Application and Evaluation of Social Marketing (SM) to Food Safety Education

Prof Chris Griffith and E. Redmond
Food Research and Consultancy Unit
University of Wales Institute, Cardiff

Where to start?

Who, What and How?

Application and Evaluation of SM to Food Safety

• Initial Planning
• Preliminary Formative Research
• Initial Intervention Development
• Evaluation of Intervention
• Assess effectiveness of Intervention
• Evaluate Process

Application and Evaluation of SM: Initial Planning

• Analyse and review literature
• Devise meals
• Assess food handling practices
  • Record practices
  • Consistency
  • Identify Target Groups
  • Risk Confirmation

Application and Evaluation of SM: Formative Research

Focus groups used in:

• understanding of issues
• Identification of barriers
• Identification of benefits
• perceived risks and responsibilities
• life point paths
• social norms / self efficacy

Application and Evaluation of SM: Initial Intervention Development

Focus groups used to determine:

• preference of interest type and design
• preference for sources and formats
• construction of pilot materials

Application and Evaluation of SM: Evaluation of Intervention

Focus groups used to :

• evaluate materials / interventions
• amend
• survey

• Audience
  • women 60-75 segmented HAPA
• Objective
  • Reduction in Cross contamination
• Determinants
  • Handwashing
  • Washing equipment
• Intervention
  • Video, 2 leaflets, 3 posters, 5 magnets, advertisement

Application and Evaluation of SM: Assess Effectiveness

Focus groups used to :

• evaluate materials / interventions
• amend
• survey

Frequency risk scores representing all food safety behaviours for all TEST sample participants (n=25).

(graphic. Shows risk scores for each participant dropping from "Before Intervention" to "After Intervention," rising during "Maintenance of Intervention," but not to initial levels.)

Frequency risk scores representing all food safety behaviours for all CONTROL sample participants (n=14).

(graphic. Shows scores for each control participant before intervention, after intervention, and maintenance of intervention. More variable than in preceeding graphic.)

Frequency Counts of Acceptable, Unacceptable and No Attempts at Hand Washing and Hand Drying Immediately After Handling Raw Chicken

(Bar graphs show frequency counts before intervention, immediately after intervention, and during maintenance of intervention for acceptable, unacceptable, and no attempts at handwashing. Exact data not available for alternative presentation.)

Application and Evaluation of Social Marketing (SM): Evaluate Process

• “One off” intervention: short term improvement
• Changed behaviour not well maintained
• Use of observation valuable: expensive and time consuming