When confrontational images may be counter productive: reinforcing the case for pre-testing communications in sensitive areas
Robert J. Donovan, Geoffrey Jalleh, Lynda Fielder and Robyn Ouschan

Abstract

Issue addressed: White Ribbon Day is an international campaign that encourages men to speak out about and demonstrate their opposition to violence against women by wearing a white ribbon on 25 November. This study assesses the effectiveness of a graphic confrontational image in the Australian 2006 campaign versus an alternative non-violent image to motivate men to wear a white ribbon on White Ribbon Day.

Methods: An intercept survey was conducted with a sample of 45 males aged 30–49 years recruited in an inner city suburban shopping strip. Respondents were presented with two alternatives: a graphic ‘amputated arm’ image and a non-violent ‘father-daughter’ image. The primary dependent variable was the relative ability of the two alternatives in motivating respondents to wear a white ribbon on White Ribbon Day.

Results: The vast majority of respondents nominated the ‘father-daughter’ as image being more motivating than the ‘amputated arm’ image to wear a white ribbon on White Ribbon Day: 84% vs 9%.

Conclusions: The bland ‘father-daughter’ image was far more motivating than the macabre/violent ‘amputated arm’ image in motivating men to wear a white ribbon on White Ribbon Day. This is contrary to the UNIFEM Australia and White Ribbon Day assertion that ‘confrontational/provocative’ images are necessary to achieve this behaviour.

Key words: Violence against women, White Ribbon Day, shock imagery, pre-testing

So what?

Confrontational images may be counter productive. Hence pre-testing of potentially controversial images is necessary, especially in sensitive areas such as violence against women and when funds for campaigns are limited.

Health Promotion Journal of Australia 2008; 19:132-136