Is behavior change the appropriate outcome measure for social marketing campaigns? Theory-based alternative outcome metrics.

Theoretical Background and research questions/hypothesis:

The Ohio Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – Education (SNAP-Ed) social marketing campaign, Celebrate Your Plate (CYP), began in 2016. CYP has the long-term goal of improving the diet quality by increasing fruit and vegetable (F&V) consumption of low-income populations: individuals at or below 185% of the Federal Poverty Level. CYP is supported at the state level by members of the Ohio State Nutrition Action Committee: federal agencies and local partnerships who all serve low-income clients.

SNAP-Ed diet quality improvement campaigns are required by their funder, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) branch of the USDA, to use behavioral change as their sole reported outcome measure. This is problematic because most SNAP-Ed social marketing campaigns don’t achieve the market saturation or continue for a length of time necessary to achieve significant behavior change. Millions of dollars are spent on social marketing campaigns each year and they yield overwhelmingly poor results because they are exploring only behavior change as an outcome measure. While behavior change is the end goal of any social marketing campaign, it is crucial to examine other success metrics including knowledge gain, information seeking, intent to change, change in self-efficacy, etc. to truly understand the effectiveness of the campaign.

Methods and Results (informing the conceptual analysis):

To address this issue, Slater’s stages of change model has been combined with Fishbein & Yzer’s Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction to create a hybrid framework. This framework was used to suggest outcome evaluation metrics that could more accurately evaluate campaign efficacy than behavior change, particularly in the early stages of a campaign (< 5 years in circulation). The CYP outcome evaluation for the first half of the campaign was analyzed in the context of this hybrid framework and supplemental outcome metrics to behavior change were identified. A revised outcome evaluation is proposed for the second half of the CYP campaign and will be implemented in 2019.

Conclusions:

Alternate outcome metrics to behavior change will be integrated into the outcome evaluation for the second half of the CYP campaign and compared with behavior change metrics from the first half of the campaign. Incorporating additional metrics beyond behavior change into the outcome evaluation will provide a clearer picture of the effectiveness of the CYP campaign. Clearer outcome evaluation results will help identify the aspects of the campaign that achieve the intended goal and those that need to be refined.

Implications for research and/or practice:

By including metrics in addition to behavior change in outcome evaluations of social marketing campaigns, it is possible to form a more complete picture of the effect of these campaigns on the target audience. A better understanding of the campaign components that are effective and those that are not will enable stronger, more effective campaigns and not only curtail costs through the elimination of ineffective practices, but also achieve a deeper understanding of the successful components of these campaigns.