|
|||||||||
|
Tips Home | Mission | Site Map | Contact Us | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Parenting Factors1 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Importance | Changeable | Combined | |||
Mean | n | Mean | n | Mean | |
Relationship quality | |||||
1. Parent/child attachment | 4.7 | 25 | 3.7 | 24 | 4.1 |
2. Parent aware of teen's life | 4.6 | 25 | 4.0 | 25 | 4.3 |
3. Parent trusts teen without supervision | 4.1 | 23 | 3.7 | 23 | 3.9 |
4. Parent does activities with teen | 4.3 | 24 | 3.9 | 25 | 4.1 |
5. Parent available at key times | 4.1 | 24 | 3.4 | 25 | 3.7 |
6. Child talks with parent re: important things | 4.1 | 26 | 3.8 | 26 | 3.8 |
7. Parent praises teen | 4.4 | 27 | 4.2 | 26 | 4.2 |
Monitoring |
|||||
1. Parent knows where child/teen is at all times | 4.0 | 26 | 3.8 | 25 | 3.9 |
2. Parent has routine for child/teen | 3.9 | 26 | 3.9 | 26 | 4.0 |
3. Parent knows child's/teen's friends | 4.1 | 27 | 3.7 | 27 | 4.0 |
4. Parent maintains close contact | 3.8 | 26 | 4.0 | 26 | 4.0 |
5. Parent knows other parents | 3.9 | 24 | 3.9 | 24 | 4.2 |
6. Child home alone for more than 2hrs | 3.9 | 24 | 3.7 | 23 | 3.7 |
Rule, enforcement |
|||||
1. Parent conveyed clear rules re: behavior | 4.6 | 27 | 4.3 | 26 | 4.5 |
2. Child knows consequences | 4.3 | 27 | 4.0 | 26 | 4.2 |
3. Parent conveyed clear rules re: homework | 4.0 | 25 | 4.0 | 23 | 4.1 |
4. Parent conveyed clear rules re: smoking | 4.4 | 27 | 4.2 | 26 | 4.4 |
5. Parent conveyed clear rules re: SLT2 | 4.3 | 26 | 4.2 | 25 | 4.4 |
6. Parent conveyed clear rules re: alcohol | 4.4 | 25 | 4.2 | 25 | 4.5 |
7. Parent conveyed clear rules re: illicit drugs | 4.5 | 26 | 4.2 | 25 | 4.5 |
8. Parent consistent with consequences | 4.5 | 27 | 4.0 | 27 | 4.4 |
Key skills |
|||||
1. Parent teaches child to manage conflict | 4.5 | 23 | 3.6 | 22 | 4.0 |
2. Parent teaches child to make rational decisions | 4.1 | 25 | 3.6 | 21 | 3.7 |
3. Parent teaches child to solve problems | 4.3 | 25 | 3.5 | 21 | 4.0 |
4. Parent teaches child to resist difficult situations | 4.2 | 24 | 3.6 | 21 | 3.8 |
Self efficacy |
|||||
1. Parent is confident he/she can keep child safe | 3.6 | 23 | 3.6 | 20 | 3.8 |
2. Parent is important in guiding child's actions | 4.2 | 24 | 3.8 | 20 | 3.8 |
Role modeling |
|||||
1. Parent has set a good example | 4.6 | 26 | 3.7 | 26 | 4.1 |
2. Parent uses tobacco | 4.5 | 27 | 3.0 | 27 | 3.9 |
3. Parent uses/abuses alcohol | 4.5 | 25 | 2.8 | 25 | 3.7 |
4. Parent abuses illegal or prescription drugs | 4.6 | 25 | 2.8 | 24 | 3.8 |
Harmful environment |
|||||
1. Parent is verbally abusive to child/teen | 4.8 | 26 | 3.0 | 23 | 4.0 |
2. Parent is physically or sexually abusive | 4.9 | 25 | 2.8 | 21 | 3.9 |
3. Child witnesses parent verbally or physically abusing | 4.9 | 24 | 2.9 | 21 | 4.1 |
1 A four-level scale was used for each question, ranging from 1.0 as Not Important and Not Changeable to 5.0 as Very Important and Very Changeable. The mean was calculated for each question and also for the combined mean of Importance and Changeable by adding the scores for both Importance and Changeable and then dividing it by two.
Thus the table presents the average mean scores for Importance and Changeable (how modifiable the behavior is perceived by the expert), and the average mean of Importance and Changeable combined for each question in terms of the parenting style and the likelihood of reducing (or increasing) cigarette smoking among children and adolescents in the future.
2 Smokeless tobacco
These seven types of interventions are all important. But no one marketing campaign, especially one with a modest budget, can take on all these behaviors. The CDC needed to determine which of these practices the agency could help or persuade parents to adopt. To determine which intervention was ripe for a campaign, AED and CDC considered which of the above interventions was most strongly supported in the literature, could be most easily communicated, showed the greatest potential for interesting parents, and would not overlap too much with other campaigns aimed at parents. The list was narrowed to four themes: awareness of child’s life, parent-child activities, parental monitoring, and conveying clear rules. Then, the CDC considered how these interventions might become part of a real campaign aimed at parents. Two clear possibilities arose:
In addition, the CDC needed to determine when parents could most effectively reach their children. Should the CDC be talking to the parents of young teenagers, the subject of most of the studies in the literature, or would that be too late? Should parents be intervening before their child reaches this vulnerable period of growing independence and rebellion? Most children are offered their first cigarette around the age of 12. So, the CDC chose to focus on parents of children 9 to 12 years of age. Yet, that primary target would not be exclusive, the CDC decided, since the methods of dissemination would probably not be that narrow. Parents of older children would also be exposed, so efforts needed to be made to keep the message relevant and useful for them as well.
The formative research began by investigating what might help parents get more involved or set clear rules. A mix of quantitative and qualitative research methods was used. Six focus groups were conducted with parents to explore attitudes, benefits, and barriers around positive parenting practices. Participants, who had at least one child aged 7 to 11, were recruited and segmented as members of two groups—parents heavily involved with their child’s life (doers) and those less involved (non-doers). Given the qualitative nature of focus groups, it was understood that any findings could not be generalized to all parents, but a comparison of doers and non-doers did shed valuable light on what might matter to these parents, especially when seen alongside a separate quantitative analysis. Among the important findings was a clear desire of both groups of parents to connect better with their children, not because it would lead to better health outcomes but because “connectedness” was highly valued itself. By contrast, non-doer parents were not eager to set or enforce rules about tobacco or many other subjects.
In addition to the focus groups, 21 parenting questions from Healthstyles ’98, using a sample size of 500, were analyzed to find clusters of parenting styles. The challenge was to find which parents needed what kind of help. Researchers chose a three-cluster solution, which divided parents into three groups:
It was at the final category that the CDC wanted to aim its initial campaign. The focus groups had indicated this group might be ripe for a change: less-involved parents in the focus groups wanted to be more involved with their children or at least said so. They simply lacked self-efficacy. They knew instinctively they should be more connected with their children—they just didn’t know how.
Creating materials and messages that would help this group gain that self-efficacy became the focus of what would become the Got a Minute? campaign.
In the meantime, AED had also investigated what kind of campaign might be helpful to the CDC’s most important partners in tobacco—the state tobacco control programs. From the beginning, the CDC had viewed the state tobacco control programs, (recent beneficiaries of settlements with the tobacco industry), as the central players in dissemination. It would be these programs, primarily, that would need to reach the audience. What the CDC needed to know was what kind of materials the states might need.
AED used a national tobacco prevention conference to disseminate a written questionnaire about what kind of parenting campaign states might support. This survey was followed by lengthy interviews with nine states selected for their diversity in size, population, and funding situation. Data from 44 unduplicated states and the District of Columbia were gathered. The results showed states were using a variety of media to reach adults with two major messages: the dangers of environmental tobacco smoke and the value of quitting smoking. About half the states had campaigns aimed specifically at parents, but almost every state welcomed new materials aimed at parents from the CDC. A variety of potential materials drew positive responses from state tobacco control managers, including prototype ads, expert recommendations, and a training program. The managers also stressed the need for a guilt- and stress-free approach, as parents are already overwhelmed with “how-to” messages. Finally, the materials needed to be flexible, so that they could stand alone or fit neatly into existing programs.
In short, state tobacco control programs appeared eager to reach parents with a nonjudgmental message through a variety of channels—one reason the Got a Minute? kits contains a variety of materials, from a presentation to earned media recommendations to advertising.
With the states needs analyzed and a parenting behavior selected, the CDC went to work on creating a campaign that would resonate with the audience and be useful to the states. Both the HealthStyles ’98 data and the CDC’s early focus groups indicated low-involvement parents saw time and energy as the major barriers to becoming more involved with their children. So, the CDC worked with AED to create a campaign that would offer parents what they needed most: easy tactics for becoming involved.
Several concepts were tested with focus groups. Then, once the creative process produced actual magazine ads, a brochure, and radio spots, they were tested with parents in one-on-one intercept interviews and adjusted to add clarity. Some of the materials, including the introduction to this booklet, were also tested with a small group of state tobacco control managers.
Below is a diagram of how the creative materials in this packet are designed. Underlying all the products is an attempt to offer parents tactics for getting more involved with their children. Parents are supposed to be attracted to the campaign not because they think they may learn ways to help their children reject tobacco (parents in the focus groups were universally confident their children would never smoke). The appeal is the opportunity to become more connected, to, in the words of the advertising copy, “get into (their) kid’s head.” By offering simple ways to get more connected, praising a child, scheduling 10 minutes, etc., the campaign is aimed at improving a parent’s self-efficacy. With this new confidence and information, parents should be more likely to engage in the targeted behaviors—establishing an involved parenting style that is likely to act as a protective factor against tobacco use.