowded media world. Annual Review of Public Health, 25, 419–437. Rice, R. E. (2006). Influences, usage, and outcomes of Internet health information searching: Multivariate results from the Pew surveys. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 75 (1), 8–28. Rice, R. E., & Atkin, C. K. (Eds.). (2001). Public communication campaigns (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rice, R. E., & Atkin, C. K. (2009). Public communication campaigns: Theoretical principles and practi- cal applications. In J. Bryant & M. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 436–468). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rice, R. E., & Atkin, C. K. (2011). Communication campaigns. Oxford Bibliographies Online (Communication). DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199756841–0055. 28pp. Rice, R. E., & Katz, J. E. (Eds.). (2001). The Internet and health communication: Expectations and experi- ences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rimer, B., & Kreuter, M. W. (2006). Advancing tailored health communication: A persuasion and message effects perspective. Journal of Communication, 56, S184–S201. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. Rogers, E. M., & Storey, J. D. (1987). Communication campaigns. In C. Berger & S. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 817–846). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 525–548). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Salmon, C. (1989). Information campaigns: Balancing social values and social change. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Salmon, C., & Atkin, C. K. (2003). Media campaigns for health promotion. In T. L. Thompson, A. M. Dorsey, K. I. Miller, & R. Parrott, R. (Eds.), Handbook of health communication (pp. 472–494). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Silk, K., Atkin, C. K., & Salmon., C. (2011). Developing effective media campaigns for health promo- tion. In T. L. Thompson, R. Parrott, & J. Nussbaum (Eds.), Handbook of health communication (2nd ed., pp. 203–219). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Singhal, A., Cody, M., Rogers, E., & Sabido, M. (2004). Entertainment-education and social change: History, research, and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. CHAPTER 1 Theory and Principles of Public Communication Campaigns 19 Steckler, A., & Linnan, L. (Eds.). (2006). Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Stephenson, M., & Witte, K. (2001). Creating fear in a risky world: Generating effective health risk messages. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (3rd ed., pp. 88–102). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stiff, J. B., & Mongeau, P. (2003). Persuasive communication (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Webb, T. L., Joseph, J., Yardley, L., & Michie, S. (2010). Using the Internet to promote health behavior change: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of theoretical basis, use of behavior change techniques, and mode of delivery on efficacy. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 12 (1), e4. Retrieved from http://www.jmir.org/2010/1/e4 Witte, K., Meyer, G., & Martell, D. (2001). Effective health risk messages. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.