A Multisite Randomized Trial of Social Norms Marketing Campaigns to Reduce College Student Drinking: A Replication Failure

Abstract

A 14-site randomized trial tested the effectiveness of social norms marketing (SNM) campaigns, which present accurate student survey data in order to correct misperceptions of subjective drinking norms and thereby drive down alcohol use. Cross-sectional student surveys were conducted by mail at baseline and at posttest 3 years later. Hierarchical linear modeling was applied to examine multiple drinking outcomes, taking into account the nonindependence of students grouped in the same college. Controlling for other predictors, having a SNM campaign was not significantly associated with lower perceptions of student drinking levels or lower self-reported alcohol consumption. This study failed to replicate a previous multisite randomized trial of SNM campaigns, which showed that students attending institutions with a SNM campaign had a lower relative risk of alcohol consumption than students attending control group institutions (W. DeJong et al. J Stud Alcohol. 2006;67:868–879). Additional research is needed to explore whether SNM campaigns are less effective in campus communities with relatively high alcohol retail outlet density.

Keywords

Alcohol college media campaign social norms student

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

DeJong

, Schneider

S K

, Towvim

L G

, Murphy

M J

, Doerr

E E

, Simonsen

N R

, Mason

K E

and Scribner

R A

2006 A multisite randomized trial of social norms marketing campaigns to reduce college student drinking. J Stud Alcohol 67: 868–879

Borsari

B B

and Carey

K B

2003 Descriptive and injunctive norms in college drinking: a meta-analytic integration. J Stud Alcohol 64: 331–341

Perkins

H W

, Meilman

, Leichliter

J S

, Cashin

J R

and Presley

1999 Misperceptions of the norms for the frequency of alcohol and other drug use on college campuses. J Am Coll Health 47: 253–258

Perkins

H W

, ed. 2003 The Social Norms Approach to Preventing School and College Age Substance Abuse: A Handbook for Educators, Counselors, and Clinicians. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Perkins

H W

and Berkowitz

A D

1986 Perceiving the community norms of alcohol use among students: Some research implications for campus alcohol education programming. Int J Addict 21: 961–976

Wechsler

, Nelson

T F

, Lee

J E

, Seibring

, Lewis

and Keeling

R P

2003 Perception and reality: a national evaluation of social norms marketing interventions to reduce college students’ heavy alcohol use. J Stud Alcohol 64: 484–494

Clapp

J D

, Lange

J E

, Russell

, Shillington

and Voas

2003 A failed social marketing campaign. J Stud Alcohol 64: 409–414

Werch

C E

, Pappas

D M

, Carlson

J M

, DiClemente

C C

, Chally

P S

and Sinder

J A

2000 Results of a social norm intervention to prevent binge drinking among first-year residential college students. J Am Coll Health 49: 85–92

Wechsler

, Lee

J E

, Kuo

, Seibring

, Nelson

T F

and Lee

2002 Trends in college binge drinking during a period of increased prevention efforts: findings from 4 Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study surveys: 1993-2001. J Am Coll Health 50: 203–217

10.

Edwards

, Roberts

, Clarke

, DiGuiseppi

, Pratap

, Wentz

and Kwan

2003 Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. BMJ 324: 1183–1191

11.

Huang

J-H

, DeJong

, Towvim

L G

and Schneider

S K

2006 Measuring college student drinking: Illustrating the feasibility of a composite drinking scale. Subst Abuse 27: 33–45

12.

U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Computing a BAC Estimate Retrieved January, 2003, from http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/alcohol/bacreport.html

13.

Baer

J S

2002 Student factors: understanding individual variation in college drinking. J Stud Alcohol S14: 40–53

14.

Murray

D M

and Blistein

J L

2003 Methods to reduce the impact of intraclass correlation in group-randomized trials. Eval Rev 27: 79–103

15.

Bryk

and Raudenbush

1992 Hierarchical Linear Models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

16.

Brener

N D

, Kann

, McManus

, Kinchen

S A

, Sundberg

E C

and Ross

J G

2003 Reliability of the 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey questionnaire. J Adolesc Health 31: 336–342

17.

Dowdall

G W

and Wechsler

2002 Studying college alcohol use: widening the lens, sharpening the focus. J Stud Alcohol S14: 14–22

18.

O'Malley

P M

and Johnston

L D

2002 Epidemiology of alcohol and other drug use among American college students. J Stud Alcohol S14: 23–39

19.

Presley

C A

, Meilman

P W

and Cashin

J R

1996 Alcohol and Drugs on American College Campuses: Use, Consequences, and Perceptions of the Campus Environment IV, 1992–94. Carbondale, IL: Core Institute, Southern Illinois University.

20.

Scribner

R A

, Cohen

D A

and Fisher

2000 Evidence of a structural effect for alcohol outlet density: a multilevel analysis. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 24: 188–195

21.

Gruenewald

P J

, Johnson

F W

and Treno

A J

2003 Outlets, drinking and driving: a multilevel analysis of availability. J Studies Alcohol 63: 460–468

22.

Kuo

, Wechsler

, Greenberg

and Lee

2003 The marketing of alcohol to college students: the role of low prices and special promotions. Am J Prev Med 25: 204–211

23.

Weitzman

E R

, Folkman

K L

and Wechsler

2003 The relationship of alcohol outlet density to heavy and frequent drinking and drinking-related problems among students at eight universities. Health Place 9: 1–6