An Exploratory Investigation of Teenagers' Attitudes Toward Anti-Drug Appeals

Citation:

George E. Belch, Michael A. Belch, and Melanie A. Jones (1995) ,"An Exploratory Investigation of Teenagers' Attitudes Toward Anti-Drug Appeals", in E - European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 2, eds. Flemming Hansen, Provo, UT : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 329-336.

European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 2, 1995      Pages 329-336

AN EXPLORATORY INVESTIGATION OF TEENAGERS' ATTITUDES TOWARD ANTI-DRUG APPEALS

George E. Belch, San Diego State University

Michael A. Belch, San Diego State University

Melanie A. Jones, KNBC-TV

Since its inception in 1987, the anti-drug campaign sponsored by the Partnership for a Drug Free America has placed over $1.1 billion dollars in donated advertising time and space. A number of studies have attempted to examine the effectiveness of this campaign, with differing opinions as to its relative success. At the same time all parties agree that the teenage segment of the population has not responded as well as hoped to the anti-drug ads. This research demonstrates (1) which types of anti-drug ads are most recalled; (2) perceptions of various appeals used by the partnership; and (3) perceptions of five specific types of appeals by 144 teenagers aged 12 to 14. The study demonstrates that some appeals are much more likely to be effective with this age group than are others.

Ex-President George Bush called it one of the most important wars the U.S. has ever fought. Jon Berry (1992) notes that (relatively speaking) challenges that normally are described as HerculeanCturning around Oldsmobile, positioning MasterCardCseem small" (p. 19). What they are referring to is the anti-drug campaign now being waged in America in an attempt to discourage teenagers (among others) from using illegal substances.

It has been estimated that The Partnership for a Drug-Free AmericaCthe agency leading the campaignChas placed more than $1.1 billion in donated advertising time and space during the period 1987-1992 to convince Americans not to use drugs. The goal of the Partnership is to continue to collect over $1 million/day in donations, expanding from mass media campaigns to home video rentals, movie theaters, direct mail, etc. (PFADFA, 1992). Recent evidence suggests, however, that this goal may be difficult to achieve as the Partnership recently reported a 13% decline in the use of its ads by the media (Goldman, 1993).

While virtually everyone agrees that the campaign has been successful from moral and degree of involvement perspectives, some believe that in respect to what the campaign is designed to accomplishCdecreasing drug useCthe results are not as convincing. Interestingly, academics have apparently not enlisted in the warCat least as evidenced by the lack of research on the campaign's effectiveness.

The purpose of this research is to examine one aspect of this campaignCthat is, the potential effectiveness of various advertising appeals on one specific target groupCteenagers. More specifically, the objective of this research is to determine which types of appeals are most likely to be effective with this target group, and why.

RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN

The vast majority of research addressing the effectiveness of the anti-drug campaign has been reported upon in trade magazines (as opposed to academic journals). Most of this research has suggested that the campaign has been successful to date (Hedrick, 1990; The Gordon Black Company, 1989; among others.) Likewise, criticism and/or cynicism regarding the efforts of the Partnership have also been most prevalent in the trade press (Murray, 1990;) though at least one academic article cites the program's limited effectiveness (Kelly, 1991).

Reports Supporting Effectiveness

As noted, the specific objectives of the Partnership are (1) to decrease the acceptability of drug use; (2) to increase social disapproval of its use; (3) to increase the awareness of risks associated with drug use; (4) to increase the level of communication between parents and children regarding the harmful effects of drugs; and (5) to decrease usage over time (Sypher and Bukoski, 1991). The Partnership has cited the results of their internally commissioned research, as well as that of other government agencies indicating that the program has been effective. For example, an article in Advertising Age (1990) reports on the results of a survey conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse in which 48% of high school seniors state that the dangers of drugs are not overstated, and that marijuana and cocaine use both showed declines in 1989. A study of 1000 teenagers and over 4000 adults conducted by the Gordon Black Company in 1987, claimed a 25% decrease in illicit drug useCwith much of the decrease attributed to the Partnership's advertising campaign (Hedrick, 1990). Black has also provided research to show that areas with high media exposure showed the most attitude change, and that adults and late teens demonstrated the most significant changes (1989). This same study also indicated that young teens showed lesser amounts of change.

Reports Questioning Effectiveness

As noted, far fewer studies have questioned the effectiveness of the anti-drug campaign. In fact, only one empirical study could be found. That study, conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health (1991) concluded that the current public service campaign is not achieving long term changes in behavior among substance abusers. The study specifically questions the creative approaches taken by the ads, taking the position that fear appeals are not likely to be effective with the target audience. Others have voiced similar concerns. Murray (1990) notes that while the donated media budget ranks among the ad budgets of big marketers such as RJR-Nabisco and Coca Cola, the advertising is "virtually invisible" relative to the products of these companies. Kelly (1991)Calso citing potential creative problemsCsuggests that the "Just Say No" campaign is "a simplistic, insufficient approach" (p. 66). Kelly contends that scare tactics have little or no impact on school children, nor does the use of celebrities as spokespersons or the providing of information on the negative social, physical and legal consequences of drug use. Kelly argues that a much more sophisticated program of drug prevention is required.

Gersh (1988) also reports that many feel the use of fear appeals is inappropriate, noting that some media (The Wall Street Journal, Miami Herald, Miami News, and Detroit Free Press), all of whom are participants in the Partnership, refused to air at least one ad due to its dramatic fear appeal. (The ad showed a man with a gun pointed into his nostril in an attempt to draw an analogy to cocaine use.) Finally, Schoenbachler (1991), citing literature from a variety of sources notes that physical fear appeals are not likely to work with teens, and notes that anti-drug psa's have relied on this approach much too often.

As these reports suggest, there are those on both sides believing that the current anti-drug campaign is either effective or ineffective. A review of this research will not reveal who is right or wrong in this argument, and a number of confounding factors are present which limit our ability to draw a conclusion on overall campaign effectiveness. However, both sides are in agreement on two key points: (1) the campaign has been least effective with the young teen segment; (Black 1989, Goldman, 1993) and (2) research on the effectiveness of specific appeals is necessary but, to date, unavailable (Schoenbachler, 1991).

This study will attempt to address both of these areas. Specifically, the study will report on empirical research designed to measure the likelihood that various appeals will be effective in influencing young teens not to engage in substance abuse. This potential for effectiveness will be based on two measures: (1) Recall- a common ad measurement employed for years throughout the advertising industry; and (2) Attitudes toward the ad- a measure shown to correlate well with subsequent behaviors. Without engaging in a long discussion of the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of various appeals, some of the more commonly employed executions in the PFDFA ads employ the use of (1) rational, (2) human, (3) fear, (4) emotion and (5) source identification. Given the frequency of use of these appeals, it was deemed necessary to include each in this study. In addition, the research will provide some insights into why this target group evaluates the appeals as they do.

METHOD

The study consisted of a two-step design. The first phase employed focus groups to gain an assessment of the ads by teenagers and to assist in the determination as to which ads were most and least likely to have an impact. Based on the analyses of the focus group discussions, a subset of ads were selected and shown to a second group of teenagers for their evaluation.

Phase I - Focus Groups

Four focus group studies of teenagers were conducted to gain insights into their perceptions of the anti-drug advertisements. Specifically, the objective of the focus groups was to determine which ads the target audience perceived most favorably and least favorably and why, and to categorize the ads as to type of appeal (i.e. fear, humor, rational, etc.)

Students were recruited and paid $20.00 to attend one of four 1 1/2 hour focus group sessions. In the sessions, the attendees were asked to watch a series of approximately 24 anti-drug ads. Following the viewing, a discussion of the various ads took place. The primary objective in this phase was to narrow down the choice of appeals to be used in the second phase of this research, as well as to determine which ads best exemplified either type of appeal.

From this discussion it became obvious that the strongest physical fear appealCa rat eating itself to death on cocaineCwas perceived as ineffective due to its strong shock value which would lead to selective attention. (Participants stated that they would refuse to watch the ad). As a result, this ad was not included in the following phase. On the other hand, consistent with previous research, a social fear appeal ad received favorable evaluations and was therefore included in the research.

Phase II - Quantitative and Qualitative Assessments

A self-administered paper and pencil questionnaire was developed for use in Phase II. The instrument included three sections; (1) overall recall of eighteen ads; (2) an attitudinal evaluation of the ads in respect to those considered to be "most effective" and "least effective"; and (3) specific evaluations of five ads representing various appeals on thirteen dimensions. Thus, the survey instrument gathered information in respect to recall and attitudes toward a variety of appeals, as well as specific evaluations of selected appeals. Demographic information was also gathered.

The ads were shown to 144 teenagers between the ages of 12 to 14 in five separate classes of approximately 30 per class. The students were asked to watch the first tape of 18 ads and then to indicate which they recalled, and to note which they considered the "most effective" and the "least effective" of the ads and why. The 8 "test ads", i.e. those targeted to this age group, were interspersed among other anti-drug ads of various appeals but targeted to other age segments. They then viewed the five selected ads representing the various appeals in randomized order and were asked to evaluate them on thirteen dimensions (culled from previous literatures on measuring advertising effectiveness) using a six-point scale.

All of the second set of 5 ads were targeted to this age group. Upon completing the evaluation a discussion of the ads took place to insure that students understood the task they were assigned, and to gain additional insights into why they evaluated the ads as they did.

The post-survey discussion and the fact that only three of the questionnaires were deemed unusable provided a strong indication that the students understood the task. In addition, both the quantitative and written responses provide strong evidence of face validity.

RESULTS

Advertising Recall

Table 1 reflects the results of responses to the 8 ads appearing in the first section of the questionnaireCadvertising recall. As indicated in Table 1, the rational appeal ad "diving board" was by far the most frequently first mentioned ad, followed by "straight up", and "catching up". The "Pablo" and "decisions ads" were least recalled, with Pablo receiving no first mentions. (It should be noted at this point that the target for the Pablo ads was Hispanics and the sample consisted of only a few.)

In respect to second mentions, the "pool party" ad again demonstrated the highest recall, "catching up" and "grow up" also scored high. The second most recalled scores are generally consistent with those in column one, with a few ads showing increases in overall recall.

The third column in Table 1, (the third mentioned ad) demonstrates results consistent with columns one and two. The "pool party" and "catching up" ads continue to receive high recall scores, while "decisions" and "Linda"Cboth of which were aimed at teenagersCconsistently had poor recall.

Most Effective and Least Effective Ads

After indicating which ads they recalled, the participants were asked to indicate which ads they considered to be "most effective" and "least effective" in stopping teenagers from using drugs and why. The results are shown in Table 2.

As shown in Table 2, the "pool party" and "catching up to her" ads were considered to be the most likely to be effective. The "Pablo" and "decisions" ads were least likely to be seen as most effective. "Straight up" received a bimodal response being almost equally perceived as good and bad, indicating that recall does not necessarily reflect a positive response.

Table 3 provides a summary of the open ended responses indicating why students thought these ads would be most effective. As this table indicates, the ability of the ad to clearly and specifically demonstrate consequences to teenagers forms the basis for positive evaluations.

Table 2 also reflects responses to the question as to which ad would be least effective. As can be seen "Pablo", "straight up" andCto a lesser degreeC"decisions" ads were perceived as likely to be least effective. As would be expected, the ads shown in Table 2 as most likely to be effective appear less frequently in the second column.

TABLE 1

AD RECALL

TABLE 2

MOST AND LEAST EFFECTIVE ADS

Table 4 reflects the results of the open-ended comments as to which ads would be least effective. These comments clearly reflect the fact that to be perceived as effective the ad must be realistic, and clearly demonstrating consequences. Ads that are perceived as unrealistic in execution are likely to have little impact. (Once again, the "Pablo" ad, being targeted to a different ethnic market might be expected to be rated as ineffective.)

Evaluations of Specific Appeals

Table 5 summarizes the results of student's evaluations of five different types of appeals (rational, emotional, humorous, social fear and identification) on thirteen dimensions. The types of appeals were selected to represent various appeals commonly employed by the PFDFA. As noted, the dimensions reflect those commonly used (along with recall) to measure ad impact. This table provides a mean score for each item.

Rational Appeal C "Pool Party"

Table 5 shows the specific evaluations of the "pool party" ad. As can be seen, this ad rated highly on all of the positive dimensions under consideration (for example, meaningful, believable, important, etc.), was considered very unlikely to be silly or irritating, and was thought to be very likely to be effective. The ad was also considered worth remembering.

Emotional Appeal C Linda

Table 5 reflects the fact that students evaluated the strong emotional appeal ad favorably. As with the rational appeal ad, the emotional appeal was generally perceived as truthful, believable, truthful, important, informative, etc. The ad was not likely to be perceived as silly and would be expected to be effective with the target group, though not as effective as the rational "pool party" execution.

Identification Appeal C Straight Up

As can be seen in Table 5, the attempt to get students to identify with someone in their age group through the use of "rappers" was perceived much less favorably. While the ad tended to fall in the middle range of the scale on the average, the dispersion of responses indicate the ad was more likely than the previous two to be perceived as silly and irritating, less likely to be perceived as believable and meaningful and less likely to be considered likely to be effective. When comparing these evaluations to the responses shown in Table 4, it appears obvious that the respondents could not relate to the ad.

Social Fear C Party

Table 5 reflects the results of students' evaluations of the "party" adCan ad with a social fear appeal. In general the overall evaluation of this ad is positive, with the potential for effectiveness being high. The ad is not likely to be perceived as silly or irritating and is considered to be more likeable and interesting than the other ads presented. Along with the "pool party" ad, this appeal had the most positive effect.

TABLE 3

BASIS FOR MOST EFFECTIVE ADS

TABLE 4

BASIS FOR EVALUATION OF LEAST EFFECTIVE ADS

TABLE 5

EVALUATIONS OF SPECIFIC AD APPEALS

FIGURE 1

COMPARISON OF APPEALS BY EVALUATIVE CRITERION

Humor C Surgeon

The use of humor was also favorably perceived overall. As shown in Table 5 the humorous appealCwhile slightly lower in respect to believability, was generally rated positively overall, non-irritating, and somewhat likely to be effective. Overall, this approach was liked and considered worth remembering. (While also perceived to be silly, this would obviously follow from a humorous appeal.)

Comparative Analysis of Ad Appeals

Figure 1 shows how each of the ads compared on each of the dimensions under consideration and on a relative comparison. As can be seen a variety of appeals score well on more than one dimension. The rational appeal is generally perceived as most important and most meaningful of the appeals examined. Humor fares best in respect to being likeable and enjoyable, and is also considered to be the most effective and the appeal most worth remembering. The emotional appeal is perceived as the most truthful, most informative, most believable and least irritating, while the social fear approach is considered to be very good and very interesting.

The appeal rating the lowest on each of these dimensions is the attempt to establish identification through the "straight up" ad. As shown in Figure 1, this ad received the lowest ratings on nine of the 13 dimensions evaluated, and received the best marks on none of the positive scales. Follow-up discussions revealed that the students felt the ad was "phony" and "not to the point".

DISCUSSION

As noted, previous research on the effectiveness of the anti-drug campaign has focussed on survey research designed to measure changes in attitudes towards drugs overall, and on behavioral changes. No research reporting on attitudes toward specific appeals has appeared in the literature, despite some conflicting opinions as to their impact. The results of this studyCwhile not definitiveCoffer some insights into this area.

Recall

As demonstrated in Table 1, the likelihood of recall of specific types of appeals varies. Reviewing the results of these tables demonstrates that no one specific appeal is most likely to lead to significant recall. The results do, however, provide some interesting insights. For example, the "pool party" ad, which employs a rational appeal and features a young girl in her teens was the most recalled ad (on a first mention basis). This ad also was considered by the students to be the ad most likely to be effective with their age group.

The third best scoring ad in respect to first mentions, "catching up to her", also employed a rational appeal. Both of these ads demonstrate the consequences associated with doing drugs, and both are related to well by teens. Neither employs a direct strong fear appeal, though both indicate the severity of the consequences.

On the other hand, gaining high recall is no guarantee that the ad will be effective. For example, the "rapper" ad (straight up) while demonstrating high recall scores, was considered by some to be a potentially effective ad, but more of the students felt that the ad would be not likely to be effective. The primary reason cited was that the ad was "unreal" and that they could not relate to it as well as the more straight forward appeals. In addition, the ad failed to provide an indication of the consequences of doing drugsCa common evaluation throughout the responses.

Perceived Effectiveness

As noted earlier, those ad appeals reflecting the highest recall were also likely to be perceived as most likely to be effective (the "straight up" ad not withstanding). Examination of Table 4 reveals that there is, in fact, an underlying current across the ads deemed to be most effective. In the "pool party" and "catching up to her" ads, the consequences of doing drugs is clear, and yet presented in a less frightening manner. Discussions with participants in both phases of the study consistently cited the fact that these consequences were obvious and rationally presented as the basis for their being rated so highly.

The one exception to this rule was the "straight up" ad. As shown, this ad received mixed reviews, being considered very effective and very ineffective. In the discussions, it was frequently mentioned that "the ad might work with some people, but not for me". In other words, much of the positive attitudinal ratings can be attributed to students' speculation that these ads would work with others. The ratings of ineffectiveness more closely reflect the results of the discussions.

Evaluations of Specific Appeals

Research regarding the effectiveness of various types of appeals is common in the advertising literature. Belch, Belch and Villareal (1987), and Weinberger and Gulas (1992) provide summary reviews of the numerous research studies on the effects of humorous appeals, while Belch et.al., and numerous others have reported on the effectiveness of fear appeals. The literature on rational versus emotional appeals and the identification process is also well represented.

The issue here is that of trying to determine which types of appeals are most likely to be effective with teenagersCnot in an attempt to sell them anything, but rather to influence their attitudes toward drugs. As noted, there has been criticism regarding the use of fear appeals, with opponents arguing that they are likely to be ineffective.

Addressing these in reverse order, the results of Phase I of this study provided strong evidence that teens will not respond favorably to strong fear appeals. The "lab rat" ad was so unfavorably reviewed in the focus group discussions that it was omitted from further consideration. Due to the strength or the objections to this ad, further research was unnecessary, as students indicated that they would be likely to "turn off" or "tune-out" the adsCa position consistent with that advocated by Janis and Leventhal (1968).

At the same time, three other types of appealsChumor, rational and social fear approaches all suggest strong potential. Previous research has shown that social fear appeals may be more effective with teenagers. The social fear appeal ad shown here received some of the most positive attitudinal evaluations of ads shownCresults consistent with previous researchCthough no one of these three types of appeal was demonstrated as being most effective. While a humorous approach proved to be most enjoyable, very worth remembering, very likable and potentially most effective, it scored slightly lower than the rational and social fear appeals on the important dimensions of meaningful, truthful, informative and believable. The social fear approach was also considered to be more interesting and more likely to be perceived as "very good". The rational appeal was considered to be the most meaningful, most important, and least irritating or silly.

What these results seem to indicate is that if properly implemented, more than one type of appeal can be effective, however it is also evident that the humorous, social fear approach and rational appeals are consistently rated more favorably than the others. Further on the perhaps more important attributes (for example, meaningful, effective, truthful and worth remembering) the rational appeal again seems to garner the highest ratings overall.

The key to effectiveness may lie in the attributes meaningful and believableCboth of which lead to adoption of the rational appeal. Discussions with participants reflect the fact that they want to be spoken to honestly, straight forward and not deceived. This attitude accounts for the poor scores on the "straight up" and "decisions" ad which students felt were almost an insult to their intelligence due to the fact that they were "too unreal" and/or "phony". The scores reflected how ineffective this approach is likely to be.

Limitations

While the results of this study offer insights into the impact of various appeals, there are some limitations that preclude stronger conclusions. These include:

1. Sample Characteristics - the sample consisted primarily of white middle class students. While a few minorities were present, not enough were included to generalize across ethnic subgroups;

2. Measures - the measure of recall, to mirror "The Real World", would have taken place the next day; and

3. Setting - a field setting reflecting a more natural viewing setting would be preferred to the lab setting employed.

Given the financial constraints imposed on this research it was not possible to design a more definitive study. At the same time, the research objective was to gain insights into the impact of various appeals. Future research in this area will be designed to account for these limitations.

APPENDIX A

DESCRIPTION OF TEST COMMERCIALS

1. Pool Party. Target: 9-12. Girl jumping off diving board: A young girl climbs a ladder to the top of a diving board, walks to the end and dives into an empty pool. The commentator is talking about what kids think drugs can do for them. He explains that kids think taking drugs is like being on top of the world and everyone is having a good time but that before a person thinks about trying something new (drugs) they should know what they are jumping into.

2. Decisions. Target: 9-12. A teenager is shown listening to headphones. The commentator is explaining how this boy is now making his own decisions such as picking his own clothes, hairstyle, and music. He then says to the boy, "So don't blow this choice-don't smoke marijuana."

3. Linda. Target: 12-17. A young girl with a pale face who looks sick is telling her story about using drugs. She explains that she started smoking marijuana a year ago but just started using crack about a month ago. She did not think anything would happen to her because she did crack but now her life is a mess. Now she can not live without crack and she is sorry that she has put her family through so much pain.

4. Straight-up. Target: Black 9-12. Two boys are rapping (singing) about how drugs are bad for people. The commercial shows boys running from police officers because they were dealing drugs. The rappers tell how life is more important than material things and kids should not do drugs because drugs are for "suckers."

5. Pablo (Spanish). Target: Hispanics 12-17. A young boy is playing with his older brother. The young boy tells how he liked his brother, but things had changed when his brother began using drugs. His brother died using drugs. Ile commercial ends with the statement "Think about it" at the bottom of the screen.

6. Grow-up. Target: 9-12. First a boy is running from a police officer and a young boy's voice says, "When I grow up, I want to be a track star. The commentator then says that no one wants to grow up and be a junkie. The next scene shows a girl high on drugs dancing around and a little girl's voice says, "I want to grow up to be a ballerina." The commentator says, "Don't let drugs get in the way of your dreams."

7. Smoking Head. Target: 9-12. A side view of boy is shown and the silhouette of his head starts to burn and turn to ashes. The commentator states that if you keep smoking crack (then the silhouette blows away) there will be nothing left."

8. Catching up to her. Target: 12-17. A girl is standing next to railroad tracks and a train is approaching while her friend is standing on the tracks. The girl knows her friend is in trouble but says "What can I do?" The girl feels that if she says anything she won't be cool and could loose a friend. The last thing the girl says is "It's her life, right?" The statement at the end of the commercial says "Do something."

APPENDIX B

DESCRIPTION OF FIVE COMMERCIALS REPRESENTING VARIOUS APPEALS

Rational Appeal-Pool Party: A young girl climbs a ladder to the top of a diving board, walks to the end and dives into an empty pool. The commentator is talking about what kids think drugs can do for them. He explains that kids think taking drugs is like being on top of the world and everyone is having a good time but that before a person thinks about trying something new (drugs), they should know what they are jumping into.

Emotional Appeal-Linda: A young girl with a pale face who looks sick is telling her story about using drugs. She explains that she started smoking marijuana a year ago but just started using crack about a month ago. She did not think anything would happen to her because she did crack but now her life is a mess. Now she can not live without crack and she is sorry that she has put her family through so much pain.

Identification-Straight up: Two boys are rapping (singing) about how drugs are bad for people. The commercial shows boys running from police officers because they were dealing drugs. The rappers tell how life is more important than material things and kids should not do drugs because drugs are for "suckers."

Social Fear Appeal-Party: A scene of teenagers at a party with a boy and a girl looking at each other. As the boy approaches the girl, apparently to talk to her, the girl starts to smoke a marijuana joint. The boy stops at the sight of the girl smoking and becomes disinterested in her and walks away.

Humor Appeal-Surgeon: The commercial shows a surgeon in an operating room smoking a marijuana joint. The doctor says, "tonsillitis?" The patients says, "No appendicitis!" The doctor laughs and keeps repeating "tonsillitis." The commentator says "Does a joint in someone else's hands, like doctors and police, still make you think it's harmless?"

CONCLUSIONS

If there is to be one conclusion to be drawn from this study, it is that to reach teens, through anti-drug ads, these ads must be honest, straight forward and realistic. In addition, the ads should clearly demonstrate the potential consequences of drug abuse, and should do so in an unthreatening (low or moderate fear) manner. Any attempts to relate to this age group through strong physical fear, identification or other methods perceived as unrealistic are likely to fail. The ad must provide evidence of what the results are likely to be as students may be unable to draw these conclusions for themselves.

Perhaps the best way to end this report is to indicate what students said they would do if they were to be put in charge of the anti-drug campaign. While a number of good suggestions were forthcoming, the one that received the most acceptance among the group, and was considered the most favorable was to have a weekly program along the lines of "9-1-1" or other such shows. This program would visit a drug rehabilitation clinic each week and show kids with drug problems. This programming said the students "would get the consequences across, and teens could see what could happen if they used drugs"Cthe same information that should be forthcoming in the advertising campaign.

REFERENCES

"Ads Aid Drug Decline", Advertising Age, 61(15), 4/9/90, p. 42.

Belch, G., Belch, M. and Villareal, A. (1987), "Effects of Advertising Communications: Review of Research", Research in Marketing, 9, pp. 59-117.

Berry, Jon, "Against All Odds", Brandweek, 33, 9/28/92, p. 16-24.

Donohew, L, H.E. Sypher and W.J. Bukoski (1991), Persuasive Communication and Drug Abuse Prevention, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gersh, D. (1988), "Some Newspapers Refuse to Run Anti-drug Ad", Editor and Publisher, p. 17.

Goldman, Kevin, "TV Starts to 'Just Say No' to Antidrug Ads", Wall St. Journal, 4/30/93, p. B3.

Gordon Black Company (1989), Drug Free America Tracking Studies Summary.

Hedrick, T., "Pro bono Anti-drug Campaign is Working", Advertising Age, June 25, 1990, pp. 22.

Janis, I.L., and Feshbach (1953), "Effects of Fear Arousing Communications", Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48(1), pp. 78-92.

Kelly, Susanne D. (1991), "Just Say No is not Enough", Education Digest 56(5), pp. 66-68.

Murray, P.N., "A Better Ad Strategy for the War on Drugs", Advertising Age, April 30, 1990, p.52.

Schoenbachler, Denise D., "Toward More Effective Televised Anti-Drug PSA's", AMA Winter Educator's Conference, Orlando, FL, February 1991, pp. 158-164.

Weinberger, M.G. and Gulas, C.S., (1992) "The Impact of Humor in Advertising: A Review", Journal of Advertising, 21.(4), pp. 35-60.

----------------------------------------