1 / 31

WP4 evaluations of campaigns

WP4 evaluations of campaigns. Project funded by the European Commission, Directorate-General Energy & Transport, under the 6th RTD Framework Programme. WP 4 - Aims. Determine if the tool developed in WP 2 is sensitive enough to detect important changes. Assess reliability and validity. Tasks.

connie
Download Presentation

WP4 evaluations of campaigns

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WP4 evaluations of campaigns Project funded by the European Commission, Directorate-General Energy & Transport, under the 6th RTD Framework Programme

  2. WP 4 - Aims • Determine if the tool developed in WP 2 is sensitive enough to detect important changes.Assess reliability and validity.

  3. Tasks • 4.1: Select an appropriate campaign using key elements identified in WP1 • 4.2: Assessment in seven different countries: Austria, Belgium, Greece, Poland, Slovenia, Sweden, The Netherlands, • 4.3: Analysing the data. Compare the tool used with that of the campaign • 4.4: Deliverable

  4. Partners Factum (Austria) IBDiM (Poland) IMOB (Belgium) Ministry of Transport (Netherlands) ULFF (Slovenia) UTh (Greece) VTI (Sweden)

  5. Campaigns: Summary • Topic: Speeding, seat-belts usage, drink/ driving, helmets and child restraints • Target groups:General and selected • Scope:National (2), Regional (1), Local (5) • Activity:Printed, media, internet, direct communication • Design:Before and after (7), after (1), control groups (5). Use of a theoretical model

  6. Example of theory predicting behaviour Attitude toward the behaviour Behavioural beliefs & outcomeevaluations Normative beliefs & motivation to comply Subjective norm Intention Behaviour Control beliefs & perceived facilitation Perceived behavioural control Theory of Planned Behaviour

  7. Key elements • Behavioural beliefs • Normative beliefs • Control beliefs • Intentions • Perception of risk • Descriptive norms • Personal norms • Past behaviour/Self reported behaviour

  8. Theoretical model (TPB) • Key advantages: • Captures important variables • Provides structure to describe interrelationships • Descriptive and/or explanatory • Testable (permitting improvement of proposed relationships) • Useful as a guide (e.g., to other researchers, to practitioners)

  9. Main results: Speeding ULFF • National campaign combined with police enforcement, before and after study. N=1504 (before); 269 (after) • TV, radio, posters • Positive effect after the campaign on intention, risk-perception and personal norms

  10. Main results: Seat-belts usage Ministry of Transport • National campaign combined with police enforcement, N=965 (before) 1475 (after) observations, before and after study. • Media • Seat-belts usage increased after the campaign but no change in indirect factors. Differences between users and non-users. Motivation for non user to avoid a fine.

  11. Main results: Seat-belts usage IMOB • Local campaign. After study. Two experimental groups (N=575). • Posters and projected campaign material. • Significant differences between attentive and pre-attentive groups. Attentive group more control and more likely to use seat-belt after the campaign. Experimental groups not different from control group.

  12. Main results: Seat-belts usage UTh • Local campaign. Before and after study. Posters. N=92 (before), 115 (after) • Experiment group greater intentions to use the belt than control group, more likely to have done it in the past

  13. Main results: drink/ driving UTh • Local campaign. Before and after study. Posters. N=108 (before), 85 (after) • Experiment group less likely to fell safe if the driver is drunk and will persuade others at their place of work to not to DD than the same group in the before study

  14. Main results: drink/ driving IBDiM • Regional campaign. Before and after study. N=400 (before), N=400 (after) . • Posters, various media. • After the campaign a larger proportion indicated they would prefer not to drive when they go to or come back from a party. Selection of spots: closer to reality and their own beliefs. Need to be emotional and clear about who is responsible

  15. Main results: Child restraints FACTUM • Local campaign. Before and after study. N=313 (before) 287 (after) pupils and parent. • One hour interactive lesson and distribution of information to parents. • Children showed more awareness of the topic after the lesson. Parents social norms increased (greater pressure from partners) fewer things would prevent them from buckle up.

  16. Main results: Cycle helmets VTI • Local campaign. Before and after study. Observations. • Education at their workplace by Falck Ambulans AB Education. • Signing of a bicycle helmet contract.

  17. VTI Method: Sample Before study Experiment N=195 (women 56%) Control N=53 (w 44%) After study Experiment N=143 (w 60%) Control N=40 (w 40%) Age range 23-65 (M=45, before; 46, after)

  18. How is the working day for the ambulance personnel?

  19. Bicycle helmet is for the cyclist what the seat-belt is for the motorist

  20. Helmets – which one works?

  21. Intention Across Groups and Measurements

  22. Behavioural belief 1=strongly disagree; high mean indicate more positive towards using helmets

  23. Normative beliefs 1=strongly disagree; high mean - others more positive towards them using helmets

  24. Control beliefs 1=less likely; high mean indicate fewer barriers against using helmets

  25. Regression analysis Dependent variable: Intention. Independent: Behavioural beliefs, normative beliefs and control beliefs

  26. Experimental groups 1=strongly disagree; high mean indicate more positive towards using helmets. Perceived risk; high mean greater risk that the cycle accident will result in a serious accident

  27. People who bike to work

  28. Transtheoretical Model of Change

  29. People who bike to work: stages

  30. Evaluation of the event

More Related