MESSAGE INTERPRETATION PROCESS MEASURES, 2001
< BackPlease note that the development of reliable measures for use at various ages still continues. The following measures comprise the most reliable versions of indices used to date.
Measures (from Austin, Pinkleton& Fujioka, 2000 and Pinkleton, Austin & Fujioka, 1999 unless otherwise indicated, and appropriate for use with middle-school, high-school and college students. Unless a separate index is presented for younger children, the measures also have been used with 3rd-grade children), using some variation of a Likert-type scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree; never true to always true; no, never to yes, always).
MEDIA USE–Exposure to TV determined via participants’ indication of how many days in the past week they had watched “any prime time TV (between 8-11 p.m.),” sports programs, news programs, daytime soap operas, music videos, late-night talk shows and Spanish-language TV, on a scale from 0 to 7 days. (Please note that media use measures are the subject of much controversy. This is only one option among many for measuring media use.)
DESIRABILITY–The degree to which adolescents found media portrayals to be attractive. Participants indicate the extent to which people drinking alcohol in beer ads seem to be having fun; people drinking alcohol in beer ads are attractive; people drinking alcohol on TV seem to have a lot of problems (reverse coded); people drinking alcohol in beer ads seem popular with their friends; bad things often happen to people shown drinking alcohol on TV (reverse coded); and people in beer ads seem happy, all on four-point scales (never to often or strongly disagree to strongly agree). (alpha=.74).
DESIRABILITY (used with 3rd graders)–People in beer ads are popular; smart; good looking; men in beer ads are strong (alpha=. 65, Austin & Knaus, 1998, with 3rd through 9th graders); men in ads are strong; people I ads have friends; women in ads are beautiful; people in ads are popular (alpha=.82, Austin & Johnson, 1997, with 3rd graders); are attractive; are happy (Pinkleton, Austin & Fujioka, 1999); have power over other people in their lives (Austin & Freeman, 1997).
PERCEIVED REALISM--The extent to which “TV is a realistic source of information for” what makes people popular, what makes people successful, how teenagers act, and what is trendy, all on 4-point Likert scales (alpha=. 79).
PERCEIVED REALISM (used with 3rd graders)–Do real people who drink beer or wine do things that people in beer and wine ads do? Do real people who drink beer or wine act like people in beer and wine ads? Do real people who drink beer or wine look like people in beer and wine ads? (Alpha=.75, Austin & Johnson, 1997).
SIMILARITY (used with 3rd graders)–I do the things I see on TV; I like what people on TV like; I am like people in ads; I have as much as people in ads have (alpha=.79, Austin & Johnson, 1997).
SIMILARITY/NORMS (used with 9th and 12th graders)–Agreement or disagreement on a 4-point Likert scale that most teenagers drink alcohol. [note that this is weak because it isn’t an index...more measures are recommended here]
PERCEPTIONS OF ALCOHOL USE NORMS at home (alpha=.88), on television (alpha=.93), and “for most people” obtained via indices created from statements regarding why "adults in my home" and "people on TV" drink alcohol, on a five-point scale (never to often), regarding perceived positive consequences, as follows: because they are sad; because they've had a hard day; to make them feel better; to forget their problems; to fit in with their friends; because it tastes good; because they enjoy it; because they're depressed; to relax; to be less bored. (Austin & Meili, 1994). Suggested modification: “for most teenagers.”
IDENTIFICATION–The extent to which participants wanted to be like media portrayals, they indicated how strongly they agreed, on four-point scales, with four statements that included I wish I could be like people on TV programs; I wish I could be like people in TV ads; I wish I could do the things that people in ads do; and I wish I could look like people I see on TV. (alpha=.81).
EXPECTANCIES–Social expectancies indicated by participants’ agreement or disagreement with the following seven statements, on 4-point Likert scales that drinking alcohol makes you feel happy; drinking alcohol makes a party more fun; drinking alcohol helps you fit in; beer is a good reward after a hard day; you will find beer at a good party; drinking together is a sign of a good relationship; and drinking alcohol is a good way to relax (alpha=.88).
EXPECTANCIES (used with 3rd graders)–Social expectancies indicated by participants’ agreement or disagreement with the following statements, on 4-point Likert scales that kids like me think that drinking alcohol will make you feel happy; drinking alcohol will help you fit in; drinking alcohol will help you seem more grown up (alpha=.75, Austin & Johnson, 1997).
ALCOHOL PREDRINKING BEHAVIOR– Preferences for products exhibiting beer or soda pop logos based on the presentation of six items which respondents rated on a scale of 1-5 (not wanting it at all to wanting it a lot). Each beer item had a corresponding item representing a soda pop logo to act as a comparison group and to make it possible to determine whether the index measured a desire for beer-related items specifically or more generalized consumerism. Items included balls, toy trucks, motorized "dancing" cans, shirts, piggy banks, towels, hats, and salt- and pepper-shakers, representing a variety of brands. Groups of six items from a total of 22 items were randomly assigned to classrooms in one of eight balanced orders to avoid item-specific, brand-specific or order-specific effects. Items in each order crossed gender stereotypes; for example, salt- and pepper-shakers countered athletic equipment. Each order included three items representing each theme (soda pop or beer). Only the beer items were used to create the prebehavior index (alpha=.61). The inclusion of the soda pop measures did not measurably improve the reliability of the index and on their own were not reliable (alpha=.47).
BEHAVIOR–Measures drawn largely from Johnston, O’Malley and Bachman but modified to include a measure of the number of products bearing alcohol logos owned by each respondent. Participants indicate the number of alcohol products owned “that display alcohol logos or products,” on a 4-point scale (none; 1-2; 3-4; 5 or more); the number of times “in the past six months” each respondent had been offered an alcoholic beverage; attended a party where alcohol was served; drank an alcoholic beverage; had four or more drinks in a row; rode with a driver who had been drinking alcohol; and got sick from drinking alcohol, all on 6-point scales (never; 1-2 times; 3-4 times; 1-3 times a month; 1 time a week; over once a week). The measures must be standardized to compute an index (alpha=.87 in Austin et al., 1999) due to the two scales employed.
BEHAVIOR (used with 6th and 9th grade)–how often you use (or have ever used) each one of the following things: cigarettes; chewing tobacco; alcohol, on scale of never used; used before but not in the past year; use about once or twice a year; use about once or twice a month; use about once or twice a week; use about every day (alpha=.63, Austin & Knaus, 1998).
POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT–Items assessing the extent to which parents reportedly reinforced television messages included how often, on four-point scales (never to often), a “parent or guardian” would say they like a product in a TV ad; say they like a character or person on TV; say something on TV often happens in real life; imitate something they saw on a TV program or in an ad; and say they agree with something shown on TV (alpha=.73).
NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT–Items assessing the extent to which parents reportedly counter-reinforced television messages included how often, on four-point scales (never to often) a “parent or guardian” would speak up when they see something on TV they don’t like; say something on TV is not true; talk about what ads try to do; say something in an ad looks better than it really is; say they disagree with something shown on TV; and tell you more about something you see on TV (alpha=.75). It has been demonstrated that positive and negative reinforcement operates differently and should be considered separately.
UNDERSTANDING OF PERSUASIVE INTENT (alpha levels have been problematic)–Companies who make ads only want me to buy things I need; Companies make ads to tell me what things I need to buy; Ads on TV tell me the truth about things I can buy (Austin & Knaus, 1988). Do you think ads are honest; People in TV ads want me to buy things because they like me; I think ads are on TV to tell me what to buy (alpha=.68, Austin & Johnson 1997)
SKEPTICISM (alpha=.75, with college students) was assessed with the answers to the following questions on a 4-point Likert scale (strongly agree-strongly disagree): advertising’s aim is to inform the consumer; I believe advertising is informative; advertising is generally truthful; and advertising is a reliable source of product information (Austin & Chen, 1999).
References
Austin,E. W., & Chen, Y. J. (1999, August). The relationship of parental reinforcement of media messages to college students’ alcohol-related behaviors, age of experimentation and beliefs about alcohol. Paper presented to the Communication Theory & Methodology Division of the Association for Education in Journalism & Mass Communication, New Orleans. Under review for publication.
Austin,E. W., & Freeman, C. (1997). Effects of media, parents and peers on African-American adolescents' efficacy toward media celebrities. Howard Journal of Communication, 8, 275-290.
Austin,E.W., & Johnson, K.K. (1997). Effects of general and alcohol-specific media literacy training on children's decision making about alcohol. Journal of Health Communication, 2, 17-42.
Austin,E.W., & Meili, H.K (1994). Effects of interpretations of televised alcohol portrayals on children's alcohol beliefs. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38, 417-435.
Austin, E. W., & Knaus, C. S. (2000). Predicting future risky behavior among those “too young” to drink, as the result of advertising desirability. Journal of Health Communication.
Austin, E. W., Pinkleton, B. E., & Fujioka, Y. (2000). The role of interpretation processes and parental discussion in the media’s effects on adolescents’ use of alcohol. Pediatrics, 105, 343‑349.
Austin, E. W., Pinkleton, B. P., & Fujioka, Y. (1999). Assessing pro-social message effectiveness: Effects of message quality, production quality and persuasiveness. Journal of Health Communication, 4, 195-210.
Johnston, L.D., O'Malley, P.M., & Bachman, J.G.(1994). National survey results on drug use from the monitoring the future study, 1975-1993. NIDA: Rockville, USHHS #94-3809.
Pinkleton, B. E., Austin., E. W., & Fujioka, Y. (1999, May). Effects of perceived beer and PSA quality on high school students’ alcohol-related beliefs and behaviors. Paper presented to the International Communication Association, San Francisco. In press at Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media.