The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Changing Speeding Behaviour in Scotland: An evaluation of the 'Foolsspeed' campaign

3.4 REACTIONS TO THE 40-SECOND "SIMON SAYS" ADVERTISEMENT

The same combination of open-ended and pre-coded questions was used in the 3 ^rd survey to gauge reactions to the "Simon Says" advertisement.

Open-ended Response

Table 3.14 presents responses to the open-ended question asking respondents to describe what "thoughts and feelings" occurred to them on seeing the advertisement. Responses are grouped by theme.

Table 3.14: Thoughts and feelings on seeing 'Simon Says' ad (open ended). Selected responses

Just over half of the respondents (52%) who had seen the ad spontaneously commented on the theme of pressure from other drivers. Nearly a quarter, 24%, recognised the situation depicted in the ad, with comments such as 'you do get intimidated/feel under pressure in situations like that' (made by 12%), and expressions of empathy with the driver in front (e.g. 'I've been in his position', 'that's me', and 'I agree with/understand how he feels', made by 8%). However, a small number (2%) empathised with the impatient driver behind, and 1% expressed empathy with the cyclist. A small number (3%) commented that they themselves would not succumb to pressure from a driver behind, or would deliberately slow down.

Around a fifth, 22%, spontaneously mentioned specific action messages on the theme of pressure. These included 'don't be pressurised/bullied/intimidated into going faster' (8%), 'make your own decisions/don't be influenced by others' (7%), and 'let others speed if they want' (4%). Five percent specifically repeated the strapline 'Be your own man'. Ten percent of respondents expressed criticism and disapproval of drivers who put others under pressure. Also on the theme of pressure, 17% made neutral descriptive comments on the action of the ad (e.g. 'the driver behind was wanting the other driver to speed up').

Half the respondents who had seen the ad spontaneously made comments indicating a level of personal involvement with the ad. In addition to the feelings of recognition and identification with the theme of pressure, mentioned above, 14% expressed identification with non-specified aspects of the ad (e.g. 'it's true to life'), and 16% said the ad made them reflect on aspects of driving: for example, 4% said it made them think about their own driving, and 3% said it made them think about the possible risks and dangers when driving.

Just under half of respondents (47%) commented on the message of the ad. These comments included messages about not being intimidated, described above, and other messages such as 'watch your speed' and 'slow down' (15%), 'pay attention' and 'be more aware of your surroundings' (8%), 'look out for cyclists/pedestrians' (4%), and 'think about your driving' (3%).

Around a fifth of respondents expressed opinions of the ad. These were mostly positive (12%), with comments such as 'it was good/clever' and 'I agree with it', although 3% made negative comments such as 'it's not hard-hitting enough'.

Four percent of respondents made comments which suggested that they had confused the ad with other advertisements; for example, references to a child being hit, '35 mph', and 'black and white', which suggest the Think! Campaign, and references to passengers, which may suggest Friends and Family or the current seat belt campaign. This possible confusion should be borne in mind when examining response to the ad.

Drivers in the 35-44 year old age group appeared to empathise more strongly with the driver in front (17% commented that they 'had been in the same position', compared with 3% among other age groups). Females appeared slightly more likely than males to comment on the ad's intended pressure message, with 16% spontaneously commenting that the ad was saying 'don't be pressurised/bullied into going faster', compared with 5% of males. However, these were minor differences.

Turning to differences between drivers on the basis of their speeding behaviour, occasional speeders appeared to respond more strongly to the theme of pressure than either frequent or infrequent speeders, with 58% spontaneously making comments reflecting this theme compared with 38% of drivers in the other two categories combined.

Table 3.15 presents spontaneous responses to the question 'What do you think the ad was trying to say?' Again, comments are grouped into categories.

Table 3.15: Perceptions of what 'Simon Says' ad is trying to say (open ended). Selected responses

The table indicates that the advertisement communicates a range of messages. Two themes predominate, 'resisting pressure' and 'speeding'. Fifty-nine percent of respondents identified messages concerned with resisting pressure, including 'make your own decisions/don't be influenced by others' (20%), 'don't be pressurised/bullied/intimidated by other drivers' (17%), and 'be your own man' (10%). A similar percentage, 56%, identified messages concerned with speeding, including 'slow down/reduce speed' (12%), 'watch your speed' (7%), 'don't speed in/drive at appropriate speed in built-up areas' and messages about the consequences of speeding (6% each). Some respondents identified messages which linked the two themes: 'don't be pressurised/bullied into speeding/going faster' (14%) and 'let others speed if they want to' (9%). The latter also included messages such as 'make your own choice of speed'.

A quarter of respondents identified messages on the theme of attention and consideration. These included 'pay attention' (11%), 'be considerate of other road users' (7%), 'look out for cyclists' (1%), 'pedestrians' (3%) and 'children' (4%). The ad did not in fact feature pedestrians or children in detail, and these latter responses may indicate some confusion. A further 2% identified messages about concern for passengers, indicating possible confusion with 'Friends and Family', and 1% identified a 'wear a seat belt' message, also indicating possible confusion.

There were few differences between males and females in their perceptions of the ad's message. The youngest respondents (17-24) were more likely to identify messages concerned with speeding (80% compared with 56% of the sample as a whole).

Prompted Response to "Simon Says"

Respondents' opinions of and reactions to the "Simon Says" advertisement were gauged by asking two pre-coded questions. The first of these asked respondents to indicate on a series of semantic scales a rating of the advertisement in terms of a series of bipolar characteristics. Table 3.16 shows the mean scores given for each characteristic, with responses broken down by age.

Table 3.16: Prompted opinions of "Simon Says" ad, by age

The table indicates that, like previous Foolsspeed advertising, Simon Says was reasonably well-received. Most respondents found the ad 'easy to understand' (8.07), said it did not 'talk down to them' (7.08), and said that they liked the ad (6.76). Encouragingly, there was fairly strong agreement that the ad made them 'think about [their] own driving' (6.50). There was an overall neutral response to the statements that the ad 'made me feel I need to be more in control when driving' (5.17), that the ad is 'definitely meant for people like me' (5.01), that the ad 'made me feel I need to have more control over my speed' (4.99), and that the ad 'made me feel that I drive too fast' (4.21). Respondents tended to disagree with the statement that the ad 'made me feel bad about how I drive' (3.78). Kruskal-Wallis tests showed that response to the last two statements varied with age. A tendency for the ad to 'make me feel that I drive too fast' was highest among younger respondents. Younger respondents were also less likely to indicate that the ad 'made me feel good about how I drive'.

Kruskal-Wallis tests also suggested that there were some differences between frequent, occasional and infrequent speeders in their response to the Simon Says ad. Table 3.17 illustrates, for brevity, the responses of the two extreme groups, frequent and infrequent speeders. Mann-Whitney tests were used to confirm the differences between frequent and infrequent speeders. There were significant differences between groups in their responses to three of the statements: 'the ad made me feel I need to have more control over my speed' (infrequent 4.16, frequent 5.81; 'the ad made me feel bad about how I drive' (infrequent 2.87, frequent 4.67; and 'the ad made me feel that I drive too fast' (infrequent 3.19, frequent 5.19).

Table 3.17: Prompted opinions of "Simon Says" ad, by frequency of reported speeding

Finally, respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with a number of statements regarding the message of the 40-second advertisement. Table 3.18 presents reported agreement for the total sample.

Table 3.18: Agreement with message statements, by gender, age and frequency of reported speeding

There were high levels of agreement with all the message statements. Messages about driving foolishly, taking more responsibility and not being influenced by other drivers received almost unanimous agreement. There was also high agreement that the ad was 'trying to say that you shouldn't put pressure on other drivers' (92%), which was not strictly an intended message, as the ad was concerned primarily with how drivers deal with intimidation rather than intimidation per se. Respondents also had high levels of agreement with the statements that the ad was 'trying to say that you shouldn't break the speed limit in town' (91%) and 'trying to make people drive more slowly' (86%). The appropriate speed message - 'that sometimes you should drive at well below the speed limit in town' - was communicated less strongly by this ad (73% agreement) than by the 'Mirror' ad (83%, Table 3.8), but more strongly than the 'Friends and Family' ad (63%, Table 3.13).

Kruskal-Wallis tests revealed that there were some age and speeding-related differences in response to the ad. Drivers in 17-24 year old age range were least likely to agree that the ad is 'trying to say that sometimes you should drive at well below the speed limit in town' (52% compared with 77% in other three age groups). Frequent speeders were least likely to agree that the ad is 'trying to say that you shouldn't put pressure on other drivers' (76% compared with 74% in the other two speeding categories).

3.5 SUMMARY: RESPONSE TO THE FOOLSSPEED CAMPAIGN

The aims of the advertising measures were to assess spontaneous awareness and prompted recall of the Foolsspeed campaign, and to provide detailed feedback on the 40-second television advertisements. The surveys examined respondents' liking, comprehension, identification and involvement with the advertisements, as well as examining their spontaneous response at an emotional level. The surveys also examined the extent to which the advertisements challenged drivers to consider their own driving. Immediate reactions such as these provide indications as to whether advertising is engaging with its target group. Engagement with an advertisement is an important precursor to any changes in attitudes and behaviour.

Between a fifth and a third of respondents over the three surveys spontaneously mentioned having seen Foolsspeed on television. There were also relatively high levels of spontaneous awareness, at all survey stages, of seeing Foolsspeed in a range of other media including vehicle-side advertising, posters and billboards, newspapers and cinema. Level of recall rose when respondents were prompted with the Foolsspeed name (64% at the 2 ^nd survey to 92% at the 4 ^th survey) and with a picture of the Foolsspeed logo (66% at the 2 ^nd survey to 95% at the 4 ^th survey).

Of the three 40-second ads, the 'Mirror' ad received the highest level of prompted recall, 74% in Spring 1999 rising to 86% in both subsequent years. 'Friends & Family' and 'Simon Says' received lower levels of prompted recall in the years they were first screened (55% and 53% respectively), although prompted awareness of 'Friends & Family' rose to 83% by its second year. Because respondents are exposed to visuals of the Foolsspeed advertising and logo at each survey stage, the earliest awareness measure taken for each campaign element is perhaps the most meaningful.

The "Mirror" advert, designed to address the attitudes component of the Theory of Planned Behaviour, appeared to trigger, at a spontaneous level, feelings of identification and in challenging drivers to reflect on their own driving. Encouragingly, drivers in the target age group of 25-44 were more likely to express feelings of involvement than other drivers.

The majority of respondents liked the "Mirror" advertisement, found it easy to understand, considered that it did not 'talk down' to them, and made them think about their own driving. Younger drivers and frequent speeders were most likely to feel that the advertisement was targeted at them and to agree that the advertisement made them feel that they 'drove too fast'.

The "Friends and Family" advert, designed to address the subjective norms component of the Theory of Planned Behaviour, appeared to trigger different sorts of thoughts and feelings. Although respondents did feel to some extent that the advertisement challenged them to consider their own driving, they appeared to feel less identification than with "Mirror". This may be partly because the driving behaviour depicted in the "Friends and Family" advertisement was more obviously 'bad' or extreme than that depicted in "Mirror". Where the "Friends and Family" advertisement did trigger feelings of identification, emotion and empathy, these tended to be more in relation to the passengers than the driver.

The advertisement appeared to communicate messages about speeding and about displaying concern for others. As with the Mirror advertisement, the majority of respondents found the advertisement easy to understand, liked it, considered that it did not 'talk down' to them; the advertisement also appeared to encourage them to think about how passengers viewed their driving.

The "Simon Says" advert was designed to address the perceived behavioural control component of the Theory of Planned Behaviour - i.e. to increase awareness of, and ability to cope with, internal and external pressures which reduce one's control over speeding. The theme of external pressure appears to have been communicated reasonably effectively by the ad, with over half of the respondents who had seen the ad spontaneously commenting on this theme. Half of the respondents also spontaneously expressed some degree of recognition and identification with the scenarios depicted in the ad. The main messages communicated by the ad appeared, at a spontaneous level, to be concerned with not being influenced or bullied by other drivers, and speeding, although a range of other messages were also identified by respondents.

At a prompted level, the majority of respondents found the ad easy to understand, felt it did not 'talk down' to them, liked it, and felt it made them think about their own driving. Although overall respondents tended to disagree that the ad 'made me feel I drive too fast' and 'made me feel bad about how I drive', agreement with these two statements increased significantly among younger respondents. Agreement with three of the statements, 'the ad made me feel I need to have more control over my speed', 'the ad made me feel bad about how I drive' and 'the ad made me feel that I drive too fast' also increased with more frequent speeding behaviour; this suggests that, as with Mirror and Friends and Family, the ad was more successful in encouraging reflection and dissonance about one's own driving among drivers who speed.

« Previous | Contents | Next »