| Literature DB >> 32316591 |
James Nobles1,2, Clare Thomas1,2, Zoe Banks Gross3, Malcolm Hamilton4, Zoe Trinder-Widdess1,2, Christopher Speed5, Andy Gibson1,2,6, Rosie Davies1,2,6, Michelle Farr1,2, Russell Jago1,5, Charlie Foster5, Sabi Redwood1,2.
Abstract
Despite many countries having physical activity guidelines, there have been few concerted efforts to mobilize this information to the public. The aim of this study was to understand the preferences of under-served community groups about how the benefits of physical activity, and associated guidelines, can be better communicated to the public. Participatory workshops, co-developed between researchers, a local charity, and a community artist, were used to gather data from four groups in Bristol, UK: young people (n = 17); adults (n = 11); older adults (n = 5); and Somali women (n = 15). Workshop content was structured around the study aims. The community artist and/or the local charity delivered the workshops, with researchers gathering data via observation, photos, and audio-recordings, which were analysed using the framework method. All four groups noted that the benefits of physical activity should be included within any communications efforts, though not restricted to health-related benefits. Language used should be simple and jargon-free; terms such as "sedentary", "vigorous" and "intensity" were deemed inaccessible, however all groups liked the message "some is good, more is better". Views about preferred mechanisms, and messenger, for delivering physical activity messages varied both between, and within, groups. Recommendations for those working in physical activity communications, research, and policy are provided.Entities:
Keywords: communication; guidelines; messaging; physical activity; qualitative research; social marketing
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32316591 PMCID: PMC7215851 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082782
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Demographic characteristics of workshop participants.
| Demographic Characteristic | Adults | Older Adults | Young People | Somali Women | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 9.1 | 0 | 47.1 | 0 |
| (%) | Female | 81.8 | 80.0 | 52.9 | 100.0 |
| Prefer not to say | 9.1 | 20.0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Age | Mean | 38.2 | 73.2 | 12.2 | 32.0 |
| (years) | Range | 23–57 | 67–87 | 10–15 | 18–55 |
| Prefer not to say ( | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | |
| Ethnicity | White British | 54.5 | 100.0 | 88.2 | 0 |
| (%) | Other Ethnicity | 36.4 | 0 | 11.8 | 73.3 |
| Prefer not to say | 9.1 | 0 | 0 | 26.7 | |
Summary of key results.
| Children and Young People ( | Adults ( | Older Adults ( | Somali Women ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
|
| Include: | Include: | Include: | Include: |
|
| (1) Simple and understandable. | (1) “Some is better than none” and “Just do a little bit of anything” | (1) Invitational language (e.g., how are you doing? Fancy a brew?). Link with emotive content. | (1) Instructive messaging may be needed for some. |
|
| Messenger must be perceived as important and trustworthy. Celebrities (differ depending on age group) Sport stars YouTubers and gamers Friends and peers | Messenger must be perceived as influential. Demographic specific. | Messenger must be perceived as trustworthy and caring—“A kind voice”. | Messenger must be relatable. Different people of different ages. |
|
| Differs dependent on participant’s age: | Different mechanisms for different audiences. Posters—colorful, clear/simple text. Child friendly–light-hearted. Stories seen as powerful. Imagery important (people being active—show progress and benefits). Other: TV, radio, billboards, bus stops, apps, and social media. | Mechanism must be simple, primarily visual. Easy to understand. | Social media seen as main mechanism–different platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, snapchat). Including community forums. |
The ordering refers to the perceived importance of the benefits of physical activity. BBC—British Broadcasting Corporation, C4L—Change4Life, CMO—Chief Medical Officer, GIF—Graphics Interchange Format, TV—Television.
Andreasen’s Social Marketing Benchmark Criteria.
| Benchmark Criteria | Definition 1 |
|---|---|
| 1. Behavioral objective | Social marketing should aim to change or focus on a specific behavior of the target recipients (e.g., physical activity). |
| 2. Formative research | Formative research should be undertaken to learn about the target audience in order to shape the intervention/message being developed (e.g., understanding the determinants which influence physical activity behavior amongst the target recipients). |
| 3. Segmentation | Segmentation acknowledges that similar groups lie within heterogenous populations, and can be identified based upon their “needs” and “wants” (not necessarily based upon their demographic make-up). Information can be tailored to these segments. |
| 4. Exchange | It is important to consider what would motivate target recipients to voluntarily take up the desired behavior–may be intrinsic (e.g., enhanced sense of wellbeing) or extrinsic (e.g., financial incentive) motives. |
| 5. Marketing mix | Social marketing strategies–including communication and messaging–should consider the four Ps of marketing: product (i.e., the benefits received if undertaking the behavior), price (i.e., the opportunity costs when carrying out the behavior–pros and cons), placement (i.e., where the behavior is promoted), and promotion (i.e., the tools used to promote the behavior). |
| 6. Competition | It is imperative to understand what other things or behaviors are concurrently competing for the target recipients’ time and attention. Strategies can be developed to mitigate the impact of this competition. |
1 Adapted from Andreasen [36], Fujijira et al., [37], Gordon et al., [13], and Luecking et al., [40].
The Bristol Recommendations for Improving Physical Activity Communication.
| Recommendations |
|---|
| 1. Work with multi-disciplinary teams to develop physical activity communications and messages. Ensure that social marketing experts are included. |
| 2. Develop a nuanced understanding of your target audience(s), and wherever possible work with your audience(s) to develop and tailor physical activity messages to their preferences. |
| 3. Carefully consider message content, including use of language and whether to include physical activity guidelines; focusing on “moving more” may seem more feasible to the public. Jargon-free language is preferred. |
| 4. Emphasize the benefits of physical activity and ensure that these include affective and social benefits, alongside physical and mental health benefits. Benefits will differ between audiences. |
| 5. Identify influential and trustworthy individuals to deliver the physical activity message. It is often important that these individuals are relatable to the public–particularly for adult audiences (i.e., “look and talk like me”. |
| 6. A multi-modal, visual approach is likely needed to widely disseminate the physical activity message. The preferred mechanism of delivery will differ between, and within, groups. |
| 7. When creating physical activity messages, be mindful about the regular conflation of physical activity, sport and exercise. Ensure that communications do not increase public confusion about what constitutes physical activity. |
| 8. Consider how resources could be pooled to create consistent physical activity messages to the public over a long period of time. Seek to reduce public confusion around physical activity recommendations. |
| 9. Whilst official documentation (e.g., CMO physical activity guidelines/infographics) may not be created for public consumption, be wary that these documents–or excerpts of–may end up in the public domain and can reinforce public perceptions of physical activity (e.g., via MECC resources). |
| 10. Critically reflect on current physical activity messages and campaigns in light of these findings and consider how they may be received, and interpreted, by under-served community groups. |