Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpersonal communication outcomes of a media literacy alcohol prevention curriculum

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Translational Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Media literacy intervention efficacy literature has focused on media-relevant (e.g., knowledge and realism) and behavior-relevant outcomes (e.g., attitudes and behaviors), without much attention paid to interpersonal communication outcomes. This project examined interpersonal communication after participation in two versions (analysis plus analysis and analysis plus planning) of the Youth Message Development (YMD) intervention, a brief media literacy curriculum targeted at preventing high school student alcohol use. Participants attended a 75-mins media literacy YMD workshop and completed a delayed posttest questionnaire 3 to 4 months later. Overall, 68 % participants replied affirmatively to interpersonal communication about the YMD intervention. Communication about the workshop moderated the effects of the type of workshop (analysis plus analysis or analysis plus planning) on self-efficacy to counter-argue (but not critical thinking). Interpersonal communication moderated the effects of the YMD intervention on self-efficacy to counter-argue, thereby signaling the importance of including interpersonal communication behaviors in intervention evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). Underage drinking. Available at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/UnderageDrinking/Underage_Fact.pdf. Accessibility verified September 19, 2014.

  2. United States Department of Health and Human Services. The surgeon General’s call to action to prevent and reduce underage drinking. Rockville: Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2008). Alcohol Related Disease Impact (ARDI) application. Available at http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/DACH_ARDI/Default.aspx. Accessibility verified September 19, 2014.

  4. Bonnie RJ, O’Connell ME. Reducing underage drinking: a collective responsibility. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Miller JW, Naimi TS, Brewer RD, Everett JS. Binge drinking and associated health risk behaviors among high school students. Pediatrics. 2007; 119: 76-85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Eaton DK, Kann L, Kinchen S, et al. Youth risk behavior surveillance-United States 2011. MMWR. 2012; 61(SS-4): 1-162.

  7. Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the future. National results on adolescent drug use: overview of key findings, 2011. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  8. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). Understanding underage drinking. Available at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/factsheet.htm. Accessibility verified September 19, 2014.

  9. Robertson EB, David SL, Rao SA. Preventing drug abuse among children and adolescents (2nd ed., NIH Publication No. 04-4212). Available at http://www.drugabuse.gov/pdf/prevention/RedBook.pdf. Accessibility verified September 19, 2014.

  10. D’Amico EJ, Tucker JS, Miles JNV, Zhou AJ, Shih RA, Green HD. Preventing alcohol use with a voluntary after-school program for middle school students: results from a randomized controlled trial of CHOICE. Prev Sci. 2012; 13: 415-425.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gosin M, Marsiglia FF, Hecht ML. Keepin’ it R.E.A.L.: a drug resistance curriculum tailored to the strengths and needs of pre-adolescents of the southwest. J Drug Educ. 2003; 33: 119-142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Considine D, Horton J, Moorman G. Teaching and reading the millennial generation through media literacy. J Adolesc Adult Lit. 2009; 52: 471-481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. McBrien JL. New texts, new tools: an argument for media literacy. Educ Leadersh. 1999; 57(2): 76-79.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Helping Youth Navigate the Media Age: A New Approach to Drug Prevention. Washington, DC: Author; Office of National Drug Control Policy; 2001.

  15. American Academy of Pediatrics, Pediatrics Committee on Communications. Policy statement: children, adolescents and advertising. Pediatrics. 2006; 118: 2563-2569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Aufderheide P, Firestone C. Media literacy: a report of the national leadership conference on media literacy. Queenstown: Aspen Institute; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rogow F. Shifting from media to literacy: one opinion on the challenges of media literacy education. Am Behav Sci. 2004; 48: 30-34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hobbs R. The seven great debates in the media literacy movement. J Commun. 1998; 48: 16-32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Considine DM, Haley GE. Visual messages: integrating imagery into instruction. Englewood: Leaders Ideas Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pinkleton BE, Austin EW, Cohen M, Miller A. Effects of media literacy training among adolescents and the role of previous experience. Baltimore: Paper presented at the Alliance for Media Literate America Conference; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tyner K. The tale of the elephant: media education in the United States. In: Bazalgette C, Bevort E, Savino J, eds. New directions: media education worldwide. London: British Film Institute; 1992: 170-176.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kupersmidt JB, Scull TM, Austin EW. Media literacy education for elementary school substance use prevention. Pediatrics. 2010; 126: 525-531.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Potter WJ, Byrne S. Media literacy. In: Nabi R, Oliver MB, eds. Sage handbook of mass media effects. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2009: 345-357.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jeong S, Cho H, Hwang Y. Media literacy interventions: a meta-analytic review. J Commun. 2012; 62: 454-472.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Scharrer E. “I noticed more violence”: the effects of a media literacy program on critical attitudes toward media violence. J Mass Media Ethics. 2006; 21: 69-86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Austin EW, Johnson K. Effects of general and alcohol-specific media literacy training on children’s decision making about alcohol. J Health Commun. 1997; 2: 17-42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hoffman G. Media literacy study. ETC: Rev Gev Semant. 1999; 56: 165-171.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Singer DG, Zuckerman DM, Singer JL. Helping elementary school children learn about TV. J Commun. 1980; 30: 84-93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Austin EW, Pinkleton BE, Hust SJT, Cohen M. Evaluation of an american legacy foundation/Washington state department of health media literacy pilot study. Health Commun. 2005; 18: 75-95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Banerjee SC, Greene K. Analysis versus production: adolescent cognitive and attitudinal responses to anti-smoking interventions. J Commun. 2006; 56: 773-794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Banerjee SC, Greene K. Anti-smoking initiatives: examining effects of inoculation based media literacy interventions on smoking-related attitude, norm, and behavioral intention. Health Commun. 2007; 22: 37-48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bergsma LJ, Ingram M. Blowing smoke: project evaluation final report. Arizona: The University of Arizona Health Sciences Center; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gonzales R, Glik D, Davoudi M, Ang A. Media literacy and public health: integrating theory, research, and practice for tobacco control. Am Behav Sci. 2004; 48: 189-201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pinkleton BE, Austin EW, Cohen M, Miller A, Fitzgerald E. A statewide evaluation of the effectiveness of media literacy training to prevent tobacco use among adolescents. Health Commun. 2007; 21: 23-34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chen Y. The role of media literacy in changing adolescents’ responses to alcohol advertising. Chicago: International Communication Association (ICA) Conference; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Robinson TN, Wilde ML, Navracruz LC, Haydel KF, Varady A. Effects of reducing children’s television and video game use on aggressive behavior: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001; 155: 17-23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Rosenkoetter LI, Rosenkoetter SE, Ozretich RA, Acock AC. Mitigating the harmful effects of violent television. J Appl Dev Psychol. 2004; 25: 25-47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Irving LM, Berel SR. Comparison of media-literacy programs to strengthen college women’s resistance to media images. Psychol Women Q. 2001; 25: 103-111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wade TD, Davidson S, O’Dea JA. A preliminary controlled evaluation of a school-based media literacy program and self-esteem program for reducing eating disorder risk factors. Int J Eat Disord. 2003; 33: 371-383.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Chernin A. The effects of food marketing on children’s preferences: testing the moderating roles of age and gender. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci. 2008; 615: 101-118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Banerjee SC, Kubey R. Boom or boomerang: a critical review of evidence documenting media literacy efficacy. In: Scharrer E, ed. The international encyclopedia of media studies: media effects/media psychology. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers; 2013: 699-722.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bergsma LJ, Carney ME. Effectiveness of health-promoting media literacy education: a systematic review. Health Educ Res. 2008; 23: 522-542.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. DeBenedittis P, Loughery M, McCannon B, Goldsborough S. Alcohol prevention children love to learn! Washington: Alcohol Policy XII Conference, Alcohol & Crime, Research for Practice and Prevention; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Southwell BG, Yzer MC. When (and why) interpersonal talk matters for campaigns. Commun Theory. 2009; 19: 1-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Gest SD, Osgood DW, Feinberg ME, Bierman KL, Moody J. Strengthening prevention program theories and evaluations: contributions from social network analysis. Prev Sci. 2011; 12: 349-360.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kam JA, Lee CJ. Examining the effects of mass media campaign exposure and interpersonal discussions on youth’s drug use: the mediating role of visiting pro-drug websites. Health Commun. 2013; 28: 473-485.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Valente TW, Gallaher P, Mouttapa M. Using social networks to understand and prevent substance use: a transdisciplinary perspective. Subst Use Misuse. 2004; 39: 1685-1712.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Hornik RC, Yanovitzky I. Using theory to design evaluations of communication campaigns: the case of National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. Commun Theory. 2003; 13: 204-224.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Southwell BG, Yzer MC, et al. The roles of interpersonal communication in mass media campaigns. In: Communication Yearbook 31. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008: 420-462.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Rogers EM, Storey JD. Communication campaigns. In: Berger C, Chaffee S, eds. Handbook of communication science. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1987: 817-846.

    Google Scholar 

  51. David C, Cappella JN, Fishbein M. The social diffusion of influence among adolescents: group interaction in a chat room environment about antidrug advertisements. Commun Theory. 2006; 16: 118-140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Druckman JN. Priming the vote: campaign effects in a U.S. Senate election. Polit Psychol. 2004; 25: 577-594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Southwell BG. Between messages and people: a multilevel model of memory for television content. Commun Res. 2005; 32: 112-140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Hecht ML, Miller-Day M. “Applied” aspects of the drug resistance strategies project. J Appl Commun Res. 2010; 38: 215-229.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Larkey LK, Hecht ML. A model of effects of narrative as culture-centric health promotion. J Health Commun. 2010; 15: 114-135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Greene K. The theory of active involvement: processes underlying interventions that engage adolescents in message planning and/or production. Health Commun. 2013; 28: 644-656.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Greene K, Elek E, Magsamen-Conrad K, Banerjee SC, Hecht ML, Yanovitzky I. Developing a brief media literacy intervention targeting adolescent alcohol use: the impact of formative research. Fairfax: Paper presented at the DC Health Communication Conference; 2011.

  58. Southwell BG, Torres A. Connecting interpersonal and mass communication: science news exposure, perceived ability to understand science, and conversation. Commun Monogr. 2006; 73: 334-350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Afifi W, Morgan S, Stephenson M, et al. Examining the decision to talk with family about organ donation: applying the theory of motivated information management. Commun Monogr. 2006; 73: 188-215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Hornik R, Maklan D, Cadell D, et al. Evaluation of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign: Campaign exposure and baseline measurement of correlates of illicit drug use from November 1999 through May 2000. Report prepared for the National Institute on Drug Abuse (Contract No. N01DA-8-5063). Washington DC: Westat; 2000

  61. Greene K, Hecht ML. Introduction for symposium on engaging youth in prevention message creation: the theory and practice of active involvement interventions. Health Commun. 2013; 28: 641-643.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Vilpponen A, Winter S, Sundqvist S. Electronic word-of-mouth in online environments: exploring referral network structure and adoption behavior. J Interact Advert. 2006; 6: 71-86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Williams D, Caplan S, Xiong L. Can you hear me now? the impact of voice in an online gaming community. Hum Commun Res. 2007; 33: 427-449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Baym NK, Zhang YB, Lin M-C. Social interactions across media: interpersonal communication on the internet, telephone and face-to-face. New Media & Society. 2004; 6: 299-318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Price V, Nir L, Cappella JN. Normative and informational influences in online political discussions. Commun Theory. 2002; 16: 47-74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This publication was supported by Grant Number R21 DA027146 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse to Rutgers University (Grant Recipient), Kathryn Greene, Principal Investigator. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Drug Abuseor the National Institutes of Health. The funders played no role in the design, conduct or analysis of the study, nor in the interpretation and reporting of the study findings. The researchers were independent from the funders. All authors, external and internal, had full access to all of the data (including statistical reports and tables) in the study and can take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Conflict of interest

All the coauthors (Smita C. Banerjee, Kathryn Greene, Kate Magsamen-Conrad, Elvira Elek, and Michael L. Hecht) declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Adherence to ethical standards

All procedures, including the informed consent process, were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Smita C. Banerjee Ph.D.

  2. Department of Communication, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA

    Kathryn Greene Ph.D.

  3. Department of Communication, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, USA

    Kate Magsamen-Conrad Ph.D.

  4. Drug Violence and Delinquency Prevention, RTI International, Washington, DC, USA

    Elvira Elek Ph.D.

  5. Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Michael L. Hecht Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Smita C. Banerjee Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kathryn Greene Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kate Magsamen-Conrad Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elvira Elek Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael L. Hecht Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathryn Greene Ph.D..

Additional information

Implications

Practice: Researchers planning, implementing, and evaluating health intervention/campaign effects should include measurement of the frequency of interpersonal communication by including different targets and content of communication.

Policy: Public health campaigns/interventions should encourage interpersonal communication about the campaigns/interventions to allow for social proliferation of the key messages.

Research: Researchers should not only include interpersonal communication outcomes in evaluating health intervention/campaign effects, but also investigate the mediating and moderating roles of interpersonal communication outcomes.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Banerjee, S.C., Greene, K., Magsamen-Conrad, K. et al. Interpersonal communication outcomes of a media literacy alcohol prevention curriculum. Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res. 5, 425–432 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-015-0329-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-015-0329-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation