An exploratory experimental study examining the short‐term effects of a public service announcement on parents’ perceptions of the descriptive norm for children’s outdoor play: A cautionary tale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ISSUE ADDRESSED: Public service announcements (PSA) targeting physical activity are not always effective at enacting behaviour change. One factor that may impact message effectiveness is whether the message matches its intent (ie, what norm is being portrayed and received). The current study explored the effects of two PSAs on parents' perceptions of outdoor play. METHODS: Parents (N = 333) completed a pre/postexperimental online survey to examine the acute impact of a PSA on their perception of how often children play outdoors (ie, descriptive norms). Participants provided their descriptive norm perceptions and then were randomised to view one of two PSAs: (a) the Mr. Lonely PSA, which portrayed outdoor activity as not normative, and (b) a control message, which portrayed outdoor activity as the norm (VERB PSA). After viewing their PSA, descriptive norm perceptions were reported again. RESULTS: A two-way mixed ANOVA indicated that participants who viewed the Mr. Lonely PSA (where outdoor play was not normative) perceived that children and youth played outdoors less frequently immediately after watching the PSA compared to before viewing it (P < 0.05). No significant change occurred in the control condition. CONCLUSIONS: PSAs can alter individuals' perceptions of whether they perceive outdoor play as normative among children and youth. SO WHAT?: As individuals align their behaviour with what is typical, PSA developers should be wary of what message is being conveyed. In terms of activity, portraying that outdoor play is not normative may not have the intended outcome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".