Social Norms Intervention to Reduce Hazardous and Harmful Consumption in a Community Setting Final Report

Transcription

1 Social Norms Intervention to Reduce Hazardous and Harmful Consumption in a Community Setting Final Report December 2014

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT DRINKING BEHAVIOUR FINDINGS FEEDBACK ON THE 2014 CAMPAIGN CONCLUSIONS AND KEY LEARNING POINTS APPENDIX A THE 2014 SURVEY APPENDIX B 2014 CAMPAIGN PLAN Acknowledgements This project would not have been possible without the continued input of Touch residents throughout the three phases of the survey and we must thank them for their participation, as well as their support to enable Touch to be a pilot site for a social norms intervention. The Touch and Garvock Community Council, the Dunfermline North and Central Area Committee and Fife Council must also be thanked for their continued support and guidance throughout the development of the project. The project was first initiated by the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project (prior to it being dissolved) and thanks must be extended to all stakeholders involved in this initiative, which allowed the social norms approach to initially be adopted in Touch. Finally, gratitude must be expressed to Dr John McAlaney at Bournemouth University for his continued specialist input and guidance throughout the research and for his informative and helpful comments on the various reports that have been produced. The project was funded by the Scotch Whisky Association. 2

3 Executive Summary Background i. The Fife Social Norms project was delivered in the Touch area of Dunfermline, home to approximately 1,000 residents, over the period 2011 to The aim of the project was to assess whether or not delivering a social norms intervention in a traditional community setting made a contribution to reducing hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption. ii. Social norms theory states that individual behaviour tends to be influenced by the individual s perceptions of how others around them typically behave. This approach was used to determine the actual drinking behaviours of the population and their perceptions of the drinking behaviours of others and, thereby, to ascertain the extent to which a social norms approach would be appropriate in Touch. iii. The intervention was initially delivered as part of the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project (FAPP) a pilot project which designed, developed and implemented a series of interventions, using a multi-component approach, to tackle alcohol-related harm. When FAPP disbanded, the Scotch Whisky Association (a member of FAPP) took over the delivery of the project, again in partnership with local stakeholders. iv. The project has been undertaken in three stages: A baseline survey in 2011 to determine if a social norms approach was appropriate. The results indicated that there was, indeed, a gap between actual and perceived drinking behaviours. Subsequently, a social norms approach was introduced in Touch to address this misperception; A first campaign, running from May to September 2012, seeking to address these misperceptions, and subsequent research undertaken in December 2012 (reported in 2013); and A second, more substantive campaign, running from April to mid-july 2014, using similar messages as the first campaign but increasing their prominence in the local community, and subsequent final research report (presented here). This final report summarises the evolution of the approach and identifies the key learning points from the project the first time a social norms approach had been used in a community setting in the UK. v. All three phases of the research have focused on comparing responses from the year old and year old age group. All findings have been reviewed by Dr John McAlaney a leading social norms researcher, currently based at Bournemouth University. The 2011 Research vi. The preliminary research was based on surveys with a sample of 107 local residents. It identified that heavy drinking was not the form in Touch; it was the norm to drink between three and five drinks approximately once a week. However, binge drinking emerged as an issue, particularly amongst the younger age group. vii. The research identified a misperception amongst local residents that others were drinking more frequently and more heavily than the reported norms suggested was actually the case. 1

4 viii. As such, the study concluded that a social norms intervention would be a valid and appropriate approach in Touch. It was hoped it would challenge the prevailing misperceptions and promote positive behaviour change and more healthy drinking habits among those who drink in excess of recommended guidelines. In October 2011, the FAPP Steering Group agreed to run a social norms intervention in Touch, with the aim of challenging the misperceptions; a campaign was organised for 2012 to promote the reported social norms. The 2012 Campaign and Research ix. Following discussion of the options, the FAPP and Touch Tasking Team agreed that the campaign would be delivered using posters, a leaflet drop and articles in the FAPP newsletter. Different colours of campaign materials were used to differentiate between the two age groups. x. Further research was conducted in December 2012 to determine the awareness, and any impacts, of the campaign on residents perceptions and behaviours. The research was based on surveys with 83 local residents. The results of the campaign were reported in April 2013 and found that awareness of the campaign was low across both age groups. The 2014 Campaign and Research xi. A further campaign was therefore run from April to July 2014 with increased visibility due to the lack of awareness of the 2012 campaign. As well as posters, street vinyls and lamppost banners were also used to promote the messages. A strapline, Did you know? was also included. As the 2012 research did not show any substantive differences in the key messages about normal drinking behaviours from the baseline position in 2011, it was agreed the campaign messages would remain the same. xii. The 2014 research presented in this report is based on surveys with 116 local residents in August The surveys are drawn from a total Touch population of to 59 year olds, indicating a +/- 8.4% margin of error. xiii. This research sought to determine the awareness of the campaign, and the impact of the campaign on residents perceptions of alcohol behaviours. It also aimed to determine whether there had been any changes in the reported norms and whether there was evidence of the misperceptions continuing. xiv. The following sections compare the research findings over the three phases. Please note, however, that while the researchers aimed to use consistent questions over the three phases for comparison purposes, in some cases there were minor differences in the questionnaire design, meaning that data is not available for comparison purposes for all three years for a limited number of questions. In these cases, comparisons are made based on the data available. In particular, the 2014 research asked more in-depth questions about the campaign which were not all asked in Drinking Behaviour Findings How often do people drink? Actual drinking behaviours xv. In 2011, 73% of younger adults reported drinking once or less than once a week; by 2012, 72% reported doing so and, by 2014, this had increased to 79% - a positive sign. Further, there was a significant increase in the proportion of younger adults stating that they never drink, increasing from 11% in 2011, 18% in 2012 and 34% in

5 xvi. Similarly, the percentage of younger adults drinking twice or more in an average week has fallen from 26% and 27% in 2011 and 2012 respectively, to 21% in Nevertheless, the proportion of respondents drinking three times a week or more has increased from 6% in both 2011 and 2012, to 18% in xvii. In terms of older adults, there has been a reduction in the reported frequency of drinking since In 2011, 59% reported drinking once or less than once a week; this increased to 68% in 2012 and 73% in The percentage of older adults drinking twice or more a week also fell from 41% in 2011, to 32% in 2012 and 26% in xviii. The 2014 norms were as follows: It is the norm for people to drink alcohol less than once a week, whereas this was once a week or less in It is the norm for young adults to drink alcohol less than once a week, whereas similarly this was once a week or less in It is the norm for older adults to drink alcohol less than once a week, again whereas this was once a week or less in Perceived drinking behaviours xix. While the majority of younger adults report drinking once or less a week, the number of younger adults considering others to be drinking far more heavily is statistically significant, and this has increased since In 2011, 6% perceived their own age group to be drinking every day; this increased to 22% in 2012 and 23% in Further, the percentage of respondents perceiving younger adults to be consuming alcohol four or more times a week has increased from 37% in 2011, to 53% in 2012 and 63% in xx. In terms of older adults, the percentage considering their peers to drink everyday has increased from 11% in 2011, to 18% in 2014, although this is down from the peak of 22% in Similarly, in 2011, 22% perceived that their peers consumed alcohol on five or more days per week, and 26% in 2014, although this is again down from the 34% peak in Again, the mismatch between perceived and reported drinking habits is statistically significant and, in some cases, is increasing. How much do people drink? Actual drinking behaviours xxi. For younger adults, the most common number of drinks consumed when they were drinking alcohol was 3 to 5 drinks in 2011 (43% stating so). In 2012, this increased to 6 to 10 drinks (48%), but decreased again to 3 to 5 drinks in 2014 (38%). The proportion of younger people drinking no more than 3 to 5 drinks (the norm revealed through the 2012 survey) has increased from 56% in 2011, to 68% in xxii. For older adults, respondents consumed approximately the same number of drinks on average throughout the three phases of the research. In 2011, 53% consumed an average of 3 to 5 drinks, with 28% having more than six drinks; in 2012, these figures were 53% and 32% respectively, altering slightly to 37% and 37% respectively in However, there has also been an increase in the proportion drinking just 1 or 2 drinks when they do drink alcohol, increasing from 2 in 2011 to 26% in The greatest proportion of 2014 respondents report normally having two or three drinks (with 16% each). 3

6 xxiii. The norms from the 2014 survey responses were as follows: It is the norm for people to drink between three and five drinks, as was the case in 2011 and It is the norm for younger adults to drink between three and five drinks, as it was in 2011 but lower than the norm of six and ten drinks in It is the norm for older adults to drink between three and five drinks, as it was in 2011 and Perceived drinking behaviours xxiv. Overall, there has been a reduction in the amount that younger adults think their peers are drinking from 2011 to In 2011, 5% thought that their peers were drinking the norm; this has increased to 2 in The percentage of respondents thinking that their peers drink 6-10 drinks has decreased by 24 percentage points between 2011 and xxv. There has continued to be a significant mismatch between younger adult s perceptions of the amount that their peers drink and how much they actually do drink; in 2014, 34% stated that they either normally drink 10+ drinks or 6-10 drinks when drinking, while 7 perceived that they do. xxvi. In terms of older adults, again, respondents generally perceive that their peers are drinking more than they do. Nevertheless, this has improved very slightly since 2011, when no respondents thought that their peers drank just 1-2 drinks when they drink which increased to 3% in 2014; nevertheless this is significantly lower than the reported behaviour, with 26% stating that they consume just 1-2 drinks when drinking. Only 6% of 2014 respondents stated that they drank more than ten drinks when they drink, while 42% thought that this was the case. Where do people drink? Actual drinking behaviours xxvii. From 2011 to 2014, the majority of both younger and older adults reported drinking inside when they do drink either in their own home, the homes of family and/ or friends, or in pubs and bars in Touch or elsewhere in Dunfermline. In all, 93% reported doing so across this time period (with the exception of younger people in 2012, when 94% reported doing so) few therefore reported drinking outdoors when they do drink. Perceived drinking behaviours xxviii. By contrast, the perception is that outdoor drinking is far more common. Younger adults tend to think that other young people most often drink outdoors; this has increased from 39% thinking so in 2011, to 52% in 2012, with a slight reduction to 5 in Nevertheless, only 3% reported doing so. xxix. Amongst older adults, there has been a slight reduction in the proportion perceiving that their peers drink outdoors, from 12% in 2011 to 11% in both 2012 and 2014, yet, just 3% report doing so. Drinking in public Actual perspectives 4

7 xxx. Overall, when asked how they feel about people in Touch drinking in public, tolerance of drinking in public appears to have increased amongst both younger and older adults from 2012 to xxxi. In 2012, 63% of younger adults either strongly disapproved or disapproved of people drinking alcohol in public, which had fallen to 54% in The proportion reporting that they have no strong feelings either way increased from 37% to 46%. In either year, no respondents approved of drinking outdoors in Touch. xxxii. In 2012, 92% of older adults either strongly disapproved or disapproved of people drinking alcohol in public; but this reduced to 53% in 2014, with a 38 percentage point decrease in the percentage stating that they strongly disapprove since The proportion reporting that they have no strong feelings either was has increased by 36 percentage points. 2% of 2014 respondents stated that they approved, compared to in Perceived perspectives xxxiii. From 2012 to 2014, there has continued to be a significant mismatch in people s own reported feelings about those drinking in public and the feelings felt most prevalently in other people, with respondents significantly underestimating the percentage of people that have no strong feelings either way. xxxiv. In 2012, 69% of younger adults thought that most other people either disapprove or strongly disapprove of people in Touch drinking alcohol in public. Although this decreased slightly to 68% in 2014 this perception is far higher than the reality. xxxv. Amongst older adults, in 2012, 55% thought that most other people either disapproved or strongly disapproved of people in Touch drinking alcohol in public, compared to 58% in Again, this is higher than the 53% reporting they disapprove or strongly disapprove. xxxvi. Amongst both age groups, the proportion thinking that other people strongly disapprove has decreased significantly (from 26% to 11% amongst younger adults and from 37% to 18% amongst older adults). Further, there has been a significant decline in the proportion of respondents reporting that they think that others strongly approve of other people drinking alcohol in public in Touch, especially amongst younger adults (from 13% to amongst younger adults and from 25% to 6% amongst older adults). Alcohol as a problem in Touch Actual Perspectives xxxvii. The percentage of respondents in both age groups reporting that they think alcohol is a problem in Touch has reduced since Overall, 55% thought alcohol was a problem in 2012, which had fallen to 34% in Of younger adults who do think that alcohol is a problem, there has been an increase from 56% to 64% in the percentage of respondents thinking that alcohol is a problem amongst both age groups. xxxviii. Amongst older adults, there has been a six percentage point increase in the proportion of respondents thinking that alcohol is a problem amongst both age groups between 2012 and The percentage of respondents thinking alcohol is a problem amongst the younger age group has also fallen, from 56% in 2012 to 42% in 2014, although still remains a significant proportion. Perceived Perspectives 5

8 xxxix. The percentage of younger adults perceiving that other people think that alcohol is a problem in Touch has reduced from 67% in 2012 to 43% in The percentage of older adults perceiving that other people feel that alcohol is a problem in Touch has also reduced, from 64% in 2012 to 38% in xl. To reduce alcohol problems in Touch, 14% of 2014 respondents thought a greater police/ community warden presence was required. 11% also thought that restricting access to alcohol would stop some, especially in the younger age group, abusing alcohol. A further 11% thought that there was a need for more things to do in the area, particularly for young people. Some residents thought there was not much that could be done to reduce alcohol problems. Feedback on the Campaign xli. Awareness of the campaign increased from 5% in 2012 to 83% in 2014, highlighting its substantially increased visibility. While in 2012 awareness was higher amongst older adults (5%) when compared to younger adults (3%), in 2014, awareness was higher amongst younger adults (91%) compared to older adults (79%). xlii. Regarding the nature of the campaign, 42% of younger people and 47% of older people noticed that the messages were about both age groups, although both age groups were more likely to think that the messages were about their own age group. xliii. Most residents, when asked to describe the campaign, stated that it was to reduce the amount of alcohol being consumed, or that it was because there is a drinking problem in Touch. A sizeable proportion of respondents questioned the legitimacy and accuracy of the information used for the campaign. Overall, however, a number of respondents correctly understood the message. xliv. Overall, the most commonly considered behaviour when viewing the materials was how much people tend to drink (53%), followed by where people drink (43%) and when people tend to drink (29%). Nearly half of younger adults said they did not think about any of the intended behaviours cited above, compared to just under a third of older adults. Although this is a significant proportion stating they did not think about the behaviours identified in the messages, this is not to say they were not influenced by the messages. xlv. In all, 45% of younger adults and 42% of older adults thought the messages were effective at raising awareness of how they behave when it comes to, and their attitude towards, alcohol. However, there is a significant percentage amongst both groups who did not think that the messages were effective (57%). xlvi. Regarding other people s behaviours, 47% of younger adults and 49% of older adults (48% overall) thought that the messages were effective at raising awareness of how other people in Touch behave when it comes to, and their attitudes towards, alcohol. Evaluation of the process and key learning points xlvii. When initiating a similar project in future, it would be helpful to have buy-in from all partners to deliver the intervention within the agreed timescale; this project took almost four years to complete, rather than the one year anticipated at the outset. xlviii. The changes in the timescale also impacted on the ability to re-interview the same individuals at baseline and follow-up survey stages. It is preferable to maintain the same group of subjects throughout the intervention, as far as possible. xlix. The fact that the FAPP closed relatively early on in the project meant that this broad support and communication structure no longer existed in the latter stages. This affected 6

9 communications to relevant services working in the area, and meant that it was more challenging to ensure continued buy-in and awareness of the project amongst all local stakeholders. l. Given the sensitivity of the subject matter alcohol misuse there is always a risk that some residents may feel that the community is being stigmatised, and this sense was evident for some community residents at times during this project. It is therefore very important to get the level of visibility for the campaign correct, recognising the need for local community engagement during both the development stage of the campaign and throughout. Collecting ongoing feedback would be helpful to gauge local community opinion throughout the campaign. li. Community buy-in can also be increased by greater community design/ ownership of the campaign materials and agreement on the messages. In future campaigns, it may be useful to consider the use of social media. lii. The duration and visibility of the campaign are important in ensuring the campaign messages are seen. However, the most important lesson here is the ability to be flexible and to take on board, as far as possible, feedback from the community. Concluding Remarks liii. While there is a considerable (and in some cases increasing) mismatch between people s reported drinking habits and their perception of others behaviours, the trend continues to be a reduction in the reported frequency and volume of drinking. Given the findings about the visibility and effectiveness of the campaign, it is highly probable the campaign has made some positive contribution to this reduction in drinking levels, although it is not possible to discount other wider societal factors that may also have had a bearing on the results. liv. There have been many lessons from the social norms project; the first of this kind in a community setting in the UK. The issue of hazardous and harmful drinking is clearly a sensitive one for any community, and the most effective approaches work closely with the community to identify and manage awareness raising campaigns of this nature. lv. This research has indicated that the social norms approach can make a contribution to helping to reduce hazardous and harmful drinking in a community setting. At the same time, there needs to be a very visible and strong campaign to achieve this, which can make a community feel uncomfortable or even resentful. There will always need to be a judgement call made by community partners whether a social norms approach is the best method of tackling a particular issue. 7

10 1 Introduction and Context 1.1 The report presents the final phase of research findings and conclusions of the Fife Social Norms project. The project aimed to assess whether or not delivering a social norms intervention in a traditional community setting made a contribution to reducing hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption. The intervention was delivered as part of the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project (FAPP), a pilot project which designed, developed and implemented a series of interventions, using a multi-component approach, to tackle alcohol related harm. The FAPP project was delivered in two pilot areas: Rosyth and Touch in Dunfermline. The Social Norms project was part of the programme delivered in the Touch area of Dunfermline which comprises of around 1,000 residents. 1.2 The Social Norms project involved: initial baseline research in 2011 (undertaken by ekosgen) which determined whether a social norms approach was appropriate); A first campaign which ran from May to September 2012 around key social norms messages; A first phase research report (prepared by ekosgen and reported in 2013) surveying 83 residents to gauge the effects of the initial campaign; and A second and more substantive campaign which ran from April to mid-july A second phase of research, included in this report, based on a survey of 116 residents, was conducted August This report is the final research report for the Social Norms project. It therefore seeks to summarise the evolution of the approach and the key findings from the earlier research phases. 1.4 Importantly, the report also sets out the key learning points from the project. It is our understanding this was the first time that a Social Norms approach had been adopted as the substantive component of a campaign in a traditional community setting to tackle alcoholrelated in the UK at the time the project was initiated. While there had been other social norms projects in the UK, these had typically been in educational settings or had incorporated only some components of the social norms approach and, as such, there are important lessons for any future work of this kind being considered or developed. However, it is difficult to say with absolute certainty that this has been the first community-based project, since community projects do not always get reported in the academic literature. Development of the Approach 1.5 The Social Norms Approach in Touch was born out of a commitment by the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project (FAPP) to address the issue of alcohol-related harm in Fife through the design, development and implementation of a series of interventions delivered as a multi-component approach. The FAPP brought together key national and local stakeholders and placed great emphasis on addressing the issue at a community level. There was a strong expectation that the resulting learning could be used in other areas across Scotland. 8

11 1.6 FAPP operated between 2008 and 2012 and focussed on two designated pilot areas: Rosyth and Touch in Dunfermline 1. These were chosen on the recommendation of a Scoping Report undertaken in 2008 by the Fife Constabulary, which identified a range of alcoholrelated issues: underage drinking, risky outdoor drinking and anti-social behaviour. There was no suggestion that these issues were confined or any worse in comparative areas. 1.7 Whilst the programme of interventions in Rosyth focused primarily on addressing underage drinking, the focus in Touch was broader looking at reducing the impact of alcoholrelated harm on individuals, families and the community. There was an acknowledged need for a community development approach to ensure that local stakeholders were fully engaged. 1.8 As such, a programme of interventions was developed, with the Social Norms approach being one of them. The Social Norms intervention was still ongoing at the time FAPP came to an end in December It was agreed with the FAPP Steering Group the Scotch Whisky Association, a FAPP member, and the Touch Tasking Team would take forward the social norms intervention to completion. Social Norms Research 1.9 Social Norms is a relatively recent field of research, and is based upon the assumptions of social norms theory which states that individual behaviour tends to be influenced by the individual s perceptions of how others around them typically behave. At the time that the project started, much of the existing research on the subject had been conducted in the United States of America primarily in addressing alcohol-related issues on college campuses where there is significant evidence to support the theory However, while the majority of existing work has still been done in the United States, there has since been an increasing amount of work carried out in Europe. The European Union has funded several social norms based substance-use projects in recent years, although these have been restricted to educational settings. As such, the project in Touch was consistent in the way in which behaviour change research is moving in Europe, whilst still being a relatively new approach to social norms, being done in a community setting Applied within the context of addressing alcohol-related issues in Touch, it was deemed that this approach could seek to establish: Firstly, the actual drinking behaviours of the target population, and; Secondly, their perceptions of the drinking behaviours of others This would be done to determine whether a gap exists between actual and perceived drinking behaviours If a gap did exist, addressing the misperception through a social norms intervention would be the secondary aim of the project. Following the theory, an intervention would essentially aim to challenge (or dispel to an extent) these misperceptions the expectation 1 A multi-component programme approach to tackle alcohol-related harm in communities: lessons learned from the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project: Final Evaluation Report, Research for Real, September

12 being that their removal would lead to a reduction in the actual levels of harmful alcohol consumption in Touch. The 2011 Research (baseline survey) 1.14 FAPP appointed ekosgen to determine whether a social norms intervention was appropriate in Touch and, in 2011, research was conducted that focused on two particular age groups; years and years. Surveys were used to gather data on the actual behaviour of the respondents followed by their perceptions of behaviours of those in both the younger and older age groups A total of 107 questionnaires were completed by Touch residents. The sample comprised 35 (33%) from the younger age group and 72 (67%) from the older age group The survey identified that heavy drinking was not the norm in Touch. Subsequent analysis showed that it is the norm to drink between three and five drinks approximately once per week. However, there was evidence to suggest that a significant minority within the community drank more heavily than the reported norm. In particular, binge drinking emerged as an issue, especially for the younger age group There was evidence of a significant misperception within the population with regard to patterns of normal drinking behaviour the key misperception being that others were drinking more frequently and more heavily than the reported norms suggest is actually the case. This was true for both the older and younger age groups. Findings were statistically robust, with Dr John McAlaney a leading social norms researcher currently based at Bournemouth University reviewing the research and analysis The study concluded that a social norms intervention would be a valid and appropriate approach in Touch and could be used to challenge the prevailing misperceptions and promote positive behaviour change and more healthy drinking habits among those whose drinking is in excess of recommended guidelines. The FAPP Steering Group at its October 2011 meeting agreed to move to the next stage and deliver an intervention with the aim of challenging the misperceptions identified Based on the findings of the October Report, a number of social norms messages were then developed by a working group these were promoted through a social norms marketing campaign in 2012 (see paragraph 1.20 overleaf). The messages were as follows: How often do people drink? Most people in Touch (63%) drink alcohol once a week or less Most young adults in Touch (73%) drink alcohol once a week or less Most older adults in Touch (58%) drink alcohol once a week or less How much do they drink? 2 Social Norms Intervention to Reduce Hazardous and Harmful Consumption in a Community Setting: A Report to the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project. ekosgen,

13 Most people in Touch (67%) have no more than 3-5 alcoholic drinks on days that they do drink Most young adults in Touch (58%) have no more than 3-5 alcoholic drinks on days that they do drink Most older adults in Touch (73%) have no more than 3-5 alcoholic drinks on days that they do drink Where do people drink? 95% of people in Touch drink alcohol indoors, in bars, or at home or the homes of friends (93%) of young adults drink alcohol indoors and 96% of older adults do likewise The 2012 Social Norms Campaign 1.20 At the beginning of 2012 a small working group of members of FAPP and the Touch Tasking Team set about discussing ideas for a campaign to communicate the norms messages. A range of options were considered: posters, leaflet drops, carrier bags, articles in local newsletters, ad shell at bus stops, communicating the message at community events e.g. meetings of the Community Council, neighbourhood watch, and social media. A designer was also engaged to support design of the campaign materials Following discussions it was agreed the campaign would be delivered using posters, a leaflet drop and articles in the FAPP newsletter. Different colours of campaign materials were used to differentiate between the two age groups. The campaign began in May Examples of the campaign materials are shown below: 11

14 May June July September An article reporting on the social norms intervention and setting out the social norms messages was published in the FAPP Newsletter which was widely distributed in Touch A leaflet setting out social norms messaging was mail dropped to every household Poster campaign. There was a dedicated poster for each of the three norms message per age group. Different colours were used to differentiate between the campaigns aimed at the different age groups. The older adults and younger adults campaigns were run con-currently. Posters were placed in local shops and community buildings The 2012 Research (follow up survey 1) 1.22 In December 2012, ekosgen conducted research to determine the awareness and any impact of the campaign on residents perceptions and behaviours. Surveys, using identical questions to the 2011 survey (for comparison purposes), collected data from 83 residents in total (again focusing on the two age groups; years and years) The 83 responses are drawn from a total Touch population of This indicates a 10.2% margin of error. Social research ideally strives to achieve margins of error of +/-5% at the 95% confidence level. In this case margins of error are slightly higher than would be ideal. However they are not too dissimilar from those in the first stage research where 107 responses were achieved It should be recognised that Touch is a small area with a small population within the target age group. As per the first stage, to achieve the ideal level of accuracy in the data was not a realistic option as this would have required double the population to be surveyed. Given the small population and the characteristics of the local area, the sample achieved is deemed meaningful to the target population and valid findings, realistic and credible analysis can be drawn from it. Data reliability was felt to be appropriate by experts working in the field of social norms. Age range Total population Achieved sample Margin of error years /-15.3% years /-12.6% Overall /-9.9% Note: margins of error are calculated based on a 5 estimate at the 95% level of confidence 1.25 The results of the first follow-up survey were reported in April Awareness of the campaign was reported to be low across both age groups 97% of year olds and 95% of year olds had not heard of the campaign. However, it is possible that awareness may be higher, and that residents may have simply not recognised the campaign s official labels. This may also have been due to the fact that the second stage of the research was undertaken via a telephone survey, and as such, could not use visual prompts to remind respondents of the campaign posters/flyers. Also, the time lag from when the poster campaign finished to the survey being undertaken may have had a bearing. The main findings from the 2012 research were as follows, although it should be noted that the changes in 3 General Registrar Office for Scotland (GROS) 2009 Small Area Population Estimates 12

15 drinking patterns between the 2011 and 2012 research may be attributable to seasonal variations, with the research being undertaken at different times of year: Overall, and across both age groups, the norm then was to drink less than once a week. This was an improvement from 2011 when the norm amongst younger adults was to drink once a week. Drinking less than once a week remained the norm for older adults and for the full sample. There had generally been a decrease across the year old age group in terms of the frequency of drinking, with a notable increase in the proportion only drinking once or less than once a week on average (from 59% in 2011 to 68% in 2012). Within the younger adults group, there was both an increase in the proportion who never drank (up from 11% to 18%) and an increase from to 3% who drank alcohol every day. There remained mismatches between perceived and actual drinking habits, particularly with regards to the frequency of alcohol consumption amongst both younger and older adults. For example, a good majority of younger adults although reportedly drinking once or less during the week at that time, still considered others to be drinking far more frequently. The same situation existed with regards to the older age group. Although the reported frequency of alcohol consumption had reduced, one in five respondents then considered members of their own age group in Touch to drink everyday (compared to just under one in 10 in 2011). The findings from the younger age group pointed towards an increased number of drinks when they did drink, with almost half of the younger adults surveyed in 2012 consuming 6-10 drinks on average; a 29 percentage point increase on the 2011 findings. Similarly, the older adult population had seen an increase on average, with a four percentage point rise in those drinking three or more drinks when they did drink. Across the full population, drinking between three and five drinks on average when drinking remained the norm, as it did for older adults (where four drinks was the norm). For younger adults, the 2012 data suggested the norm was to drink between six and ten drinks. Significant majorities across both age groups reported drinking indoors in Touch when they had a drink, with very little variation between the two years. In terms of perception, there was again mismatch particularly with regards to the younger age group between perceived and actual behaviour in Touch, with a greater perception of outdoor drinking than was the case. The 2014 Campaign 1.26 An update on the progress of the project and the results of the second survey were discussed with the Touch and Garvock Community Council at its meeting on 10 August 2013, at which the Community Council s support to re-run the campaign, with increased visibility, was sought. The Community Council agreed to support re-running the campaign, but wished to see a revised proposal to ensure the campaign was sensitive and to avoid any potential for stigmatisation of the community. As the 2012 research did not show substantive differences in the key messages from the baseline position in 2011, it was agreed the campaign messages would remain the same. 13

16 1.27 A site visit was conducted at the end of September 2013 to assess the locations and types of materials that could be used to communicate the social norms messages more widely A presentation was given to the October 2013 meeting of the Community Council setting out the proposed campaign materials and the locations that would be used. This was approved by the Community Council. The presentation was then delivered to Fife Council, Dunfermline North & Central Area Committee on 18 December Following this meeting, Fife Council issued a letter in March 2014 confirming they were content for the project to proceed The principle difference of the 2014 campaign was the visibility of the materials for the campaign, given the relatively low awareness of the first campaign amongst local residents. For 2014, street vinyls and lamppost banners were also used to promote the messages, in addition to the posters. Another major change was to introduce a new strapline for the campaigns Did you know? which ran across all campaign materials and took on board feedback that the previous campaign materials focussed too much on the name of the community. Another change was to run a teaser campaign two weeks prior to the main campaign. This simply used posters with the strapline Did you know?, the aim being to generate interest in the campaign. The campaign ran for 14 weeks including the teaser campaign. The campaign messages were refreshed every four weeks (i.e. removed and replaced with a different norms message). Again, the campaign focussed on two groups: year olds and year olds Although the messages were the same, the 2014 campaign increased the visibility and scale of the campaign Examples of the initial teaser campaign materials are provided below: 1.32 Examples of the campaign materials, pavement vinyls and lamppost posters are provided below: 14

17 Younger Adults Older Adults 15

18 Street vinyls Lamppost posters 16

19 1.33 Unfortunately, following the launch of the campaign, there were a few complaints to the Community Council from some local residents, and a negative article in the local newspaper expressing the views of some residents the campaign was stigmatising the community. However, at a meeting with the Community Council on 10 May 2014 (four weeks after the first installation of campaign materials) these issues were discussed and it was agreed the campaign should continue in view of its positive objectives. This delayed the campaign for one week, with the second install of campaign material taking place on 19 May. At that time the street vinyls were not deployed as it was recorded they did not remain in situ for very long (1-2 days). It was agreed the street vinlys would be deployed at the third install. The 2014 Research (follow up survey 2) 1.34 In August 2014, ekosgen conducted a third stage of research to determine the awareness of the campaign, and the impact of the campaign on residents perceptions of alcohol behaviours. Surveys, using largely identical questions to the 2011 and 2012 surveys (for comparisons purposes), collected data from 116 residents in total. The new 2014 questions asked about awareness of the campaign and awareness of the messages they convey. Prompts were used, where needed, during face-to-face surveys to trigger recall of the campaign The aim of the survey was to determine if there had been any changes in the reported norms and whether there is any evidence of the misperceptions continuing. These findings are benchmarked against the previous survey responses (where possible). 4 Of the 116 responses achieved: 100 were completed face-to-face, at either the Touch Tastic festival, a four-day annual community engagement event held at Touch Community Centre, or through door-to-door surveys; 4 Please note that a shortened version of the survey was used for Phase 3 of the research, meaning that not all questions can be compared. 17

20 16 were completed with respondents who had previously completed a survey. These were all undertaken by telephone due to difficulties in arranging face-to-face meetings. As such it was not possible to ask respondents certain questions regarding the campaign where prompts were required The 116 responses are drawn from a total Touch population of to 59 year olds. This indicates an 8.4% margin of error. Social research ideally strives to achieve margins of error of +/-5% at the 95% confidence level. In this case, margins of error are slightly higher than would be ideal yet, as with previous phases, they provide good confidence in the robustness of the results, and the margins of error are lower than those in the first and second stages of research where 107 and 83 responses were achieved respectively It should be recognised that Touch is a small area with a small population within the target age group, as per the first and second stage; to achieve the ideal level of accuracy in the data was not a realistic option as this would have required double the population to be surveyed. Given the small population and the characteristics of the local area, the sample achieved is deemed meaningful to the target population and valid findings, realistic and credible analysis can be drawn from it. Data reliability was felt to be appropriate by experts working in the field of social norms. Age range Total population Achieved sample Margin of error years /-14.2% years /-10.1% Overall /-8.4% Note: margins of error are calculated based on a 5 estimate at the 95% level of confidence The following chapter in this report presents the findings of both the younger and older age groups in relation to the key social norms messages. In all, 16 respondents were repeat respondents. Report Structure 1.39 The report is structured in the following way: Chapter 2 provides detail on the background of respondents and also on their drinking behaviours and perceptions of others drinking behaviours. Where possible, these are benchmarked against the survey findings from the baseline survey and the follow-up survey 1; Chapter 3 provides feedback on the campaign and its strengths and weaknesses. Where possible, these responses are compared with the visibility of the previous campaign; Chapter 4 provides conclusions and key learning for the further use of Social Norms approaches in communities across Scotland and elsewhere. 5 Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics (July 2013) 18

21 2 Drinking Behaviour Findings Introduction 2.1 This chapter sets out the 2014 survey findings in relation to actual drinking behaviours and perceptions of others drinking behaviours following the most recent campaign. It compares the findings with the 2012 research following the first (shorter and less visible) campaign, and with the 2011 initial pre-campaigns findings. How often do people drink? Reported Behaviour Younger Adults In an average week, on how many days do YOU drink alcohol? Source: ekosgen, Survey of Residents, 2014, 2012 and % 18% 11% Never 51% 36% 31% Less than once a week 2 21% 18% 14% 11% 3% 6% 9% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Once Twice 3 times 4 times 5 times 6 times Everyday The above graphs reveal the drinking habits of younger adults (in this case the frequency of consumption) identified in the 2014 survey; benchmarked against the findings of the other two surveys. 2.3 For the younger adults, the key findings are as follows: A higher proportion reported drinking once or less than once a week in 2014 (79%) compared to 2012 (72%) and 2011 (73%). There was a significant increase in the proportion of young adults stating that they never drink (34%), compared to 2012 (18%) and 2011 (11%). Never was the most frequently cited response for the first time in Those drinking twice or more in an average week has fallen to 21% (27% in 2012 and 26% in 2011). Whilst overall there is a fall in the frequency of drinking, there has been an increase in the proportion drinking three times a week or more. This was 18% in 2014, compared 19

22 to 6% in 2011 and The small proportion (3%) drinking every day in 2014 was unchanged from the 3% in Older Adults In an average week, on how many days do YOU drink alcohol? Source: ekosgen, Survey of Residents, 2014, 2012 and % 3 25% 2 15% 1 5% 32% 31% 29% Never 22% 23% 13% Less than once a week 17% 19% 14% 29% 24% 15% 7% 2% 7% 6% 4% 2% 1% 1% 1% Once Twice 3 times 4 times 5 times 6 times Everyday The key findings for older adults are: With regards to the older age group, there has been a further reduction in the reported frequency of drinking in Nearly three quarters in 2014 report drinking once or less than once per week (73%) compared to 2012 (68%) and 2011 (59%). There was a further decrease in the proportion of older adults drinking twice or more during the week to 26% (32% in 2012 and 41% in 2011). For the first time there is a small proportion of older adults (2%) who drink every day or almost every day (i.e. 6 times a week). 2.5 The 2011 report identified the norm within the community and sub-groups was found by identifying the median response (the mid-point if all the data is ranked in ascending order). Using this method, the reported norms in Touch were: 2011 Full sample: It is the norm for people to drink alcohol once a week Younger people: It is the norm for younger adults to drink alcohol less than once a week Older people: It is the norm for older adults to drink alcohol once a week 2.6 The 2012 norms using the same approach are different amongst older people and for the full sample, where the norm is now less than once per week Full sample: It is the norm for people to drink alcohol less than once a week Younger people: It is the norms for young adults to drink alcohol less than once a week Older people: It is the norm for older adults to drink alcohol less than once a week 2.7 Again using the same approach, the 2014 norms are exactly the same as the 2012 norms. 20

23 2014 Full sample: It is the norm for people to drink alcohol less than once a week Younger people: It is the norms for young adults to drink alcohol less than once a week Older people: It is the norm for older adults to drink alcohol less than once a week Perceptions Year Olds 2.8 The survey then asked respondents to consider on how many days, on average (per week) they perceive their own age groups in Touch drink alcohol. The following graph shows the perceived drinking habits of year olds according to their own age group. In an average week, on how many days do you think year olds in Touch drink alcohol? Source: ekosgen, Survey of Residents, 2014, 2012 and % 3 25% 2 15% 1 5% 3% 3% 3% 3% Never Less than once a week 26% 2 16% 34% 28% 17% 26% 22% 14% 6% 6% 17% 3% 3% 22% 23% Once Twice 3 times 4 times 5 times 6 times Everyday 6% Key findings are as follows: Since 2011, there has been a 17 percentage point rise in the young adults who perceived their own age group to be drinking every day. In 2014, nearly one in four young adults (23%) considered other young adults to be drinking every day. In all, almost two in three of those surveyed in 2014 (63%) perceived other young adults to be consuming alcohol 4 or more times per week, up from 53% in 2012 and 37% in Evidently, the mismatch between the perceived and actual reported habits is further increasing amongst young adults, particularly with regards to heavier drinking. The majority, although reportedly drinking once or less during a week still consider others to be drinking far more heavily. 21