MPH 602 Week 3 Audience-Specific Message Design Example

Three Audiences, Three Messages, One Action: Designing and Pretesting Naloxone Messages for Parents, Young Adults Who Party and People Who Use Drugs

[Student Name]

University of Phoenix

MPH/602: Public Health Communication and Advocacy

Week 3 Assignment

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The county, its audiences, draft messages, pretest participants and results are composites written for a model paper; research findings come from the sources cited.

The county health department planned a naloxone campaign built around a single advertisement, a photograph of a kit with the words "Save a life. Carry naloxone." A health educator who had worked at a syringe services program questioned the plan: parents, young adults who party and people who use drugs see overdose very differently, and one message might reach none of them. This paper designs and pretests messages for each audience.

Why Segment

Audience segmentation is widely regarded as essential to effective health communication, yet practice is often ad hoc. A review of segmentation theory and methods critiqued common strategies and recommended grouping audiences by characteristics that predict how they will respond, using systematic methods such as cluster analysis where data permit (Slater, 1996).

Choosing the Segments

The department used local survey and focus group data to identify three segments that differ in risk, beliefs and barriers: parents of teenagers, many of whom fear fentanyl but have never seen naloxone; young adults aged 18 to 29 who go to bars and parties and may use pills or powders occasionally; and people who use drugs regularly, many of whom know naloxone but face barriers to carrying it.

What Tailoring Can Achieve

Tailoring helps, though modestly. A meta-analysis of 57 studies with more than 58,000 participants found that tailored print interventions produced greater health behavior change than comparison materials, with a sample-weighted mean effect size of r = 0.074, and that effects varied with the behavior, population, materials and number of contacts (Noar et al., 2007). Segment-level targeting is a simpler cousin of individual tailoring, and the same logic applies.

Segment One: Parents

Parents believe fentanyl is a serious threat to their children but see naloxone as something for other families. Barriers include not knowing where to get it, fear of seeming to expect drug use and uncertainty about how to use it. They trust pediatricians, school nurses and other parents and see messages on Facebook, school emails and local news.

Message for Parents

Strategy: high threat with strong efficacy, framed as ordinary safety. Draft: "Fentanyl can be in any pill a teen is offered. Keep naloxone at home, like a fire extinguisher. Free at every school nurse's office and pharmacy." Visual: a naloxone box next to a first aid kit on a kitchen shelf. Messenger: a local pediatrician and a mother whose son survived.

Segment Two: Young Adults Who Party

Young adults underestimate risk, believing fentanyl is a problem for other people, and value looking out for friends. Barriers include not wanting to seem like a drug user by carrying naloxone. They use Instagram and TikTok and trust peers, bartenders and musicians more than officials.

Message for Young Adults

Strategy: social norms and friendship, with a one-time action. Draft: "Your friends would do it for you. Keep naloxone in your bag. Free kits at the bar." Visual: friends at a concert, one pulling a kit from a bag. Messenger: local bartenders and a musician.

Segment Three: People Who Use Drugs

People who use drugs regularly know the risk, and many have seen overdoses. Barriers include stigma, fear of police when calling for help and running out of kits. They trust peers and syringe services staff and are reached through the program, text lines and word of mouth.

Message for People Who Use Drugs

Strategy: efficacy and respect, with no fear appeal. Draft: "Never use alone. Test first. Carry naloxone, and refills are always free, no questions." Visual: none; a simple card handed out by peers. Messenger: peer outreach workers.

Evidence Behind the Appeals

Fear works when paired with efficacy. A meta-analysis of 248 samples found fear appeals positively influenced attitudes, intentions and behaviors, more so when messages included efficacy statements and recommended one-time behaviors (Tannenbaum et al., 2015). The parent and young adult messages pair threat with a one-time action, picking up a kit. For people who already know the danger, the message focuses on efficacy alone.

Evidence Behind the Words

All drafts avoid words such as addict and abuser. In a randomized study, clinicians who read about a substance abuser rather than a person with a substance use disorder agreed more that the person was to blame and should be punished (Kelly & Westerhoff, 2010). Words that assign blame push away exactly the people a naloxone message most needs to reach.

Spanish-Language Versions

Each message was drafted in Spanish by bilingual staff, not translated word for word, and reviewed by community members. The parent message used an image of a grandmother's kitchen, since grandparents often care for teenagers after school. The fire extinguisher comparison worked in both languages, but the young adult slogan needed a different phrase in Spanish to carry the same sense of loyalty to friends.

Messages to Avoid

The team also agreed on what not to say. Messages would not show drugs, needles or bodies, would not imply that naloxone encourages drug use and would not use statistics without a clear action. Each of these choices came from focus group reactions or research on fear and stigma.

The Pretest

The team pretested each segment's message and one alternative with 12 members of each segment, 36 in all. After viewing, participants rated understanding, perceived threat, confidence that they could get and use naloxone and intention to carry it, then explained their reactions.

Pretest Results

Parents understood the message and rated efficacy highly; several said the fire extinguisher comparison made carrying naloxone feel normal. Young adults preferred the friendship message to an alternative with statistics, which they called preachy. People who use drugs rated the respect-focused card highest but asked that it mention Colorado's law protecting people who call 911 for an overdose.

Revisions

Parent materials added a short video showing how to use nasal naloxone. The young adult message kept the friendship theme and dropped the statistics version. The card for people who use drugs added a line about protections for people who call for help and a text number for refills.

Channels and Timing

Parent messages run in school emails and on pediatric clinic screens in August and January. Young adult messages run on social media and bar coasters on weekend nights. Peer workers distribute cards daily.

Measuring After Launch

After release, the department will track kits picked up at each distribution point, clicks on the video, text line sign-ups and a short intercept survey at pharmacies and bars asking where people saw the message. Comparing pickup by segment will show which messages reach their audiences in practice.

Conclusion

One naloxone message would have fit no one well. Segmentation theory guided three audiences, tailoring evidence supported different messages, fear appeal research shaped when to use threat and experimental evidence on stigma shaped word choice. Pretesting with 36 audience members confirmed what worked, discarded what did not and led to revisions before a single poster was printed.

References

Kelly, J. F., & Westerhoff, C. M. (2010). Does it matter how we refer to individuals with substance-related conditions? A randomized study of two commonly used terms. International Journal of Drug Policy, 21(3), 202-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.10.010

Noar, S. M., Benac, C. N., & Harris, M. S. (2007). Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 673-693. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673

Slater, M. D. (1996). Theory and method in health audience segmentation. Journal of Health Communication, 1(3), 267-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/108107396128059

Tannenbaum, M. B., Hepler, J., Zimmerman, R. S., Saul, L., Jacobs, S., Wilson, K., & Albarracín, D. (2015). Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. Psychological Bulletin, 141(6), 1178-1204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039729