Challenging Dogma - Spring 2009

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Winning the War against STIs: Why Public Health Interventions have failed to reduce STI rates among Adolescents- Oluwakemi Olukoya

Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health problem in the United States. The CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year and almost half of the infections occur among young people 15-24 years of age. Though several public health campaigns have been conducted to curb the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) among adolescents, the rate of STDs continues to soar. The failure of these campaigns can be linked to their reliance on traditional health behavior models which have limited ability to change behavior. The traditional health models are limited by their individualistic approach to change behaviors and by their assumption that individuals have mastery and control over decision making and behavior change.

An example of a public health campaign which is based on traditional health behavior models is the It’s Your (Sex) Life (IYSL) national campaign. IYSL is an ongoing partnership of MTV and the Kaiser Family Foundation to help young people make responsible decisions about their sexual health (1). IYSL campaign has distinguished itself from other public health campaigns by winning the Emmy and Peabody award for public information campaign on HIV/AIDS, other sexually transmitted diseases and related sexual health issues. In addition, the recent extension of IYSL partnership with Planned Parenthood Federation of America to promote the GYT (Get Yourself Tested) campaign- aimed at removing the taboos surrounding STD testing- through celebrities seems promising. Despite the above strengths of the IYSL campaign, its’ message, based on traditional health behavior change models (Health Belief Model and Social Learning Theory), has limited ability to change adolescents risky sexual behaviors to preventive behaviors. This article critically reviews the It’s Your (Sex) Life national campaign and presents three arguments which explain the limitations of the IYSL from the perspective of social and behavioral sciences.

I.) Health Belief Model
By using the Health Belief Model, It’s Your (Sex) Life campaign presumes that by promoting ads which emphasize on the consequences and statistics of sexually transmitted diseases, an individual will perceive his susceptibility to acquiring STD and perceive the severity of STD on his life; thus he would rationally weigh the benefits of not engaging in risky sexual behaviors to barriers which leads to intention and safe sex practices. For example, one ad featured a lady instructing a “teenage girl” to break up immediately with her boyfriend who refused to use a condom because she is at risk of contracting HIV.

Though the ad provides factual information, studies have shown that early prevention efforts that involved providing factual information about HIV/AIDS to promote safer sexual practices among adolescents and young adults were not strongly correlated with preventive behaviors(2). Thus, knowledge is necessary but not sufficient for HIV/AIDS risk reduction (2; 3). In addition, findings from various studies(4) that applied the HBM to promote preventive sexual behaviors among heterosexual college students have been inconsistent and provided only partial support for the model. Overall, perceived barriers (to condom use) received the most consistent support as a significant predictor of engaging in preventive behaviors (5). The fact that the extension components of the HBM did not significantly increase the prediction of condom use among college students may reflect the limitations of the HBM in promoting protective behaviors (5).

Furthermore, there is a wider social context within which individuals must circulate such as families and communities, which in turn affect the individuals’ decisions and behavior. HBM does not account for such social and environmental factors. (6) The HBM focus on individual-level factors and its’ reliance on the individual’s ability to make rational decisions and develop intention (7) to engage in protective behaviors constitute a major weakness of this approach. Intention does not always lead to behavior and human actions are mostly irrational. Also, HBM does not take into account the spontaneous activity that characterizes much of human behavior (7)

II.) Self-efficacy versus Self-control
IYSL draws from SLT by promoting self-efficacy. The IYSL campaign assumes that by instructing adolescents to take charge of their sex life by being in control and making smart choices, adolescents will be empowered and thus develop self-efficacy to practice safer sex. However, this assumption is false because individuals lack self-control over their actions due to other influences.

Studies indicate that patterns of social cognitive development in adolescence vary as a function of the content under consideration and the emotional and social context in which the reasoning occurs (8). Adolescents’ reasoning about real-life problems is not as advanced as their reasoning about hypothetical dilemmas (9) (e.g. a female practicing negotiation of condom use in a non-aroused state versus an aroused state). Adolescents’ when faced with a logical argument are more likely to accept faulty reasoning or shaky evidence when they agree with the substance of the argument than when they do not. (10-11). In other words, adolescents’ social reasoning, like that of adults, is influenced not only by their basic intellectual abilities, but by their desires, motives and interests (12).

Behavioral data have made it appear as though adolescents are poor decision-makers (i.e. their high-rates of participation in dangerous activities, automobile accidents, drug use and unprotected sex) however, there is substantial evidence that adolescents engage in dangerous activities despite knowing and understanding the risks involved (13-15). Thus, in real-life situations, adolescents do not simply rationally weigh the relative risks and consequences of their behavior – their actions are largely influenced by feelings and social influences (16). In addition, research has shown that sexual motivation can distort judgments on the risk of contracting sexually transmitted disease (17). Results from a study suggests that arousal does not change an individual’s general knowledge about the risks of unprotected sex, but when it comes to concrete steps involving condoms, sexual arousal changes one’s perceptions of the tradeoffs between benefits and disadvantages in a fashion that decreases the tendency to use them. (18)

III.) Social Determinants
IYSL campaign fails to account for diverse array of factors influencing adolescents’ risk taking behavior (Figure 1). Such factors include familial characteristics such as parental support, peer influence, school environment, community, socioeconomic status, racial disparities and societal factors such as media exposure (19). IYSL campaign may have no influence on adolescents who do not belong to a stable and supportive family system. Families provide role models, shape sexual attitudes, set standards for sexual conduct, control and monitor adolescents’ behaviors. Parental monitoring is associated with older ages of sexual initiation, smaller numbers of sexual partners and more consistent contraceptive use, all of which suggest lower STD risk (20). Thus how will the IYSL campaign account for teenagers, particularly homeless teens, who do not have family support and are predisposed to engage in risky behaviors?

In addition, though IYSL campaign used teenagers to promote its’ message to other teens, the campaign failed to recognize the power of group dynamics in shaping an adolescent decision with regards to which norms to abide to. Peer norms surrounding sexual behaviors and condom use have been shown to be major influences on both risky and protective sexual behavior. When adolescents perceive that friends and similar-aged teens engage in risky sexual behavior, even if their perception is skewed, then they are more likely to adopt those same behaviors (19). IYSL campaign needs to be more strategic in using teenagers in its’ ads in promoting safe sex practices rather than showing teenagers who are willing to adopt condom use because of the consequences of acquiring STDs.

The IYSL campaign failed to take full advantage of the effect of school environment on sexual risk taking behaviors. In one ad, a Professor told a group students that “there is hardly any healthy sexual relations…… they should learn to stop and have a conversation” about sex. Through this ad, IYSL campaign assumes that students have self-control and schools are a good place to let adolescents know they can take charge of their sex life. Though schools play a vital role in sex education, how does IYSL account for other aspects of school social environment associated with risky sexual behaviors? School structural attributes affect norms and attitudes about dating practices and sexual behaviors (21). Studies of the effects of school characteristics on sexual risk-taking behaviors found that racial composition and school type (public or private) are associated with age at first intercourse and number of sexual partners (22). Compared to private schools, teenagers in public schools have a higher STD risk. (21-22).

In addition, IYSL campaign failed to take into consideration racial differences in an ad which lead to counterproductive responses from adolescents. In the commercial, a white teenage girl refused to have sex with a black teenage boy because he did not have a condom to use. Though the ad was trying to tell adolescent females to be firm in their decision of practicing safe sex, the public interpreted it as her being a racist as illustrated by several comments on You Tube. This commercial also failed to use effective communication principles by ensuring a similar group was used as the source of message to the receiving group. The media plays a significant role in socialization of adolescents and therefore impacts their sexual risk and protective behavior. For example, studies have found that greater exposure to rap music videos and X-rated movies were associated with having multiple sex partners, more frequent sexual intercourse, and testing positive for an STD (23, 24). It is ironic that MTV, partners of IYSL campaign, hopes to promote protective sexual behaviors while they show more of music videos promoting sexual activity.

Overall, we cannot hope to optimize changes in adolescents’ sexual behavior without addressing the broad range of factors that influence adolescents’ decision-making process and, in turn, their likelihood of engaging in risky sexual behavior (24).


COnclusion
In order to achieve greater success, “It’s Your (Sex) Life” campaign must move beyond the traditional health behavior models- focused on individual level factors. Merely examining individual-level determinants in isolation provides a limited perspective on a complex issue and, furthermore, precludes a more in-depth understanding of how higher-level variables (e.g., family, peers, school, community, and society) may be independently associated with STD risk behaviors in the presence of other individual-level factors (19). Thus, while efficacious in promoting the adoption of STD/HIV-preventive behaviors in the near-term, individual-level interventions appear to be insufficient in sustaining newly adopted preventive behavior changes over protracted periods of time (19). What is needed is a complementary approach that addresses these multiple spheres of influence and adopts alternative health behavior change models capable of changing people’s behavior en masse to the desired or protective health behavior.

Section 2

To address the problem of rising STD’s rates among adolescents, I propose an intervention/strategy that promotes condom use at a group level by utilizing the following alternative health behavior models: marketing (social marketing) and framing theories.

Marketing is defined by the American Marketing Association as the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large. Social marketing is the systematic application of marketing strategies along with other concepts and techniques to achieve specific behavioral goals for a social good. Social marketing seeks to influence social behaviors and to benefit the target audience, the general society and not the marketer.(26)
The defining features of social marketing emanate from marketing’s conceptual framework and includes exchange theory, audience segmentation, competition, “the marketing mix,” consumer orientation and continuous monitoring. (27)
Framing comes from cognitive science, which defines a frame as a conceptual structure involved with thinking.(28) Frames are a composition of elements—visuals, values, stereotypes, messengers— which together trigger an existing idea. Frames tell us what a communication message is about. They signal to us what to pay attention to (and what not to), and they set up a pattern of reasoning that influences decision. Framing, therefore, is a translation process between incoming information and the pictures in our heads (29)

Intervention: Ignite Campaign- bringing out the fire in you

This intervention builds on the growing evidence which indicate that promoting pleasure in condom use, alongside safer sex messaging, can increase the consistent use of condoms and the practice of safer sex.(30) Ignite campaign aims to reduce STD’s rate by increasing the consistent use of condoms among sexually active adolescents. It aims to achieve this by reframing the use of condoms as being pleasurable rather than a just a protection “tool” from sexually transmitted diseases; also by using effective marketing strategies to spread its’ message.

Components of the Intervention

1) Form partnership with a condom manufacturing company in order to make Ignite pleasure condoms.

2) Use strategic adverts to reframe condoms as being pleasurable. I created two commercials which use pleasurable activities (dancing, and going to the beach) to appeal to core values (such as attractiveness, pleasure, vitality, sex) which adolescents value more than health.


Commercial One:
Several teens are gathered in an arena to watch a Salsa dance competition (illustrated by showing contestants (adolescents) with their partners (male and female) wearing salsa dance costumes)
Scene: Presenter of the show: Let’s welcome our final contestants for the night
(The crowd cheers)
Two teams come on stage and as the salsa music plays both teams start dancing.
Team 2: The female partner suddenly stops dancing…..she tells her partner “I can’t continue dancing…..my wrist hurts severely”. Her partner smiles and brings out a pack of Ignite condom (she smiles), he opens the condom pack and ties it around her wrist. Immediately vibrant salsa music plays, team 2 does amazing dance steps and wins the competition. At the end of the commercial, Ignite condom- bringing out the fire in you is displayed.

Commercial two:
Four teenage boys sitting on the beach suddenly get excited when four attractive females walk up to them. The boys stare so hard that “fire” comes out of their eyes. Each of the girls show the boys a box of ignite condom…..strangely the boxes become “alive”, grow so big and each female enters the box. Happily each boy grasps one Ignite condom box.

The two commercials use the power of visual imagery to frame the message. Imagery in brand marketing helps to create the external ideal (e.g. a figure, image or symbol that embodies socially desirable characteristics). Thus an individual will aspire to close the gap between his or her own self image and the idealized external image (e.g. Ignite condom brands).

3) Spread the message via a multi-channel approach by using a combination of traditional media channels, including TV, radio, print (billboards, celebrity, sports and other youth magazines), and new media such as internet websites (blogs, download materials, videos, games, celebrity and Ignites’ own website), E-mail services, Social networks (Facebook, Myspace), Youtube, Desktop agents, mobile phone texting and placing ads on other hand held computing devices.

4) Organize community based events such as concerts, cultural festivals, fairs where free Ignite condoms can be distributed. Distribution can be extended to recreational centers, school health centers, summer camps, hair salons etc. Flyers that have the logo of Ignite and the picture of the star couple in the Salsa dance ad will be distributed. Also, members of the community will be engaged in advocacy for the provision of sufficient resources (e.g. comprehensive adolescent health centers) for adolescent health.

5) Regular evaluation of the campaign to gauge the responses of the target audience to all aspects of the intervention, from the broad marketing strategy to specific messages and materials.

Argument: Why the Ignite campaign is better than It’s Your (Sex) Life campaign
1.) Strength of the alternative health theories over the health belief model
Unlike the HBM that relies completely on individual level factors to change behavior, the alternative health models utilize the group phenomenon to change people’s behaviors en masse. Groups are not just a collection of individuals; they have certain characteristics which individuals tend to adopt. For example, though an adolescent may not want to engage in risky sexual behaviors, when he/she perceives that friends and similar-aged teens engage in risky sexual behavior, then he/she is more likely to adopt those same behaviors (19). The alternative health theories do not focus on predicting individual behavior rather they take advantage of the predictable group “mentality” (the herd mentality) to change an entire group at the same time. The Ignite campaign uses effectively two alternate health theories (Framing and Marketing) which have been proven to yield desirable results in the commercial and political sector. There is substantial evidence that social marketing is effective in changing health behaviors on a population level (31). The VERB campaign, It’s what you do, promoted by the CDC is a good example of how social marketing can change health behavior at a group level. Marketing alters the environment to make the recommended health behavior more advantageous than the unhealthy behavior it is designed to replace (27).

The Ignite campaign uses the framing theory to appeal to other core values (sex, attractiveness, pleasure) more compelling to adolescents than health as used by the IYSL and other public health campaigns. Framing an issue on core values more important to individuals (level 1) is vital because they are the ones that connect to individuals in the deepest way (29) which can trigger the ‘jolt’ necessary for instantaneous behavior change. According to Lakoff (1996), people’s support or rejection of an issue will largely be determined by whether they can identify and connect with the Level 1 values rather than the minute details of issues (e.g. statistics of sexually transmitted diseases) which may “crowd’ level 1 core values and make the campaign message ineffective. The national Truth campaign used the framing theory to appeal to the rebellious core value of adolescents. By successfully framing non-smoking as being rebellious and promoting a teen focused “counter marketing” brand, Truth campaign was able to account for 22 percent of the decline in adolescent smoking prevalence from 25.3% to 18.0% from 200-2002. (32)



2.) Self control
Unlike the IYSL campaign which assumes that adolescents have self control over their actions and can take charge of their sex life, the Ignite campaign takes cognizance of the fact that people have difficulty with self control and their social reasoning is influenced not only by their basic intellectual abilities, but by their desires, motives and interests (12). In addition, the alternative health models used in the Ignite campaign take advantage of the fact that human behavior is influenced by expectations, predictably irrational and not planned. For example, there are “seasons” in the stock market when investors (skilled and unskilled) “rush” to buy a particular stock at unreasonable high prices because such companies have strategically raised the expectations of consumers (via branding, framing and marketing theories) and taken advantage of the predictable irrational “herd” mentality. Similarly, by successfully associating the Ignite condom brands with the core values (sex, attractiveness and pleasure) that appeal to adolescents, the Ignite campaign can take advantage of adolescents lack of self control (which contributes to risky behaviors) and predictable irrational behavior in order to increase the use of Ignite condoms. Trust campaign, conducted by the U.S.-based Population Services International (PSI) promoted an HIV/AIDS prevention social marketing campaign that was effective in reaching adolescents and young adults in Kenya. The Trust campaign promoted the social desirability of condom use by making condom use seem cool. Studies show that the campaign increased adolescents and young adult awareness of the Trust condom brand and increased condom use among those with repeated exposure to the brand. (33)

It is important to note that while the commercial marketing strategies benefit the marketer, the social marketing strategy used by Ignite campaign benefits the target audience and the society at large by reducing STD rates and its consequences. In addition, by actually making pleasurable condom packs, Ignite campaign is not deceiving the target audience.

3.) Social Determinants



Though the Ignite campaign may not be able to address all the societal factors that influence adolescents’ behaviors, it offers a more comprehensive approach for addressing these factors than the IYSL campaign. Firstly, because adolescents are increasingly less subject to parental influence and more subject to peer and media influence (31), there is a dire need for public health professionals to promote media campaigns that can influence adolescents. Campaigns that appeal to the core values of adolescents are more influential than campaigns which emphasize on the negative consequences of acquiring STD’s. The use of negative messaging (“don’t do this behavior”) counters the rebellious core value of adolescents. Adolescents rebel against external restrictions on their independence and self-control (31), thus they develop opposing reactions to negative — “don’t do it” —messages. For example adolescent boys who associate displeasure strongly with condom use are likely to rebel against outside forces who try to “impose” condom use on them without offering them an immediate, tangible, gratifying and valuable exchange that will not make them feel a loss. Thus by reframing condom use as pleasurable and using ads that do not counter the rebellious nature of adolescents and appeals to their other core values (pleasure, attractiveness, sex), the Ignite campaign has superiority in using the media to influence adolescents’ behaviors than the IYSL campaign. The success of the Trust campaign in increasing condom use by framing condom use as being cool, illustrates the power of branded messages that convey positive behavioral alternatives for young people (33).

Secondly, through the extensive use of multi-channels by the Ignite campaign, the campaign is capable of fighting the “battle” against other media and marketing exposures that can promote risky health behaviors. The VERB campaign, It’s what you do, is an excellent example of a public health campaign that used several multi channels to reach its target population. The VERB advertising and promotions reached “tweens” in their homes, schools, and in their communities. The primary vehicle was paid advertising in the general market and in ethnic media channels. The VERB made use of TV, radio channels, print advertising in dozens of youth publications, websites, social networks (Facebook, MySpace) and other media agents such as text messages. Evaluation of the VERB campaign showed that as these same children became more aware of VERB, they engaged in more free-time physical activity sessions. The average 9-to 10-year old youth who were aware of VERB engaged in 34 percent more free-time physical activity sessions per week than did 9- to 10-year-old youths who were unaware of the campaign. (31)

Thirdly, the Ignite campaign also offers a comprehensive approach to promoting preventive behaviors through its outreach to the communities and school based centers. In addition, by involving community members in advocacy for provision of comprehensive adolescent centers, the Ignite campaign takes advantage of the “power” of social marketing in affecting policy makers through the media to frame public debate in support of enacting health policies; thus by influencing policy makers, they can address the broader social and environmental determinants of health (27).

Conclusion
The alternative health behavior models (Framing and Social Marketing Theories) used by the Ignite campaign have the potential to promote preventive sexual behaviors among adolescents; and thus reduce STD rates. Public health professionals need to abandon the “myth” that using such strategies to promote healthy behaviors is manipulative and unethical. It is time for public health campaigns/interventions to look beyond the traditional health models which have failed to curb STD rates among adolescents. The Ignite campaign provides a strong model that can be used to win the war against sexually transmitted diseases.

REFERENCES
1.) Music television channel (MTV).IT’S YOUR SEX LIFE. http://itsyoursexlife.com/iysl
2.) Johnson E. H, Gant L, Hinkle Y. A., Gilbert D, Willis C, Hoopwood T. Do African American men and women differ in their knowledge about AIDS, attitudes about condoms and sexual behaviors? Journal of National Medical Association.1992; 84(1):49-64.
3.) DiClemente R. J, Forrest K. A, Mickler S. College students’ knowledge and attitudes about AIDS and changes in HIV-preventive behaviors. AIDS Education and Prevention. 1990; 2(3): 201-212
4.) Lollis C. M, Johnson E. H, Antoni M. H.The efficacy of the Health Belief Model for predicting condom usage and risky sexual practices in university students. AIDS Education and Prevention. 1997; 9(6): 551-563.
Sands T, Archer J, Puleo S. Prevention of health-risk behaviors inn college students: Evaluating seven variables. Journal of College Student Development. 1998; 39(4): 331-342. Steers W. N, Elliott E, Nemiro J, Ditman D, Oskamp S. Health beliefs as predictors of HIV-preventive behavior and ethnic differences in prediction. Journal of Social Psychology. 1996; 136(1): 99-110.
5.) Evelyn B. Winfield and Arthur L. Whaley A Comprehensive Test of the Health Belief Model in the Prediction of Condom Use Among African American College Students. Journal of Black Psychology. 2002; 28(4):330-346
6.) Kyung-Hee Choi; Gust A. Yep; Eugene K. HIV Prevention Among Asian and Pacific Islander American Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Critical Review of Theoretical Models and Directions for Future Research. AIDS Education and Prevention. 1998; 10(A): 19-30.
7.) Mary K. Salazar MN, COHN. Comparison of four behavioral theories. AAOHN Journal. 1991; 39(3):128-135.
8.) Eisenberg N, Morris A. Moral cognitions and pro-social responding in adolescence (pp. 155–188). In: Lerner R. and Steinberg L ed. Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. Wiley, 2004
9.) Sobesky W. The effects of situational factors on moral judgments. Child Dev. 1983;
54:575–58
10.) Klaczynski P.A. Bias in adolescents’ everyday reasoning and its relationships with intellectual ability, personal theories, and self serving motivation. Dev. Psychol. 1997; 33:273–283
11.) Klaczynski P, Gordon D. Everyday statistical reasoning during adolescence and young adulthood: Motivational, general ability, and developmental influences. Child Dev. 1996; 67: 2873–2891
12.) Laurence Steinberg. Cognitive and affective development in adolescence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2005; 9(2 ):69-74
13.) Benthin A. Adolescent health-threatening and health enhancing behaviors: A study of word association and imagery. J. Adolesc. Health. 1995; 17:143–152
14.) Cauffman, E. and Steinberg, L.The cognitive and affective influences on adolescent decision-making. Temple Law Rev. 1995; 68:1763–1789
15.) Slovic, P. What does it mean to know a cumulative risk? Adolescent’s perceptions of short-term and long-term consequences of smoking. J. Behav. Decis. Making. 2000; 13:259-266
16.) Steinberg, L. Risk-taking in adolescence: What changes, and why? Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004; 1021: 51–58
17.) Blanton H, Gerrard M. Effect of sexual motivation on men’s risk perception for sexually transmitted disease there must be 50 ways to justify a lover. Health Psychology. 1997; 16:374–37
18.) Dan Ariely, George Loewenstein. The Heat of the Moment: The Effect of Sexual Arousal on Sexual Decision Making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2006; 19: 87–98
19.) DiClemente R.J, PhD, Salazar L.F, PhD, Crosby R.A, PhD. A Review of STD/HIV Preventive Interventions for Adolescents: Sustaining Effects Using an Ecological Approach. Journal of Pediatric Psychology. 2007; 32(8):888-906
20.) Hogben M, PHD, Leichliter J.S, PHD. Social Determinants and Sexually Transmitted Disease Disparities. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. 2008; 35(12):S13–S18.
21.) Upchurch D.M, Mason W.M, Kusunoki.Y, Johnson M. Social and Behavioral Determinants of Self-Reported STD Among Adolescents. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.2004;36 (6):276–287
22.) Teitler JO and Weiss CC. Effects of neighborhood and school environments on transitions to first sexual intercourse. Sociology of Education. 2000; 73(2):112–132
23.) Wingood GM, DiClemente RJ, Bernhardt JM, Harrington K, Davies SL, Robillard A. A prospective study of exposure to rap music videos and African American female adolescents’ health. American Journal of Public Health. 2003; 93(3):437–439
24.) Wingood GM, DiClemente RJ, Harrington K, Davies S, Hook EW. Exposure to X-rated movies and adolescents’ sexual and contraceptive-related attitudes and behaviors. Pediatrics. 2001; 107(5):1116–1119
25.) Maton K. Making a difference: The social ecology of social transformation. American Journal of Community Psychology .2000; 28(1):25–57
26.) Kotler P, Andreasen A. Strategic Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations.
New York: Prentice Hall, 1996.
27.) Grier S, Bryant A.C. Social marketing in public health. Annu. Rev. Public Health. 2005; 26:319–39
28.) Lakoff, G. Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Chelsea Green: White River Junction, 2004
29.) Dorfman L, Wallack L, Woodruff K. More than a message: Framing public health advocacy to change corporate practices. Health Education & Behavior. 2005 ; 32 (3): 320-336
30.) Philpott A, Knerr W, Boydell V. Pleasure and Prevention: When Good Sex Is Safer Sex. Reproductive Health Matters. 2006; 14(28):23–31
31.) National Institute for health care management. Recommended Adolescent Health Care Utilization: How Social Marketing Can Help. NIHCM Foundation Issue Brief March 2009.
http://www.nihcm.org/pdf/NIHCM-SocialMarketing-FINAL.pdf
32.) Farrelly MC, Davis KC, Haviland ML, Messeri P and Healton CG. Evidence of a Dose-Response Relationship Between ‘truth’ Antismoking Ads and Youth Smoking. American Journal of Public Health. 2005; 95(3):425–431.
33.) Agha S. The Impact of a Mass Media Campaign on Personal Risk Perception, Perceived Self-Efficacy and on Other Behavioral Predictors. Aids Care. 2003; 15(6):749–62

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Foundations Of A New HIV Intervention Among Young Black MSM –Allan Welter

Introduction
Evidence shows that individual, interpersonal and community level HIV behavioral interventions are effective in reducing the odds of unprotected anal intercourse considerably among MSM (men who have sex with men) (5, 6, 12). The individual-level component of an intervention is effective when modifying HIV-related knowledge, attitudes and beliefs held by MSM. Increasing perceived self-efficacy among MSM in relation to safer-sex behaviors is also crucial in the individual-level component of the intervention. The interpersonal-level component of an intervention is effective when aimed at changing knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about MSM in small groups of people. Group intervention among family members and close acquaintances of MSM is the main focus of the interpersonal-level. Finally, the community-level component of an intervention is effective in motivating and reinforcing behavior change among those who do not participate directly in the individual and interpersonal levels of the intervention (6).
A Hypothetical Alternate HIV-Intervention to the “Use a Condom Every Time” Campaign
New studies have shown that the annual increase of HIV among young black MSM is as high as 15% (3). In response, the public health department of Washington DC chose young Black MSM in metropolitan Washington DC as the key population of interest for a new culturally sensitive HIV intervention campaign running on individual, interpersonal, and community levels. The goal of this intervention was to increase rates of safer sex practices among young Black MSM.
Individual-Level Component of the Intervention for Young Black MSM:
To modify HIV-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs among young Black MSM, culturally sensitive advertisements were spread throughout the metropolitan DC area via brochures, dance clubs, radio stations, top40 podcasts, NPR, and common MSM-oriented websites. Advertisements promoted positive attitudes toward safer sex practices among young Black MSM. These attitudes were promoted through images of men participating in safer sex practices. Young black MSM couples were shown valuing safer-sex practices by saying slogans such as, “I love my Boo. Safer Sex is one way we Show our Love” (13). Men in the advertisements were young and relatable to young Black MSM in the metro DC area.
A general sense of well-being and perceived self-efficacy in relation to safer-sex practices were promoted through confidential private and group sessions in open, supportive environments. Sessions were held on weekdays and weekends and were conducted by trained professionals. These sessions ranged from safer-sex demonstrations to discussing difficulties associated with having sex with men and being a young Black man (5). Young Black MSM were recruited through social websites and after-school programs. Incentives such as food, public transportation tokens, and free passes into local 18+ and 21+ clubs were offered to increase turnout rates.
Interpersonal-Level Component of the Intervention:
To modify the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of young Black MSM among families and proxy contacts of young Black MSM (5), culturally sensitive messages were spread via brochures, the media, grocery stores, fast-food restaurants, the Internet, and any other accessible place. Respectful images showing families embracing MSM children were circulated. Individual MSM and MSM couples were shown everyday settings being welcomed, loved, and respected by family and friends. Culturally sensitive images were also circulated showing parents and close contacts of MSM playing active, respectful and positive roles in accepting a young Black MSM’s sexuality (6).
Through social networking, use of bulletins, media sources, and Internet advertisements, families and proxy contacts of MSM were actively recruited into the intervention. Incentives such as food, public transportation tokens, BP gasoline cards equal to the value of public transportation tokens, and $20 gift cards to whole foods with free delivery were offered to increase turnout rates. Sessions were offered on weekdays and weekends and were led by experts in this area of intervention. Counseling for families and proxy contacts were aimed at increasing open communication about sexuality with young Black MSM and transitioning to more positive attitudes relating to MSM persons. Support groups composed of multiple families and contacts were formed to help share experiences related to raising MSM children. Social networks supportive of gay children were introduced to families holding negative attitudes toward young Black MSM (5).
Community-Level Component of the Intervention:
A community intervention among young Black MSM was run on the national-level. Upon research, the campaign discovered that most young Black MSM considered safer-sex to be labeled as “good” and unsafe safe to be labeled as “bad” by the public. These beliefs were problematic for two reasons. First, there was a strong sense of masculinity among young Black MSM that corresponded with being “tough” and daring. Engaging in “bad” and unsafe sex could lead to a conscious or subconscious increase in perceptions of masculinity. Second, young Black MSM felt a sense of homophobia imposed upon them when told to use condoms. They felt heterosexuals imposed the belief that engaging in unsafe sex among MSM individuals is and will always be bad, regardless of any relationship circumstances (6). The campaign also discovered that definitions of “healthy” differed between public health officials and young Black MSM. Young Black MSM did not consider an HIV+ person unhealthy until they were diagnosed with AIDS. This potentially rises from high recognition between young Black MSM of effective HIV treatment (11). There were high levels of awareness of the high HIV infection rates among young Black MSM. This awareness may have led to the feeling infection as inevitable and therapy as painless. Low self-efficacy in relation to protecting oneself from HIV may be leading to higher rates of unsafe sex among young Black MSM.
The nationwide intervention used mass-media campaigns, taking advantage of the culturally sensitive data gained. Prime-time commercials, newspapers, popular magazines, websites commonly frequented by young Black MSM, NPR, and various radio stations transmitted the intervention. Advertisements portrayed HIV as sneaking into the body and hiding in an infected human’s DNA so the treatment could not touch the virus. This shifted the young Black MSM view of engaging in safer-sex as “good” to engaging in safer-sex as actively defending oneself against the sneaky and cowardly virus. It also challenged the notion of having only HIV as being in a healthy state because it made visible the fact that the virus lives inside the individual. To combat the perception of masculinity, advertisements showed young Black MSM protecting others from HIV through engaging in safer-sex practices, effectively associating masculinity with safer sex practices.
Peers of young Black MSM began delivering messages advocating for safer-sex practices. MSM oriented safer-sex demonstrations were made mandatory in public schools [through the wand of Barack Obama?], increasing the perceived self-efficacy relating to safer-sex among young Black MSM. To deconstruct homophobic undertones of safer-sex interventions, open dialogue relating to engaging in unprotected sex within monogamous MSM couples was encouraged. The term monogamous was emphasized, just as is true for heterosexual couples. Finally, role model stories of young Black MSM were distributed throughout the country over various forms of media in an attempt to increase a sense of value and well-being among young Black MSM.
Improvements of Proposed Intervention on the “Use a Condom Every Time” Campaign
Proposed Intervention Does not Run Only on the Individual Level:
One fundamental improvement of this intervention over the “Use a Condom Every Time” campaign is that it is not run merely on the individual level. Accounting for the group dynamic (4), this intervention will be able to shift behaviors of entire groups of young Black MSM rather than individual MSM (4). Essentially, people who do not participate in the intervention on the individual level are still influenced by the intervention through the cultural shift of attitudes related to safer-sex practices (5). The community and interpersonal proportions of this intervention attempt to shift HIV-related beliefs for entire groups rather than individuals.
Additionally, this intervention specifically addresses the wider social context affecting health related behaviors of individuals (4). Contextual issues are put forth regarding masculinity and unprotected sex among young Black MSM. Young Black MSM may have had unprotected sex to increase their sense of masculinity. This intervention used masculinity as a contextual tool of intervention, showing young Black MSM protecting others through safer-sex as masculine. This would not be possible in the “use a condom every time” campaign.
Homophobic Societal Undertones related to Condom Use are Eliminated:
MSM have “experienced hatred, abuse, and a lack of acceptance by their families, friends, communities, and society in general” (5, 6, 14). We have shown that these negative experiences, potentially leading self-destructive psychological natures, can result in MSM engaging in unprotected sex because it is dangerous (6, 14).
This intervention works on the interpersonal level to decrease homophobia among families, friends, and close contacts of MSM. This will hopefully lead to a decrease in self-destructive tendencies caused by homophobia. A potential decline their rates of unprotected anal sex may be observed as a result (14). Additionally, homophobia is addressed on the national level. Counter to the “use a condom every time” campaign, this intervention opens publicly accepted discussion among monogamous MSM couples to decide whether they want to use condoms in their relationship. In effect, the intervention removes society’s homophobic desire to dictate the behaviors of MSM through “always use a condom” campaigns. This allows MSM and the intervention to interact without the negative pretense of perceived homophobia. In circumstances such as these, MSM are less likely to be defensive and more likely to listen to the message being put forth by the campaign (5, 14). Intervening at the group and interpersonal level allows maximum efficiency in decreasing homophobic experiences of MSM individuals, leading to increases in safer-sex practices (12).
Health Not Assumed to be Highly Valued by most MSM:
The proposed intervention directly addresses the fact that the definition of “healthy” differs between young Black MSM and public health professionals. To get around this discrepancy in definitions, the intervention circulated images depicting HIV as deceptive and cowardly. This image of deception leads to young Black MSM acting in defense of their body, regardless of the definition of health.
MSM may hold a high value for not contracting HIV, but they may also have a low perception of self-efficacy in relation to engaging in safer sex. The new intervention addressed this potential low perceived self-efficacy for using a condom among young Black MSM, an aspect completely left behind by the “use a condom every time” campaign. Since the new intervention does not require that MSM use a condom every time, the pressure associated with having to use a condom in every sexual encounter for the rest of one’s life is diluted. Additionally, confidential group and private sessions were run that showed MSM how to engage in safer-sex practices. Role-playing was implemented to help MSM gain the strength and courage to insist to their partners that a condom be used if they feel it is necessary. Note that both individual and group level interventions were required to address the potential effects of low perceived self-efficacy relating to safer sex among young Black MSM.
Concluding Statement
The proposed intervention improves upon the “how to use a condom every time” campaign in three significant ways. First, this campaign is run on the individual and group level. While increasing perceived self-efficacy relating to safer-sex practices among young Black MSM, we are also shifting beliefs and behaviors of entire groups with relation to HIV (4, 12). Second, young Black MSM men do not perceive the intervention as homophobic. As a result, it is more likely for young Black MSM to take in messages of the intervention. The campaign also addresses homophobia through interventions among families and proxies of young Black MSM. Lower levels of homophobia among MSM proxies will lead to an increased sense of well-being. Young Black MSM will feel more valued and welcomed in everyday aspects of life, which can lead to decreased self-destructive actions and increases in the frequency of safer-sex practices. Finally, the proposed campaign improves on the “use a condom every time” campaign in that it does not assume “health” to be highly valued among most young Black MSM. Without this contextual assumption, the intervention was able to target factors that were truly related with low frequencies of safer-sex practices and intervene based on those factors.
Evidence shows that individual-level, interpersonal-level and community level HIV behavioral interventions are effective in reducing the odds of unprotected anal intercourse considerably among MSM (5, 12). It is crucial for all three components to be a part of the intervention. The community level component is necessary because it allows those who were not directly involved in the intervention to still be influenced by the intervention and because it analyzes health-related behaviors within the cultural context (4). The interpersonal level is essential because reduced levels of homophobia among proxies of MSM will lead to higher senses of well-being among MSM. This may correlate with decreases in self-destructive behavior, and potentially increases in safer-sex practices. Finally, the individual level component is essential because it provides HIV-related knowledge directly to individuals and increases individual perceived self-efficacy relating to safer-sex practices. Implementing all three components into an intervention significantly improves on the “use a condom every time” campaign, and will be effective in increasing the frequency of safer-sex practices within the target population.
REFERENCES:
1. Department of Health and Human Services. Basic Information. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/qa/index.htm.
2. Sterk C. The health intervention project: HIV risk reduction among African American women drug users. Public Health Rep. 2002; 117(Suppl 1): S88–S95.
3. Brown D. HIV rate up 12 percent among young gay men: Steepest rise is in black males ages 13 to 24. (2008, June 27). The Washington Post, p. A14.
4. Edberg M. Essentials of health behavior: Social and behavioral theory in public health (pp 65-76). In: Edberg M, ed. Social, Cultural, and Environmental Theories (Part II). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2007.
5. Choi K. H., Yep, G. A., & Kumekawa, E. HIV prevention among asian and pacific islander american men who have sex with men: A critical review of theoretical models and directions for future research. AIDS Education and Prevention. 1998; 10: 19-30.
6. Siegel M. The importance of formative research in public health campaigns: an example from the area of HIV prevention among gay men (pp. 66-69). In: Siegel M, ed. Marketing Public Health: Strategies to promote social change. Sudbury MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2004.
7. The Complete HIV/AIDS Resource. HIV/AIDS Among Women. The Body. http://www.thebody.com/index/whatis/women_basics.html.
8. Huebner D. et al. The Impact of Internalized Homophobia on HIV Preventive Interventions. American Journal of Community Psychology 2002; 30(3):327-348.
9. Salazar K. Comparison of Four Behavioral Theories: A Literature Review. AAOHN Journal 1991; 39(3):128-135.
10. S A. Bug Chasing: Why Some Men Want to Become HIV Positive. Associated Content: Information from the source. Published Nov 09, 2005. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/13507/bug_chasing_why_some_men_want_to_become.html?singlepage=true&cat=5
11. Jaffe H, Valdiserri R, De Cock K. The Reemerging HIV/AIDS Epidemic in Men Who Have Sex With Men. JAMA Nov 28, 2007;298(20):2412-2414.
12. Herbst J, Beeker C, Mathew A, McNally T, Passin, W, Kay L, Crepaz N, Lyles C, Briss P, Chattopadhyay S, Johnson R. Effectiveness of Individual, Group, and Community-Level HIV Behavioral Risk-Reduction Interventions for Adult Men Who Have Sex with Men. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2007; 32: S38-S67.
13. Gay Men’s Health Crisis. GMHC launches two new HIV awareness campaigns. New York City: Gay Men’s Health Crisis. Retrieved February 13, 2009, from GMHC: Press Web site: http://www.gmhc.org/about/releases/080319.html.
14. Huebner D, Davis M, Nemeroff C, Aiken L. The Impact of Internalized Homophobia on HIV Preventive Intervention. American Journal of Community Psychology 2002; 30:327.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Prenatal Breastfeeding Education: An Examination of Why Education Does Not Work In All Circumstances and a Proposed Intervention -Michelle O’Brien

As a maternal child health care provider and a public health practitioner, I am very interested in interventions aimed at increasing breastfeeding rates and longevity. At Boston Medical Center, a Baby Friendly hospital, we have many different interventions intended to impact breastfeeding rates. The Department of Pediatrics’ Adolescent Health Center Teen and Tot Program offers prenatal education classes for pregnant teenagers. The prenatal classes consist of a two hour session, once a week for ten weeks. The classes cover many important topics such as mind and body changes during pregnancy, common complications of pregnancy, family planning, child development, and newborn care. Breastfeeding is covered in one session, along with maternal nutrition, in the third week. The focus of the breastfeeding portion of the session is on the reasons to breastfeed, nutritional information about breastfeeding and resources to help with breastfeeding. There is no further mention of breastfeeding in the remaining seven weeks of classes. This is typical of most prenatal education classes as there is a lot to be covered in a short amount of time.
I will critique this intervention by focusing on the three most common mistakes made by healthcare professionals and health educators when creating and teaching prenatal breastfeeding education; over-reliance on the Health Belief Model, lack of focus on the needs of the intended audience and poor timing of the intervention.
Concept #1 - The Health Belief Model: “Breast is Best”
Many interventions in modern, Western medicine have a basis in the Health Belief Model. Doctors and other healthcare professionals use facts and data as the foundation of all that they do during their training years. They learn to trust knowledge and feel safe within the constructs of the Health Belief Model. Therefore, many of their interventions are linked to this model. However, there are many flaws with this theory, particularly when applied to the choice to breastfeed or formula feed.
Irrational behavior
The Health Belief Model is anchored in the belief that when presented with information about a desired behavior, the target audience will weigh the risks and benefits of adopting that behavior and make a rational choice. This has been proven to be untrue when applied to decision making regarding infant feeding (breast vs. formula). When questioned about the benefits of breast milk over formula, most women acknowledge the superiority of human milk over formula (1, 2). When asked specifically about the benefits of breast milk, the women are able to identify that breast milk has nutritional benefits over formula, that it can protect babies against disease, that breast milk is involved in both physical and psychological development of the child and that the act of breastfeeding creates a special bond between mother and child (1). In a study examining the reasons for infant feeding choices, this was true of both formula feeding and breastfeeding mothers. Women that had chosen to bottle feed acknowledged the advantages of breast milk over formula, although overall the difference between their ratings of breast milk over formula were smaller than for breastfeeding mothers (1). When looking at the decision making based on this information alone, it seems that prenatal education has been successful in educating the mothers on the benefits of breastfeeding but that this was not influential in the decision making in a large number of women. Another strategy used within the Health Belief Model when persuading women to breastfeed is an economic argument. Formula is very expensive when compared to breast milk. In the same study, women acknowledged the higher cost of formula but in women that chose to formula feed, the cost was not influential in their decision making (1). This is even more striking when you realize that the women sampled in this study were primarily low-income. One might even say it seems a bit irrational.
We are not all the same
Prenatal education as an intervention for breastfeeding assumes that all women will seek out information on breastfeeding. A sociodemographic difference in the women who attend childbirth preparation or prenatal education courses (3) has an impact on the overall effectiveness of this particular intervention, with poor minority women less likely to enroll in classes. For the women who do attend classes, use of the Health Belief Model assumes that they are all at the same level of education, have the same values and beliefs as each other and the health care providers and have the same support systems in place. Many prenatal education courses also assume that the baby is central to the decision regarding feeding methods. Research studies show that this is often not the case. There are other factors that supersede the needs of the baby; including perceived convenience of formula feeding over breastfeeding, feeling “tied down” with breastfeeding and pressures from family, significant others and friends to allow them to help feed the baby (1-2, 4). Women who are working or in school may not feel they have the time or a place to breastfeed or pump (1, 5). All these factors contribute to women rejecting the “facts” that they learn in the classes in making their infant feeding decisions.
Concept #2 - Know your audience: The teen mother
There are many studies that show that adolescents learn differently than adults and that their decision-making capacity is influenced by much different factors. In reference to breastfeeding, it is well known that teenagers are least likely to initiate breastfeeding and more likely to discontinue early (2, 4, 6-10). So breastfeeding interventions geared towards adolescents need to focus on the special needs and characteristics of their target audience.
Learning is boring
Most adolescent mothers are not interested in didactic education sessions. In order to keep their interest and attention, the educator needs to be creative. A program in Florida (11) utilized games to teach the adolescents about breastfeeding; a word search with common breastfeeding terms, “condom breasts” to demonstrate latch while also addressing safe sex issues, Breastfeeding Bingo and group activities such as “You Solve It” and Baby Boob Jeopardy. This adolescent-focused intervention showed a significant increase in breastfeeding initiation (65.1%) in comparison to girls who received “standard” breastfeeding education (14.6%). The typical prenatal education class is similar to a health class lecture. The teacher or educator imparts knowledge to the learner (adolescent mother) and allows time for questions at the end. More interactive learning is ideal in this age group particularly when addressing subjects that can be identified as embarrassing.
It’s Embarrassing
Adolescent mothers are more likely to cite embarrassment as the primary reason for not breastfeeding (2, 4). Prenatal education classes infrequently address the issues faced by adolescent mothers who are just becoming comfortable with the changes in their maturing bodies but do not yet have the mental maturity to assimilate breastfeeding and the purpose of breasts in infant feeding with their daily lives. When you add in the cultural context of sexuality and breasts found in this country (12), it is often too much for an immature mind to process without the proper support and guidance.
‘They” Don’t Want Me To
Not surprisingly, adolescent mothers are much more sensitive to the viewpoints of the people closest to them when making their infant feeding choices. The teens’ mothers are often the most influential in their decisions regarding infant feeding (2, 4) even if they don’t have a good relationship with their mother (2). Since most adolescent mothers still live with their parents, the maternal grandmother (of the infant) will shape her daughter’s decision based on her own experiences with breastfeeding and how involved she is with the care of the infant (ie Is she taking the “mother” role?) (2). If the mother’s mother will be assuming a large portion of the care duties (for instance, when the mother returns to school) she may be more likely to discourage the mother from breastfeeding so she can easily feed the infant with a bottle. The father of the baby also has significant influence on the decision of feeding method (2, 4). He may feel left out if the mother exclusively breastfeeds or may attach a sexual connotation to her breasts. A single two hour class on breastfeeding cannot even begin to address the influences of the mother (of the teen mother) and the father of the baby nor include them in any meaningful dialogue. As is common in individual based public health interventions, prenatal education classes do not always consider the greater context of the relationships and environment that the intended audience lives and works within.
Concept #3 - Timing is everything: Too little, too late
Finally, this intervention does not take into account the time needed to make a decision as complex as whether or not to breastfeed. A single two hour class does not do justice to the multitude of factors that play a part in each individual woman’s decision making process. As has been addressed in previous sections of this paper, pregnant teens are faced with many competing factors as well as dealing with pregnancy and impending motherhood. If an intervention truly intends to increase breastfeeding initiation, it needs to be more of a continuous ongoing intervention.
Most prenatal education classes take place in the seventh to eighth months of pregnancy. Studies have shown that in order to be effective breastfeeding interventions need to start much earlier (4, 11), perhaps even in schools before the teens are even pregnant (11). Breastfeeding presented in health class as a natural, normal way to feed your baby begins to lay the foundation for a different societal view of breastfeeding.
In summary, the Adolescent Center’s prenatal breastfeeding education intervention is less than ideal for many reasons. As demonstrated by the evidence cited, the decision whether to breastfeed or not is usually not a rational decision. Use of the Health Belief Model in breastfeeding promotion is misguided as it is in most public health intervention. Despite the fact the critiqued program is occurring within an Adolescent Center, they fail to consider the special needs of their population when approaching breastfeeding promotion. Innovative teaching methods are necessary to get the attention of the adolescent mind and the support people (mother, partner) need to be more integrated into the intervention beyond “inviting” them to attend classes. More thought should be put into the timing of breastfeeding interventions and collaborative efforts with the school systems should be explored.
A potential intervention that addresses the weaknesses of the Adolescent Center’s prenatal breastfeeding education class is one that I proposed in MC820 Planning and Program Development in Maternal and Child Health. This intervention combines several models of public health and healthcare interventions. The cornerstone of the intervention is an innovative model for prenatal care called CenteringPregnancy®. Developed by Sharon Schindler Rising, CNM, CenteringPregnancy® is group prenatal care which utilizes the power of self-empowerment and community to increase patient satisfaction, improve perinatal outcomes and increase breastfeeding rates (13, 14). A group of 10-12 women with similar due dates receive all their prenatal care in a group that is consistent throughout the nine months. Together the women teach and learn from each other, with guidance from a trained medical professional.
My intervention adds a hands-on breastfeeding education component to CenteringPregnancy® that starts at the very beginning of prenatal care, occurs at each visit and happens in the group setting. This breastfeeding education allows women to practice breastfeeding techniques with life size dolls and cloth breast models, visualize the size of a newborn’s stomach and discuss what to expect in the first couple days to weeks of breastfeeding. While there would be some teaching about the benefits of breast milk and why it is the ideal nutrition for newborns, this would not be the core of the breastfeeding education curriculum. A certified lactation consultant would participate in the design of the curriculum and would help the health care providers in demonstrating and problem solving with the women.
Previously, I discussed some of the limitations of other breastfeeding promotion interventions. This intervention directly addresses the weaknesses of the previous model; over-reliance on the Health Belief Model, lack of focus on the needs of the intended audience and poor timing of the intervention.
Concept #1 Redo - The Health Belief Model: “Breast is Best”
A skill based, hands on intervention does not rely on the concepts of the Health Belief Model. The Health Belief Model relies on presenting the target subject(s) with information and facts and trusting that these subjects will make rational decisions based on this information. The proposed intervention allows for the practice of techniques with props, while in a group setting where they can watch other women doing the same and learning from each other about what does and does not work. It gives women practical skills, not just facts. There is not so much a process of weighing the risks and benefits of the information gained as the achievement of skills that may or may not be utilized depending on the woman’s intentions regarding breastfeeding. By allowing the women to practice and consider the implications of breastfeeding beyond nutrition for the baby, it makes it more concrete and allows them to make a decision that works best for them. This type of learning has been found to be effective in several studies (15-18). And while this does have some foundation in Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (19), the limitations of this model are mitigated by the second portion of the intervention, the Centering® model.
The CenteringPregnancy® portion of the intervention uses social network theory. Social network theory describes the power that a group that is tied to each other in a social manner can influence and affect behavior of individuals in the group. By sharing an important time in their life with other women going through the same experience, the women involved in Centering® form strong relationships within the social network of the group. The healthcare provider participates as a member of the group, facilitating but not leading discussion or lecturing. So often the “answers” or proposed behavior changes are suggested by other members of the group and not necessarily by the authority figure of the healthcare provider. The type of group care in a Centering model is also contrary to the Health Belief Model because it is not a one size fits all approach. The conduct within the group is centered on every participant having an equal say, and while the care is done in a group, it is individualized for each woman. My proposed intervention would build on that. While the activities presented would be similar, each woman could choose to focus on what is most important to her and her needs.
Concept #2 Redo - Know your audience: The teen mother
Teenagers would be the ideal group of women for this intervention. First of all the hands-on, practical aspects of the intervention would appeal to many adolescents. It is often embarrassing for young women to talk about breasts, due to the sexualization of the breasts by our society. By getting comfortable with the cloth breasts and the baby models, teenage mothers are more likely to feel a little less embarrassed and self-conscious about trying breastfeeding when the time comes. As mentioned previously, it has been found that adolescents learn better when the information is presented in a creative or interactive way (11).
CenteringPregnancy® has been found to be very effective with adolescents (14). The model is aimed at empowering the women to take control of their health care and their bodies by allowing them to be actively involved in self care and other healthcare activities. This empowerment helps adolescent mothers have confidence in their decisions for themselves and their babies. The influence of the adolescent’s mother or the father of the baby on the young mother’s feeding decision lessens when she feels that she has control over her body and health. Many CenteringPregnancy® groups include support people in each session so they have the opportunity to hear the same information, hear what other fathers or grandmothers are saying about breastfeeding and bottle feeding.
The Centering® model has some elements of diffusion of innovation theory. Teens are very much influenced by leaders or innovators. Often they follow or imitate unhealthy or destructive behaviors. With CenteringPregnancy®, these young women see that it can be “cool” to take care of your body, to have respect for yourself and the decisions you make.
Concept #3 Redo - Timing is everything: Too little, too late
The proposed intervention would begin early in pregnancy. It would be a component of each group prenatal visit. Early introduction of breastfeeding interventions and support has been shown to be effective (4,11). By using the ideas presented in framing theory, breastfeeding preparation is reframed to become a part of normal prenatal care. By addressing breastfeeding and breastfeeding preparation at each prenatal visit, the concept becomes as normal and routine as a weight or blood pressure check. Because of the marketing of formula and even promotion of formula feeding by health care providers in this country, breastfeeding is often viewed as “extra” or something special that only some mothers do. Incorporating it into the usual prenatal routine helps send the message that breastfeeding is normal and natural.
Conclusion
While breastfeeding is not for everyone, more efforts need to be made in the clinical and public health arenas to better prepare women for breastfeeding, allow them the opportunity to experience the “process” of breastfeeding before the baby is born and normalize breastfeeding a natural and healthy choice for women and their babies. I propose that my intervention is just one way that this could be accomplished but does have the potential to work particularly well in a pregnant adolescent population.

REFERENCES
1. Zimmerman DJ, Guttman N. “Breast Is Best”: Knowledge Among Low- Income Mothers Is Not Enough. Journal of Human Lactation 2001; 17:14-19.
2. Morrison L, Reza A, Cardines K, Foutch- Chew K, Severance C. Determinants of Infant-Feeding Choice Among Young Women in Hilo, Hawaii. Healthcare for Women International 2008; 29(8):807-825.
3. Lu MC, Prentice J, Yu SM, Inkelas M, Lange MO, Halfon N. Childbirth Education Classes: Sociodemographic Disparities in Attendance and the Association of Attendance with Breastfeeding Initiation. Maternal and Child Health Journal 2003; 7(2):87-93.
4. Ineichen B, Pierce M, Lawrenson R. Teenage mothers as breastfeeders: attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Adolescence 1997; 20:505-509.
5. Johnston, ML, Esposito N. Barriers and Facilitators for Breastfeeding Among Working Women in the United States. JOGNN 2007; 36(1):9-20.
6. Hannon PR, Willis SK, Bishop-Townsend V, Martinez IM, Scrimshaw SC. African American and Latina Adolescent Mothers’ Infant Feeding Decisions and Breastfeeding Practices: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Adolescent Health 2000; 26:399-407.
7. Benson S. Adolescent mothers’ experience of parenting and breastfeeding:
A descriptive study. Breast Rev. 1996; 4:19-27.
8. Robinson J, Hunt A, Pope J, Garner B. Attitudes toward infant feeding
among adolescent mothers from northern Louisiana. J Am Diet Assoc.
1993; 93:1311-1313.
9. Reifsnider E, Eckhart D. Prenatal breastfeeding education: It’s effect on
breastfeeding among WIC participants. Journal of Human Lactation 1997; 13:121-126.
10. Maehr J, Lizarraga J, Wingard D, Felice M. A comparative study of adolescent and adult mothers who intend to breastfeed. Journal of Adolescent Health 1993; 14:453-457.
11. Volpe EM, Bear M. Enhanced Breastfeeding Initiation in Adolescent Mothers Through the Breastfeeding Educated and Supported Teen (BEST) Club. Journal of Human Lactation 2000; 16(3):196-200.
12. Rodriguez-Garcia R, Frazier L. Cultural Paradoxes Relating to Sexuality and Breastfeeding. Journal of Human Lactation 1995; 11(2):11-115.
13. Massey Z, Schindler Rising S, Ickovics J. CenteringPregnancy Group Prenatal Care: Promoting Relationship-Centered Care. JOGNN 2006; 35(2): 286-294.
14. Grady MA, Bloom KC. Pregnancy Outcomes of Adolescents Enrolled in a CenteringPregnancy Program. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health 2004; 49(5): 412-420.
15. Chezem JC, Freisen C & Boettcher J. Breastfeeding knowledge, breastfeeding confidence, and infant feeding plans: Effects on actual feeding practices. JOGNN. 2003; 32:40-47.
16. Hartley BM & O’Connor ME. Evaluation of the ‘Best Start’ breast-feeding education program. Archives of the Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 1996; 50:868-871.
17. Kistin N, Abramson R & Dublin P. Effect of peer counselors on breastfeeding initiation, exclusivity, and duration among low-income urban women. Journal of Human Lactation. 1990, 10(1):11-16.
18. Zimmerman DR. You can make a difference: Increasing breastfeeding rates in an inner city clinic. Journal of Human Lactation. 1999; 15:217-220.
19. Bandura A. Self-Efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review; 1977, 84:191-215.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Successful Miscommunication: A Critical Review of the Peace of Mind Campaign -Matthew Hanlon

Introduction
In an effort to combat high rates of unhealthy sexual behaviors and negative outcomes of those behaviors the Health Promotion Agency, a public health organization in Ireland, launched a campaign in Northern Ireland. This initiative named "The Peace of Mind Campaign," focused on increasing knowledge of existing sexual health issues facing the Northern Ireland population aged between eighteen and thirty years. The campaign began its efforts in 1993, with a poster campaign that was received very well, but not directly followed up upon. It was not until 1997 that a new poster campaign was launched. These posters were targeted primarily university students at first, as they were used as a test group. Advertisements addressing transmission of chlamydia, getting regular STD tests and to a lesser extent condom use were placed in and around university campuses and surrounding pubs. Studies were then conducted in order to measure awareness of the poster advertisements in the target population. It was found that approximately two thirds of the population was aware of the advertisements and their message.
Based on the findings of the awareness study the in December of 2000 the intervention was expanded to include information leaflets, fact sheets and other forms of print media as well as other locations not directly associated with university students. However, it is important to note that the target age group was not expanded at this time. As the campaign progressed posters were changed regularly with about one year between new iterations. By 2004 fourteen different posters had been created and used in the campaign. Keeping in line with the strategy of varying how the safe sex message was delivered in April of 2007 the Health Promotion Agency began launching radio and television advertisements in Northern Ireland as well (10).
HBM and the Peace of Mind Campaign
This intervention, as has been stated previously, is an educational campaign based on the dissemination of information and subsequent awareness of sexual health issues faced by the population being targeted. It is worth noting that content of the print media contained within this campaign can be divide into two main classes. The first class is information aimed at increasing the population's view of benefits derived from safe sex behaviors. This is achieved by enlarging the population's view of its susceptibility to and the severity of the negative health outcomes associated with sexual behaviors, such as unwanted pregnancy, chlamydia, HIV or other STDs. The second class of information deals with providing specific knowledge about sexual health clinics or where to get further information on sexual health issues. This type of information can be seen as material aimed at reducing the perceived barriers to gaining information about and practicing health conscious sexual behaviors. These two factors, perceived susceptibility and perceived barriers are major components of a popular model for public health interventions known as the Health Belief Model (HBM). The HBM asserts that perceived benefits and perceived barriers are in opposition of each other, and that in order for someone to develop an intention to perform a health behavior the perceived benefits must overcome the perceived barriers (3).
The HBM can be very useful at the beginning stages of a public health intervention. It provides direction and focal points for disseminating information to the target population. There are a number of people that do and will respond to the strategy outlined by the HBM early on in the intervention. Often times there can be a change in a significant portion of the population when a campaign based on the HBM is instituted. However, it is important to note that the entire population does not respond the same way as this smaller group that is fast to develop safe sex habits. There are a few explanations for this occurrence. One is that the people who are fast to pick up condom use and other safe sex habits are different from the rest of the population regarding health conscious behaviors. Due to variables not shared by the rest of the population this group of people readily makes behavior changes when they are given health information they did not previously have. The second explanation is that the educational information presented in the intervention are more salient with the first group and have simply not reached the others who have yet to develop the safe sex habits being promoted. Each of these explanations results in a very different view of the HBM's impact as an intervention model.
Failure of the HBM
When viewing "The Peace of Mind Campaign" through the lens of the HBM it seems to be a rousing success when 67% of subjects in the study evaluating awareness of the campaign responded they knew of the posters and that they recalled the message(10). This is especially true if it is believed that the reason the HBM may be unsuccessful is not because of different groups' response to health information, but whether or not they retained the information given to them. However, this is also based on the assumption that health behaviors in general and, more specifically, sexual health behaviors do follow the HBM, which has been shown to not be the case. In a study where the predictive powers of the HBM was compared to other health behavior models it was shown that the HBM accounted for less variance in diet, exercise and smoking behaviors than did the theory of reasoned action or theory or planned behavior (5). In addition, a later study based on a quantitative review of many preexisting studies it was shown that the HBM was lacking in predictive powers, which was then attributed to its focusing only on factors predisposing people to a behavior (4). Because of these studies it can then be concluded that the HBM functions through the first explanation given for why the HBM does not reach an entire population: there are different groups within a population with different dispositions towards adopting a health behavior. As such this entire campaign is fundamentally flawed because it is based on faulty assumptions made by the HBM and how it is applied to target populations.
Lack of Aim in Addressing Relevant Populations
Another major flaw with this campaign is the target population for the intervention. This intervention was an educational campaign focused on creating awareness of sexual health so that people would then subsequently change their behaviors to conform with their new knowledge. In addition, as stated earlier "The Peace of Mind Campaign" targeted adults of ages eighteen to thirty years. Although there is nothing inherently wrong with targeting a safe sex intervention to that age group, it was a mistake in this particular intervention to place that specific age restriction on the campaign. There is reasoning based on both psychological theories and empirical data collected directly in relation to this campaign that gives credence to an age restriction of eighteen to thirty years being a mistake.
As stated earlier, interventions of this type do have an effect on some members of the population, but there still remains a large proportion that does not change their preexisting behaviors. One possible explanation for this occurrence comes from an extension of the endowment effect. The endowment effect states that people will place higher value upon an item that they have ownership of in comparison to a similar item that they do not own (7). This can be interpreted to mean that owning something has an inherent value to a person and that value is substantially higher than the innate value of that item. It is therefore very easy to infer that people who do not readily change their behaviors to safe sex practices as prescribed by "The Peace of Mind Campaign" feel ownership of their preexisting behaviors. Also, the value members of the target population place on that sense of ownership is substantially higher than what they feel the will receive in return for ceasing their current behaviors.
In order to effectively change the sexual behaviors of those living in Northern Ireland the sense of ownership stemming from the endowment effect must be circumvented. Classical conditioning theory shows that behaviors become more ingrained over time and repetition. The more often, longer duration and amount of reinforcement received from a behavior performed the more ingrained that behavior becomes (6). Thus in order to circumvent that sense of ownership that develops from an ingrained behavior it would be ideal to create a change before or in the early stages of behavior conditioning. Research done by the Health Promotion Agency, the same organization responsible for "The Peace of Mind Campaign," shows that approximately 90% of females and 80% of males between the ages of twelve and fifteen years old are sexually active. Based on this research the target audience of the intervention should have used age twelve as the lower bound for the target population. By educating the population early on it is easier to effect change as behaviors are not yet ingrained and individuals do not possess a sense of ownership yet. Also, it is considerably more likely that by targeting a younger population that early sexual behaviors will be health conscious and will continue into the future due to the processes described by conditioning theory and the endowment effect.
Breakdown in Communication
Borrowing from the endowment effect again another issue can be raised with "The Peace of Mind Campaign." In this instance the issue is not with the delivery of the message, but rather the message itself. The posters used in the promotion of health information this intervention is based around may actually be counterproductive to the end goal. A specific example is one poster used in May of 2004 to educate that chlamydia may not present with any noticeable symptoms. The poster reads "You could be looking at someone with chlamydia." This message is written upon a mirrored background so that whoever is reading it should see their own reflection. This one poster is sending the wrong message, according to three different theories explaining behavior. The first, as was mentioned, is the endowment effect. This poster goes against what you would expect to see if the endowment effect was considered because the poster is threatening a person's sense of ownership of health. People place value on being healthy and this poster in a sense attempts to purchase that belief in exchange for either proof of health or proof of illness. This is not an exchange that would seem worthwhile to a person who believes that he is in fact healthy.
The second theory this poster seems counter to is psychological reactance theory. The basics of reactance theory can be explained as follows. When people perceive a threat to their freedom they will often overexercise that freedom in order to prove that they still hold control over the situation. This can manifest in one or both of two possible ways: behavior or attitude. When a person perceives a behavioral freedom is threatened reactance to threat will motivate the person to further participate in that behavior. Also, if a person feels a particular attitude is being forcible impressed upon them he will most likely take up the opposite attitude in order to assert his freedom (2). This outcome can occur in this situation, as there is a threat being made to a person's freedom from illness and his sexual freedom. A behavioral reaction predicted by this theory would be that a person would not get tested. By making a conscious choice not to get tested a person can reassert their control over being healthy or sick and maintain their sexual freedom. Having an asymptomatic illness allows this choice as the only way to "become" ill is to actually get tested, thus allowing a person to create their own state of health or illness.
Creation of categories based on the physical status of a person leads to the third theory that this poster opposes: labeling theory. This theory asserts that when an individual is labeled as part of a group they will begin to conform to what that label would expect of them (1). There are two different ways under labeling theory that this poster is counterproductive to the goal of promoting safe sex. The first is that poster labels all people, regardless of their true situation, as being at risk for chlamydia. This is a dangerous label to apply to both those at risk and those not at risk as for either group it promotes sexual risk taking in regards for chlamydia. As per labeling theory people or either risk group may be given motivation, they would not have had otherwise, to attempt to live up to the label of being at risk for chlamydia by participating in risky sexual behaviors such as intercourse without condoms. This increases the the level of risk for those already at risk for chlamydia or other negative outcomes of unsafe sexual behavior, and creates risk for those that had a minimal amount beforehand.
The second aspect of labeling theory this poster is set against has to do with stigmatization. Because chlamydia can be asymptomatic the only way to be certain of a person's infection status would by medical testing. However, those who get tested can be labeled quite negatively as being at high risk or even worse actually having the disease. This creates a stigma that is associated with the act of being tested(8). People, regardless of their actual risk or infection status, fear being labeled as having the disease simply because they do get tested. This stigma in turn discourages people from seeking medical tests to determine their infection status. A public health intervention should seed to discourage stigmas around being tested instead of promoting them. This poster unfortunately promotes stigmatization of those seeking medical tests and in fact goes against its own goal.
Evaluation of The Peace of Mind Campaign's Effectiveness
Although as stated earlier the Health Promotion Agency cited a study in which 67% of respondents were aware of their campaign, it was by no means a massive success. What this study of the effects of the intervention showed was that people were aware of the intervention's message. In terms of getting the message and information "The Peace of Mind Campaign" was presenting to the public the intervention was moderately successful. Reaching two thirds of the target population is a very large step in the correct direction for a public health intervention. However, reaching the target population in itself does not mean that the message received was effective.
There may have been a portion of the population, as earlier stated, that responded to the health education approach used by this intervention. However, it is highly unlikely that this intervention had any appreciable effect on increasing sexual health behaviors and subsequently decreasing infection rates of sexually transmitted disease beyond those that were reached easily and early on in the intervention. Incidence data for sexually transmitted disease collected by genitourinary medicine clinics in the United Kingdom support this claim. Between the years of 1998 and 2007 chlamydia rates have increased 2.5 times and total diagnoses of any sexually transmitted disease has increased 1.63 times. This data shows it is absolutely vital that public health interventions be rethought. There is a vast body of research that exists and can be applied to campaigns promoting any number of health behaviors, that is not being used to its fullest potential. By tapping into resources not traditionally used by public health agencies interventions can become massively more effective. If new approaches are not used there will just be more interventions like "The Peace of Mind Campaign" that span decades, but only accomplish wasting funding and effort.
Possibilities for Future Interventions
The "Peace of Mind Campaign" instituted in Northern Ireland by the Health Promotion Agency in order to improve the rate of safe sex behaviors was not nearly as effective as it could have been, due to a number of flaws in its design (10). Some flaws existed in the very foundation of the intervention others came about later on and were introduced at a later stage. Regardless of where these flaws were found they detracted from the overall effectiveness of the "Peace of Mind Campaign," which is an unfortunate occurrence as promotion of safe sex behaviors is an important public health goal. However, the "Peace of Mind Campaign" was not a total loss as in addition to its flaws it had some effective strategies as well and because of this can be used as a comparison point for future plans for safe sex interventions. By judging what was effective and what was not about the "Peace of Mind Campaign" an intervention that is significantly more effective as a whole can be designed.
Choosing the Proper Model
The first flaw with the "Peace of Mind Campaign" that was discussed was its reliance on an ineffective behavior model, the Health Belief Model. Therefore, a new intervention would have to diverge from using this model as a basis for planning the intervention. One possible approach would be to create an intervention based on a combination of social expectations theory (SET) and social network theory (SNT). Social Expectations Theory explains behavior which may at first seem to be an individual choice, like condom use, is in fact a social behavior (11). As such, safe sex practices are largely a result of conformity to the expectations of the larger group of which a person is a member. Social network theory also deals with people as being influenced largely by their peers. Under SNT people do not exist as individuals but rather as part of a great social amalgam. Because of this view SNT asserts that behavior change does not occur on the individual level, but rather on the group level and that in order to affect behavior change it must be group focused rather than individually focused (12).
By using group level models instead of the HBM the issue of individual differences between people influencing the effectiveness of the intervention is decreased. Whereas there may exist a strong degree of heterogeneity between individuals, there is much higher degree of homogeneity between groups. This is an important concept for a number of reasons. The first reason, it allows a more focused campaign in terms of how the intervention appeals to an individual. Rather than making hundreds of posters that are designed to appeal individually to people, only a few posters need to be made provided they are designed to appeal on a group level. Another reason is that within a population there are those with different levels of safe sex behaviors. By using a group centric approach this difference does not matter, as changing the group dynamic will reinforce behaviors in people that already practice safe sex, and cause a shift towards safe sex behaviors for people that are not yet there. Therefore, by targeting groups, instead of individuals, it is much more likely that an intervention will be effective for a large proportion of the population rather than a small subsection.
Individual Behaviors Change on a Group Level
Also, using a group centric model as the base for this intervention helps in addressing the second major flaw of the original "Peace of Mind Campaign": its failure to address problems facing the intervention stemming from endowment theory and classical conditioning. As stated earlier, when these two theories are applied to sexual behaviors they show that people are unwilling to make changes because of the intrinsic value of ownership and the level of conditioning they have with respect to that behavior. By using a model that promotes group change for the basis of the intervention it helps alleviate both of these issues. People are more likely to change a behavior they value if they believe they will gain something of equal or greater value. A group level model directly effects this exchange. As the social group a person belongs to shifts, they will be forced to alter their behavior in order to maintain their place in the social hierarchy. In a sense people are exchanging individual behaviors for a sense of social belonging (7). Also, affecting a change in a social network helps to lessen conditioning people have towards sexual behaviors. Changes in social networks result in a break down of cues for the conditioned response a person has towards a behavior (6). If a large enough change can be created then there will be removal of many, if not all, of the social cues that trigger unsafe sexual behavior.
Focusing on the Message
The issues addressed so far have only dealt with the general concepts of a public health intervention without going into the specifics, such as the method of interacting with the public. The "Peace of Mind Campaign" used mainly print media, such as posters and leaflets to reach the target population. This proved to be effective in just terms of exposure in that 60% of people interviewed in a study by the HPA recalled the content of the posters (10). Therefore it seems print was a good media for gaining exposure in the target population. However, the "Peace of Mind Campaign" had problems, not in exposure, but rather in terms of the content of the posters it presented.
One such poster with lackluster content was already discussed in great detail. The major issues with this poster being that it went against what would be expected from an intervention that consulted endowment theory, psychological reactance theory or labeling theory. Therefore it would make sense to design a poster that incorporated the major tenets of these theories rather than disregarding them. The first concept to be included in this poster would come from endowment theory: the poster should somehow offer something of equal or greater value than the behavior being targeted. Psychological reactance theory states that the poster should not threaten the sense of freedom a person possesses, otherwise they will rebel against the message presented (2). Labeling theory states people will conform to a label placed upon them, so the poster should place a positive label on people.
One example of a poster that meets these requirements is as follows: The main picture on the poster is of a couple sitting at the bar talking. The people in the poster are fairly representative of the target population. There is a main caption that reads "It's not about getting lucky tonight, it's about being prepared for the night. Know where you're going, and bring a condom with you." In this poster an exchange is being offered, for a change in sexual behaviors. The message implies that by using a condom it will make a person more sexually attractive because it's "not about getting lucky." This is an exchange that gives a person something of value for giving up their previous behavior. Also, by using a couple representative of the target population it creates a sense of identification for the recipient of the message which limits psychological reactance to threatened freedoms (2). Finally this poster creates a positive label for condom users, without the co-creation of a negative one for non-condom users. "Know where you're going" implies a sense of purpose, direction and confidence. These are all positive traits that people will aspire to have that according the poster condom users have. Therefore if the poster is salient enough people will attempt to take on the label of being a condom user in order to gain these traits that come with it (1).
Synthesizing an Effective Approach
After analysis of the shortcomings of "Peace of Mind Campaign" and their comparison to other approaches described a general understanding of what an effective public health intervention would require can be reached. The first step in an effective intervention is to choose a model that works to base the intervention upon. Group level models have distinct advantages over individual level ones that make them much more useful in this setting. By using a group level model it allows interventions to focus on the issue at hand in a homogeneous population rather than getting bogged down by trying to determine how best to influence a conglomeration of heterogeneous individuals. Also, group level models confer the added advantage of creating a new set of social norms. This is aids in the second step of creating a successful intervention: people must feel they are benefiting from making the behavior change proscribed by the intervention. Changing social norms is an advantage in reaching this second step. People will exchange their negative behavior for these new norms because they gain a sense of group belonging as replacement for their lost behavior. The third step is to make sure the message of the intervention is salient and coercive to the public. Three cognitive theories were used in creating the poster in described as a replacement for the one that came from the "Peace of Mind Campaign." However, there are countless useful cognitive theories that can be applied as well. It falls to public health officials to carefully design interventions so that they meet these criteria. If this is done, there will be more successful interventions that occur.

References
1. Becker, H.S. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Simon and Schuster 1966
2. Brehm, S. S., Brehm, J. W. Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and Control. New York, 1966
3. Glanz, K. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. Jossey-Bass, 2002
4. Harrison, J. A.; Mullen, P. D.; and Green, L. W. A Meta-Analysis of Studies of the Health Belief Model. Health Education Research 1992; 7:107–116.
5. Mullen, P. D., Hersey, J., Iverson, D. C . Health Behavior Models Compared. Social Science and Medicine 1987; 24: 973–981.
6. Pavlov, I. P. Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex. London: Oxford University Press, 1927.
7. Shogren, J. F., Shin, S. Y., Hayes, D.J., Kliebenstein, J.B. Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept. The American Economic Review March, 1994; 84:255-270
8. Wright, E.R., Gronfein, W.P., Owens, T.J. Deinstitutionalization, Social Rejection, and the Self-Esteem of Former Mental Patients. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, March, 2000; 41:68-90
9. All new episodes seen at GUM clinics: 1998-2007. United Kingdom and country specific tables. Health Protection Agency, July 2008
http://www.avert.org/stdstatisticuk.htm
10. The Peace of Mind Campaign:
http://www.healthpromotionagency.org.uk/Work/Sexualhealth/campaign.htm
11. Hornic, R. Alternative Models of Behavior Change Working Paper. Annenburg School for Communication, 1990; 131: 5-6
12. Meyer, G.W. Social information processing and social networks: A test of social influence mechanisms. Human Relations, 1994; 47: 1013-1048.

Labels: , , , , ,

Why Abstinence-only Education Fails: A Critique from a Social Behavioral Perspective – Christine Connolly

Introduction

Sexual activity during adolescence can have a myriad of public health consequences; including but not limited to increased rates of sexually transmitted disease (STD) and unintended pregnancy. In the United States, recent estimates have suggested that adolescents account for almost half of all new STD cases while only representing a quarter of the ever sexually active population (1). Although pregnancy and birth rates among girls ages 15-19 years have decreased since 1991, approximately 400,000 infants were born to mothers in this age group in 2006. More than 80% of these pregnancies were unplanned. Among developed countries, the United States has the second highest adolescent pregnancy and birth rates. (2)

To help address these issues, the United States federal government began funding programs to promote abstinence in 1982, with the passage of the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA). Since this time, federal funding for abstinence programs has increased; first under Section 510 of the Social Security Act in 1996 and again under the Special Projects of Regional and National Significance Community-Based Abstinence Education Program (CBAE) in 2000. In particular, passage of Section 510 of the Social Security Act was significant, as this legislation outlines an eight-point definition of abstinence; the interpretation of which has gone on to define the characteristics of programs to receive federal funding. Based on this eight-point definition (and later, on strict guidelines introduced by CBAE), funding has shifted from comprehensive sex education programs (promoting abstinence in conjunction with other health-related behaviors such as contraception use) to education programs advocating abstinence-only until marriage. Under current legislation, federally funded programs must promote only abstinence and are prohibited from disseminating information regarding contraception services, sexual orientation and gender identity, and other aspects of human sexuality. (3)(4)(5)

Despite immense funding to date ($204 million was appropriated in 2008 alone (5)), there is evidence to suggest that abstinence-only education (AOE) largely fails to reduce negative public health consequences of adolescent sexual activity. This paper will present three arguments for why AOE has failed as a public health initiative from a social behavioral perspective.

Argument 1: Intention vs. Behavior

The notion that intention leads to behavior is a common theme among traditional health behavior change models, including the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Intention is a cornerstone of many AOE programs, where it is assumed that adolescents who develop intention to remain abstinent will carry this forward behaviorally. As is the case with the aforementioned traditional models, the idea that intention (in this case abstinence) leads to behavior (forgoing sexual activity) is fundamentally flawed.

Studies have shown that intention to abstain does not always lead to abstinence behavior among adolescents. Perhaps the most straightforward evidence of this is demonstrated by AOE programs that include public virginity pledging; where adolescents publicly declare their intention to abstain from sexual activity in the form of an oral or written promise. Studies on the effectiveness of public virginity pledges have generally shown that adolescents who have pledged do not delay sexual initiation longer than their non-pledging counterparts (except in some specific social contexts). Adolescents who have pledged versus those who have not have comparable rates of STDs. Further, many adolescents go on to deny having pledged if they break their pledge. (6)(7)(8)

Perhaps this discrepancy can be explained in part by a new model of adolescent risk behavior called the prototype/willingness (P/W) model, first proposed by Gibsons and Gerrard in 1995. According to this model, much of adolescent risk behavior is unplanned and is influenced by an adolescent’s willingness to engage in a behavior. An adolescent’s willingness is function of four factors: whether the adolescent’s peers have positive attitudes toward the behavior, whether the adolescent has positive attitudes toward the behavior, whether the adolescent has engaged in the behavior in the past, and finally, whether the adolescent associates a positive social image or prototype with the behavior. In this model, an adolescent’s engagement in risk behavior is based on social reactivity. So, in a risk-conducive situation, an adolescent may react by engaging in risk behavior conditional on his or her willingness to engage in the behavior. This reaction is completely unplanned. The P/W model acknowledges the presence of intention, but views it as independent from but related to willingness. In this model, an adolescent can fully intend to abstain from a behavior (such as sexual activity), but can go on to engage in the behavior anyway if the situation presents itself and they are willing. (9)

Even if intention always led to behavior, some studies have suggested that adolescents do not consider abstinence and sexual activity to be opposing constructs. This is problematic in the context of AOE programs, as an adolescent could both intend to abstain and intend to be sexual active simultaneously. Several studies to date have shown intention to have sex to be a stable predictor of sexual activity among adolescents (10). Expanding on this, a recent study examined how adolescents think about abstinence as well as sexual activity. This study found that intention to abstain did not consistently predict abstinence or reduction in sexual behavior. In fact, the association between abstinence intention and subsequent behavior differed by an adolescent’s intention to have sex. For example, when an adolescent’s intention to have sex was positive but low, intention to abstain from sex had little impact on sexual activity. However, when both intentions to have sex and to abstain were high, intention predicted an increased likelihood of sexual activity. The authors of this study feel this could be due to a perception among some adolescents that there is a natural linear progression between abstinence and initiation of sexual behavior. When considered temporally, it is possible to have strong non-oppositional intentions regarding both. (11)

Argument 2: Perceived Susceptibility

Although discussion of contraception use is prohibited, contraception is often described in AOE programs with an emphasis on failure rates. In addition, there is no requirement for scientific accuracy in educational materials provided by AOE programs and inaccuracies often involve exaggerations of failure rates. (6)(12) When discussion of contraception is limited to downplay of possible positive health effects, AOE programs become a flawed public health approach. By limiting information and/or distorting facts, AOE programs attempt to enhance an adolescent’s perceived susceptibility to negative health outcomes. The flaw inherent to such an approach is that adolescents may not be particularly influenced by this construct in the context of risk behavior.

This effect may be particularly pronounced among young women. A study of 209 adolescent women conducted in 2003, found that the majority of participants (88.9%) perceived themselves to be at little to no risk for contracting and STD. This was despite the fact that the majority of participants (73.8%) had reported previously contracting an STD and/or engaging in risky sexual behaviors, such as unprotected sex. (13)

Perhaps this can be explained by research which suggests that adolescents (as well as adults) can exhibit unrealistic optimism regarding the development of negative health outcomes. Unrealistic optimism is a form of cognitive bias and can be defined as the tendency for individuals to perceive their risk of harm as below average as compared with others. (14) Such a bias could certainly render perceived susceptibility ineffective, given that individuals with this bias may not truly believe they are susceptible to the same negative health outcomes as other individuals.

A second explanation may stem from the fact that adolescents tend to be oriented in the present and generally do not focus on future outcomes. Adolescents tend to plan ahead, think about the future, and anticipate future consequences of their actions less than their adult counterparts. Adolescents also tend to favor small rewards delivered sooner over large rewards delivered at a later time point. These effects appear to be more pronounced in younger adolescents and decrease as adolescents move towards adulthood. (15) This is significant in the context of sexual behavior, as adolescents may not fully comprehend possible long term consequences associated with their actions. Because of this they may feel less susceptible to negative health outcomes that will not manifest until much later in life (such as the development cervical cancer from contracting HPV).

Argument 3: Unaddressed Contextual Factors

As with traditional health behavior change models, AOE attempts to cultivate health behavior change on an individual level and fails to address contextual factors that may inhibit or promote health behaviors. For this reason, AOE is a flawed public health approach, as it fails to account for contexts where it may be virtually impossible for adolescents to abstain.

For example, AOE ignores that individuals may make very different decisions in contexts that leave them in dispassionate versus aroused states. In his book, Predictably Irrational, Dan Ariely discusses an experiment he conducted where college students were asked to predict a number of decisions they would make (for example, the decision use or not use a condom) in both dispassionate and aroused states. The results of this experiment showed that students in dispassionate states were more likely to predict making rational decisions, but the same students in aroused states were more likely to predict making irrational decisions. He goes on to suggest that this phenomenon may be exacerbated in adolescents and that adolescents may not be able to resist sexual behavior once they are in an aroused state, even if they would have earlier decided to abstain. (16)

AOE ignores social contexts which may influence an adolescent’s decision to abstain. In the case of virginity pledges, pledging is at times associated with delay of first sexual intercourse among adolescents. However, this delay appears to be mediated by social contexts. In situations where too many or too few adolescents within a community pledge, pledging is not associated with delay in sexual activity. Specifically, pledging seems to work when adolescent pledging can assume a minority identity as a result of their pledge. This is a common phenomenon related to identity movements. (17) The influence of identity within a social context can also be seen in a recent study that found retraction of virginity pledges by those who had pledged previously was strongly associated with the abandonment of a born again religious identity. Together, these findings suggest that identity in social contexts may be a motivating factor for adolescents when it comes to abstinence. (7)

Further, AOE programs largely ignore the influence of family dynamics and socioeconomic status (SES) on adolescent sexual activity. For instance, multiple studies have shown greater parent-child connectedness (parental support, closeness, and warmth) is related to delay in the timing of first intercourse and reduction of sexual activity. Living with a single parent and/or having sexually active older siblings has been associated with higher rates of adolescent pregnancy. Lower SES has been associated with earlier first intercourse and lower rates of contraception use. (18)

Conclusions

Abstinence-only education is not flawed because abstinence is ineffective. In fact, as argued by many proponents of AOE, abstinence is the only way to completely avoid negative consequences related to sexual activity. Rather, the fundamental flaw inherent to AOE is the uncertainty around whether adolescents can successfully remain abstinent. As argued above, an abstinence-only approach may not be a realistic option for adolescents for a number of reasons. To a large extent, social factors appear to be related to whether an adolescent remains abstinent, regardless of whether an adolescent intends to abstain. In addition, AOE programs do not take into account how adolescents may cognitively process their own sexual development or risks for subsequent health issues. An effective program must acknowledge that adolescents may not be able to abstain and therefore must provide them with tools to protect themselves if they become sexually active.

A Counter-Proposal to Abstinence-Only Education

Abstinence can be used as one part of an effective strategy to avoid negative health outcomes associated with sexual activity. An effective public health intervention could utilize abstinence by incorporating it as one of several methods an adolescent could employ to avoid negative health consequences. Such an intervention could further improve outcomes by addressing fundamental flaws inherent to AOE-based interventions.

An Alternative Intervention

An alternative approach to AOE programs could consist of a hypothetical country-wide network of community-based outreach and education programs collectively called the Rainbow Project. Across the Rainbow Project network, programs would have three primary goals. First, programs would endeavor provide adolescents and their families with scientifically accurate information regarding a variety of topics related to human sexuality. Topics covered would include, but not be limited to: abstinence, effectiveness and proper use of contraception, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Second, programs would endeavor to cultivate social environments where adolescents feel supported and empowered to be responsible for their sexual health. Third, programs would endeavor to provide services designed to strengthen relationships between adolescents and their families, such as parent-child activities, parenting classes, and family counseling.

How individual programs would achieve the goals described above would be relatively flexible. Individual programs would be housed within neighborhood community centers and would receive funding to conduct community-level research to design and fine tune initiatives to fit community needs. However, despite this flexibility, a few general concepts would be implemented across the board.

Overall, programs would engage adolescents and their families both together and one-on-one. Programs would provide comprehensive sex education directly to adolescents via classes and workshops within their schools. Adolescents would also be addressed outside of their schools through after school programs and activities organized within their community. Parents and other family members would be engaged through school and community activities as well. The community center would serve as a place for impromptu contacts between programs and community members. Programs would be staffed at hours to promote accessibility, based on the needs of the community

The initiative described above would incorporate abstinence as one of many methods to be used to protect adolescents from negative health outcomes. Further, the initiative described above would address a number of flaws inherent to AOE-based programs. How the Rainbow Project would address the specific flaws discussed previously is discussed below.

Flaw 1: Intention vs. Behavior

Similar to traditional health behavior change models, AOE programs fail in their assumption that abstinence intention will lead to abstinent behavior. The Rainbow Project does not share this flaw, as it does not assume that intention leads to behavior.

Instead, the Rainbow Project arms adolescents and families with a myriad of strategies to avoid negative health outcomes related to sexual activity. In this sense, the fact that people can have a number of intentions and may only be able to translate a few into behavior is acknowledged. By providing a number of options, the Rainbow Project will give adolescents alternative strategies to use if they are unable to follow through with their initial intentions.

This could be significant in cases where adolescents may have positive intentions regarding both abstinence and sexual behavior. In such cases, adolescents would now be armed with methods to protect themselves if their intention to engage in sexual activity leads to behavior. In addition, the Rainbow Project would foster social environments where abstinence intention could lead to behavior more often. A recent study suggests that adolescents may experience negative social and emotional consequences as a result of abstaining from sexual activity. In this study, adolescents who remained sexually inexperienced over the course of the study reported having a bad reputation as a result and regretted abstaining. (19) This is significant in the context of the prototype/willingness model, where an adolescent’s willingness to engage in a behavior is based in part on whether the adolescent associates a positive social image with the behavior. The Rainbow Project will work towards changing social perceptions among adolescents by promoting positive social images related to reproductive health responsibility.

Flaw 2: Perceived Susceptibility

AOE programs are flawed when they fail to take into account that perceived susceptibility is not an effective tactic to influence adolescent behavior. The Rainbow Project improves upon this in that it does not attempt to emphasize perceived susceptibility and instead focuses on disseminating scientifically accurate information regarding contraception, as well as other aspects of human sexuality.

There is ample evidence to suggest that providing adolescents with medically accurate information about contraception is an effective strategy. Multiple studies have found that providing such information to adolescents does not encourage early sexual activity. Rather, such initiatives were found to increase contraception use among adolescents who were already sexually active. In fact, declines in unintended pregnancies among adolescent women observed in the 1990s have largely been attributed to an increased knowledge regarding and appropriate use of contraception. (20)

Providing adolescents with medically accurate information regarding contraception acknowledges the existence of cognitive bias, such as unrealistic optimism, and the tendency for adolescents to be oriented to the present rather than the future. When adolescents cannot abstain from sexual activity due to cognitive bias or lack of forethought regarding future outcomes, contraception can provide an alternative method to safeguard their reproductive health.

Flaw 3: Unaddressed Contextual Factors

AOE programs fail as public health policy as they do not address contextual factors that may influence adolescent sexual behaviors. The Rainbow Project improves upon this as it strives to address contextual factors related to sexual activity among adolescents.

First, as mentioned previously, the Rainbow Project will arm adolescents and their families with a myriad of strategies they can employ to avoid negative outcomes. This is significant in the context of decisions made by adolescents in dispassionate versus aroused states. In this context, an adolescent who has made an irrational decision to engage in sexual activity based on their physiologic state will still have options available, such as using the functional knowledge required to use contraception effectively.

In addition, the Rainbow Project will not ignore social contexts which may influence an adolescent’s decision to become sexually active. Instead, it will directly acknowledge and try to address issues within social contexts by fostering environments where adolescents are influenced to make responsible decisions regarding their reproductive health.

Further, the Rainbow Project will address issues related to family contexts by strengthening communication and relationships between adolescents and their caregivers. Strengthening both will help to alleviate negative health outcomes, as there is evidence to suggest the adolescents who feel that their parents are involved in their lives (who know where they are and who they are with) are less likely to engage in at-risk sexual activity. Further, there is evidence to suggest that positive parental influence can mediate effects of peer influence that can lead to sexual behavior. (21)

Conclusions

The Rainbow Project is a hypothetical intervention to reduce negative health outcomes associated with sexual behavior among adolescents. It avoids strategies employed by both traditional health behavior change models and AOE programs and instead recognizes the importance of innate human behavior, social behavior, and environmental contexts. Perhaps the most compelling strength of the Rainbow project from a contextual perspective is its emphasis on community-based research to define new and augment existing programs. It is in this way that the Rainbow Project recognizes heterogeneity between communities and will be able to better address contextual issues specific to the communities they serve.

REFERENCES

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2007. Atlanta, GA: National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, December 2008.

2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Adolescent Reproductive Health. Atlanta, GA: Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. http://www.cdc.gov/Reproductivehealth/AdolescentReproHealth/index.htm.

3. Advocates for Youth. The History of Federal Abstinence-Only Funding. Washington, DC: Advocates for Youth. http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fshistoryabonly.htm.

4. Santelli J. et al. Abstinence and abstinence-only education: A review of U.S. policies and programs. Journal of Adolescent Health 2006; 38: 72-81.

5. Duffy K. et al. Government support for abstinence-only-until-marriage education. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 2008; 84 6: 746-748.

6. Kantor L. Abstinence-only policies and programs: An overview. Sexuality Research & Social Policy 2008; 5 3: 6-17.

7. Rosenbaum JE. Reborn a virgin: Adolescents’ retracting of virginity pledges and sexual histories. American Journal of Public Health 2006; 96 6: 1098-1103.

8. Rosenbaum JE. Patient teenagers? A comparison of the sexual behavior of virginity pledgers and matched nonpledgers. Pediatrics 2009; 123: e110-120.

9. Gibbons F. and Gerrard M. et al. Reasoned action and social reaction: Willingness and intention as independent predictors of health risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1998: 74 5: 1164-1180.

10. Buhi E. and Goodson P. Predictors of adolescent behavior and intention: A theory-guided systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health 2007; 40: 4-21.

11. Masters NT. The opposite of sex? Adolescents’ thoughts about abstinence and sex, and their sexual behavior. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 2008; 40: 87-93.

12. United States House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform. The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs. Washington, DC: Minority Staff Special Investigations Division, 2004.

13. Ethier KA. et al. Adolescent women underestimate their susceptibility to sexually transmitted infections. Sexually Transmitted Infections 2003; 79: 408-411.

14. Greening L. et al. Predictors of children’s and adolescent’s risk perception. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 2005; 30 5: 425-435.

15. Steinberg L. et al. Age differences in future orienting and delayed discounting. Child Development 2009; 80 1: 28-44.

16. Ariely D. Predictably Irrational the Hidden Forces that Shape Our Decisions. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2008.

17. Bearman P. and Bruckner H. Promising the future: Virginity pledges and first intercourse. American Journal of Sociology 2001; 106: 859-912.

18. Miller B. Family influences on adolescent and contraceptive behavior. Journal of Sex Research 2002; 39: 22-26.

19. Brady S. and Halpern-Felsher B. Social and emotional consequences of refraining from sexual activity among sexually experienced and inexperienced youth in California. American Journal of Public Health 2008; 98 1: 162-168.

20. AIDS Policy Research Center & Center for AIDS Prevention Studies. Abstinence Only vs. Comprehensive Sex Education: What are the arguments? What is the evidence? San Francisco, CA: AIDS Research Institute University of California, March 2002

21. DiClemente R. et al. Psychosocial predictors of HIV-associated sexual behaviors and the efficacy of prevention interventions in adolescents at-risk for HIV infection: What works and what doesn’t work?. Psychosomatic Medicine 2008; 70: 598-605.

Labels: , , , ,