THINK! Road Safety Campaign Evaluation

THINK! Road Safety Campaign Evaluation

Post evaluation of the ‘Personal Consequences’

Drink Drive campaign

Report

February 2009

Prepared for:

Department for Transport

Prepared by Helen Angle, Sarah Kirwan, Katie Buckley and Emily Goddard, BMRB Social Research

Telephone: 020 8433 4374 Email: sarah.kirwan@bmrb.co.uk

Part of BMRB Limited (British Market Research Bureau) BMRB/HA/SK/45107727

BMRB is ISO9001:2000 and ISO 20252 accredited.

Printed on 100% recycled paper

BMRB is also a member of the London Remade environment scheme and is working with the Woodland Trust to offset the paper used in the course of our business.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction........................................................................................ 1

1.1

Research objectives and method......................................................... 1

1.1.1

Drink Drive................................................................................. 2

1.2

Arrangement of this report................................................................. 3

2 Management summary and recommendations ......................................... 4

2.1

Introduction..................................................................................... 4

2.2

Campaign awareness ........................................................................ 4

2.3

Campaign communication .................................................................. 5

2.4

Attitudes towards drinking and driving ................................................. 6

2.5

Consequences of drink driving ............................................................ 7

2.6

Conclusions and recommendations ...................................................... 7

3 Campaign awareness ........................................................................... 9

3.1

Awareness of sources of publicity/advertising about drinking and driving .. 9

3.2

Proven recall ...................................................................................11

3.3

What was said – examples ................................................................13

3.4

Prompted recognition of Personal Consequences Drink Drive campaign....14

4 Campaign communication....................................................................18

4.1

Communication of the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad ...................................18

4.2

Believed main message of the ‘Cell’ radio ad........................................22

4.3

Thoughts or feelings about the ‘Cell’ radio ad.......................................23

5 Attitudes towards drinking and driving...................................................25

5.1

Perceived safety of drink driving ........................................................25

5.2

Perceived acceptability of drinking and driving .....................................28

6 Consequences of drink driving ..............................................................31

6.1

Perceived likelihood of getting caught by the police ..............................31

6.2

Likelihood of consequences of drink driving .........................................32

6.3

Consequences most concerned about .................................................37

APPENDIX A: Sample Profile ......................................................................40

Driving status..........................................................................................40

Drinking alcohol out of the home................................................................41

Commercial radio listenership ....................................................................43

APPENDIX B – Sampling Method ................................................................45

APPENDIX C: Weighting Procedures............................................................46

APPENDIX D: Questionnaire ......................................................................48

Copyright: survey findings and deliverables are normally intended for use within the Client's organisation or its consultants and other associate organisations such as advertising agencies. Should the Client intend wider circulation of the survey findings and deliverables, the Client should inform BMRB prior to such disclosure and agree the form and content with BMRB. The client should acknowledge BMRB as the source of the information with wording acceptable to BMRB.

Index of Charts

Chart 3a: Where seen/heard/read publicity about drinking and driving (prompted)

Chart 3b: Where seen/heard/read publicity about drinking and driving (prompted)

9

10

Chart 3c: Proven recall of publicity and advertising about drinking and driving

(spontaneous)

Chart 3d: Prompted recognition of the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad

12

14

Chart 3e: Prompted recognition of ‘Cell’

Chart 3f: Prompted recognition of ‘Locked In’ poster ad

15

16

Table 4a: Which of the following do you personally feel about the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad (prompted) – all adults over time 18

Table 4b: Which of the following do you personally feel about the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad (prompted) - subgroups 20

Chart 4c: Main message of ‘Cell’ radio ad

Chart 4d: Thoughts or feelings about ‘Cell’

22

23

Chart 5a: Agreement with statement - Driving after having one or two drinks would make me more likely to have an accident 25

Chart 5b: Agreement with statement – It is safe to drive after…

Chart 5c: Acceptability of driving after drinking two pints

27

28

Chart 5d: Acceptability of driving after drinking two pints (over time) 29

Chart 6a: Agreement with statement – If I were to drink and drive I would be likely to get caught by the police 31

Chart 6b: Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (1)

Chart 6c: : Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (2)

33

34

Chart 6d: : Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (3)

Chart 6e: : Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (4)

35

36

Chart 6f: Consequences of drink driving most likely to worry about (prompted) – over time 37

Chart 6g: Consequences of drink driving most likely to worry about (prompted) – young male drivers vs. all drivers 38

Chart A1: Driving Status

Chart A2: Frequency of drinking alcohol out of the home

Chart A3: How often listen to commercial radio

40

41

43

1 Introduction

The THINK! Road Safety publicity campaign was launched in 2000, as part of the

Government’s road safety strategy, Tomorrow’s roads: safer for everyone. The strategy set out targets to reduce road casualties in Great Britain by 50% for children and 40% overall between 2000 and 2010. A mix of engineering, enforcement and education measures are used to help meet these targets, of which the THINK! Road safety publicity campaign forms part.

The THINK! campaign aims to encourage all road users to recognise that it’s the small things they do that can lead to crashes on the road and that there are simple steps they can take to reduce their risk to themselves and others. THINK’s power is that it fosters an attitude of shared responsibility.

THINK! campaign priorities are identified by the Department for Transport’s publicity team in collaboration with policy officials in Road User Safety Division.

They are chosen because they account for the highest number of road casualties and it is felt that they will benefit most from coordinated national publicity.

1.1

Research objectives and method

In July 2006 BMRB Social Research took over the evaluation of the THINK! campaigns. This report focuses on research carried out in January 2009. This research wave was a fourth post stage evaluation for the drink drive campaign

‘Personal Consequences’.

Fieldwork ran from the 8 th to the 14 th January 2009. Interviews were conducted using BMRB’s Omnibus survey. This is a survey that is run each week by BMRB, with different clients placing questions onto a common questionnaire, and sharing the costs of fieldwork and analysis. All results are confidential to the individual client. Interviews were conducted in-home, using Computer Assisted Personal

Interviewing (CAPI) by fully trained members of BMRB’s own fieldforce, working under supervision. The sample was drawn by means of Random Location sampling (see appendices for further details).

In total 2,005 interviews were conducted with those aged 15+ in Great Britain.

Due to ethical guidelines set out by the Market Research Society we were unable to ask those under 18 about their drinking behaviour, so for some questions which were asked of drivers who drink alcohol, we included all 17 year olds, as we did not know whether they drank alcohol or not. Data were weighted to be representative of the population. Only weighted data are shown in this report.

BMRB Report THINK! Post Drink Drive February 2009 1

1.1.1

Drink Drive

The latest drink drive campaign, ‘Personal Consequences’ launched in July 2007 using a variety of communication activities to try to persuade drivers to avoid drinking and driving, including TV, cinema, radio, online and in-pub advertising.

Male drivers aged 17 to 29 were the core target group for the campaign, and will be highlighted as the target group throughout this report.

The key aims of the campaign are as follows:



To increase awareness of the personal consequences of a drink driving conviction;



To encourage the belief that 1 to 2 drinks are too many before driving;



To reinforce and build the social stigma around drink driving.

Prior to the launch of the latest campaign, a pre stage research wave was carried out in July 07, in order to provide benchmark attitudinal and behavioural data for future evaluation. All post stage measurements are compared with this initial pre stage data in order to evaluate the campaign’s impact over time.

The objectives of the post stage research were as follows:



To evaluate awareness and communication of the Christmas 2008 burst of the ‘Personal Consequences’ campaign;



To measure attitudes towards drink driving, and in particular having

1 to 2 drinks before driving, commonly referred to as ‘the tipping point’ for drink driving behaviour;



To look at the perceived consequences of drink driving, including which consequences are seen as most likely, and which drivers are most concerned about.

This is the fourth post stage evaluation of the campaign, with the first post stage taking place in September 2007 straight after its initial burst, the second in

January 2008 after Christmas activity and the third in July 2008 following summer activity. More detail on the evaluations of the previous three bursts of the campaign can be found in the separate reports; ‘Pre/post evaluation of the new Drink Drive campaign’ (October 2007)’, ‘Post evaluation of the Drink Drive


campaign (February 2008)’ and ‘Post evaluation of the Drink Drive campaign

(July 2008)’.

This report focuses on the fourth burst of the ‘Personal Consequences’ campaign.

This was Christmas activity, which is traditionally a focus in the year for drink drive communications. The campaign was launched on 1 st December 2008 and in addition to the main ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV and cinema ad, utilised new poster (in pub toilets) and radio executions to emphasise the possibility of prison as a consequence of drink driving. In previous waves of research this was found to be the consequence that people were most worried about but that they thought was least likely to happen to them. In pub ambient advertising, including advertising on beer mats, was also used, as were online banners, but these were not evaluated as part of this research. Timings for the various strands of activity are show below:



TV advertising – 1 st – 31 st December 2008;



Cinema advertising - 1 st – 31 st December 2008;



Radio advertising - 1 st – 31 st December 2008;



In-pub ambient advertising – 8 th December 2008 – 13 th January

2009;



Online banner advertising - 1 st – 31 st December 2008.

1.2

Arrangement of this report

Following this introduction is a management summary of the findings. The main body of the report provides a detailed commentary, illustrated by summary tables and charts. Appendices contain details of the sampling method, weighting, the sample profile and the questionnaires.

Data have been supplied in separate volumes. In charts and tables ‘-’ denotes 0 and ‘#’ denotes a proportion of less than half of one per cent, but more than 0.


2 Management summary and recommendations

2.1

Introduction



This report focuses on research carried out in January 2009. This research wave was a fourth post stage evaluation for the drink drive campaign ‘Personal Consequences’.



Fieldwork ran from 8 th to 14 th January 2009. Interviews were conducted using BMRB’s Omnibus survey.



In total 2,005 interviews were conducted with those aged 15+ in

Great Britain.



The main part of the campaign ran from 1 st – 31 st December 2008 and, in addition to the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV and cinema ad, utilised new poster and radio executions to emphasise the possibility of prison as a consequence of drink driving.

2.2

Campaign awareness



Eight in ten (81%) respondents had seen or heard something about drinking and driving in at least one of the media sources used in the

Christmas Drink Drive campaign (TV and cinema advertising, radio advertising, beer mats, posters in pub toilets or indoor posters and online). Among the target group of male drivers aged 17-29, awareness was higher at 87%. A TV ad was the most commonly cited source, mentioned by three quarters (78%) of all respondents and just under nine in ten (86%) of the target group of male drivers aged 17-29.



One in six (16%) respondents gave a description that could be directly attributable to the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad. This is similar to the 14% seen in the summer (July 2008). Male drivers aged 17-29 were slightly more likely to be able to describe the ‘Moment of

Doubt’ TV ad (20%) than all respondents, with the consequences the barman lists being particularly well recalled (11% of young male drivers mentioned this, compared with 5% of all respondents).



The ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad was recognised by eight in ten (78%) respondents when it was played to them in the interview, an increase from 69% in July 2008. This was from an exposure of 366


TVRs, compared with 347 16-34 male TVRs in July 2008. Nine in ten

(91%) male drivers aged 17-29 recognised the ad; this is almost at saturation point for this group.



Two in ten (21%) commercial radio listeners recognised the ‘Cell’ radio ad. This is higher than the recognition for ‘937 cats’ (11%) and

‘Kiss’ (13%) from July 2008, but lower than ‘The List’ from January

2008 and the ‘Story’ campaign from September 2007 (both 29% of commercial radio listeners).



One in ten (12%) respondents said that they had seen the ‘Locked

In’ poster ad before. This is higher awareness than the 5% who recognised the ‘Pink’ poster, and the 6% who recognised the ‘Yellow’ poster in July 2008.

2.3

Campaign communication



The ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad remains impactful, with a third (36%) of all respondents (no change from January 2008) and 45% of the target group of male drivers aged 17-29 agreeing that it stuck in their mind.



The core message appears to have been conveyed, in particular to the target group of male drivers aged 17-29. Three in ten (31%) of all respondents and just under half (45%) of young male drivers agreed that ‘Moment of Doubt’ made them think about the range of consequences associated with drinking and driving. It was also well targeted as young male drivers were more likely to say the ad was aimed at them (18% compared with 7% of all respondents). They were also more likely to agree that the ad made them think about the impact drink driving could have on their lifestyle (40% compared with 21% of all respondents) and that it will make them think twice before drinking and driving (30% compared with 19% of all respondents). In terms of a behavioural call to action, the target group were more likely to agree the ad has actually made them drive more carefully (10% compared with 5% of all respondents), which implies that they are linking the action with the consequences.



The ad is showing no signs of wear out as yet, with no change in the proportion of people agreeing that it is irritating (9%) or confusing

(8%) from previous waves. One in twenty (5%) said they were tired


of seeing it, unchanged from July 2008. These more negative reactions came through at similar levels amongst the target group.



A quarter (26%) of those who recognised the new Christmas radio ad execution ‘Cell’ reported the main message to be, ‘don’t drink and drive’. Two in ten (20%) reported it to be that the driver could go to prison or get locked up for drink driving. and 15% said the main message was that you will be treated or processed the same as any other criminal if you are caught drink driving.



Thoughts and feelings about the radio ad were wide ranging, with little difference in response by the target groups compared with all respondents. As seen with the main message, the most prominent thought in reaction to hearing the ad was that you should not drink and drive (6% of all respondents, and slightly higher at 9% among the target group). There were a balance of reactions to the ad with some saying they thought the ad was hard to follow or make out what was happening (5%) and a handful deeming it boring (1%).

Others thought it was an effective ad (2%) or that it was shocking or hard hitting (1%).

2.4

Attitudes towards drinking and driving



Nearly nine in ten (87%) drivers agreed that driving after one or two drinks would make you more likely to have an accident and six in ten

(60%) strongly agreed. These levels were unchanged from previous waves of research but were slightly lower for young male drivers

(83% agreed and 53% strongly agreed).



Having two drinks and driving was still considered to be far less safe than having a single drink, with two thirds of drivers who drink alcohol strongly disagreeing that this is a safe behaviour (62%, compared with 30% strongly disagreeing for one drink). Similar attitudes were held by young male drivers (51% strongly disagreed for two drinks and 18% strongly disagreed for one drink).



Over eight in ten (83%) respondents felt that driving after drinking two pints was unacceptable and two thirds (64%) found this extremely unacceptable. Both of these have remained stable over time. Overall acceptability was slightly lower at this wave among young male drivers (77%), fuelled by a much smaller proportion


(49%) finding driving after drinking two pints extremely unacceptable.

2.5

Consequences of drink driving



Two thirds (67%) of drivers who drank alcohol felt that they would be likely to be caught by the police if they were to drink drive, with one in three (35%) strongly agreeing. This is higher than was seen in summer 2007 and 2008 but in line with January 2008, which suggests there is a greater perceived police presence over the

Christmas period. Young male drivers were less likely than all drivers to agree: 60% agreed overall and 25% agreed strongly.



As seen in previous waves, a prison sentence was the consequence drivers were most likely to worry about as a result of being caught drink driving (36%) but the one which they were least likely to believe would happen to them (18% thought it was very likely).

Although this was a focus in the Christmas 2008 campaign, these levels have not changed since the last wave. Young male drivers were more likely than all drivers to think they could go to prison

(26% thought it very likely), although it was still the consequence seen by the fewest within this group as being very likely.



The consequence drivers were most likely to think would happen to them was that the cost of their insurance would increase (87% thought this was very likely, increasing to 97% of young male drivers). However, only 1% of all drivers and no young male drivers said that this was what they were most worried about.

2.6

Conclusions and recommendations

The ‘Personal Consequences’ campaign and in particular the ‘Moment of Doubt’

TV ad are now clearly established, in particular within the target group of young male drivers (20% could describe it spontaneously and 91% recognised it when it was played to them). Amongst the wider group of all respondents, prompted recognition increased from previous waves (78% in January 2009, up from 69% in July 2008). The new support executions (‘Cell’ radio and ‘Locked In’ poster) used in the Christmas 2008 campaign were better recognised than those used in summer 2008, although recognition was still at relatively low levels (21% of commercial radio listeners had heard the radio ad and 12% of all adults had seen the poster).


Response to the TV ad remains positive, and despite the four bursts of the campaign and high recognition levels, is showing no sign of wear out. It does a good job of communicating the core message of the consequences of drink driving, in particular to the target audience of male drivers aged 17-29.

The radio ad seems to have conveyed the message that if you are caught drink driving you could end up in prison. However, there was no real change in the proportion who thought up to six months in prison was a likely consequence of being caught drink driving. This may be a result of relatively low recognition levels of the new radio and poster ads. Up to six months in prison remains the consequence that people are most likely to worry about, but the one which they think is least likely to happen to them.

There has been no real change in the proportion who believed that driving after having one or two drinks is more likely to make them have an accident. However, the proportion who believed they were more likely to be caught by the police recovered to January 2008 levels, suggesting there is a greater perceived police presence on the roads around Christmas. There remains a gap in perceptions of safety of driving after one drink (30% strongly disagreed this was safe) and two drinks (62% strongly disagreed).


3 Campaign awareness

This chapter looks at awareness of advertising and publicity about drinking and driving, followed by spontaneous recall of the content of that advertising. It goes on to look at prompted recognition of the specific ads using in the latest campaign.

3.1

Awareness of sources of publicity/advertising about drinking and driving

Respondents were prompted with a list of media sources, and asked whether they recalled seeing or hearing anything about drinking and driving in any of these sources recently. As a wide range of different sources were asked about and recalled, the items with the highest levels of mentions are shown in Chart 3a and items with fewer mentions are shown in Chart 3b. Media sources used in the latest Christmas campaign (TV and cinema advertising, radio advertising, beer mats and pub toilet posters, as well as indoor posters, which could be mentioned in place of pub toilet posters, and online advertising) are outlined.

Chart 3a: Where seen/heard/read publicity about drinking and driving (prompted)

ANY CAMPAIGN SOURCE

TV advert

87

70

73

76

78

81

86

National newspaper

TV news

Local newspaper

Road signs

Poster hoarding

Radio advert

28

30

33

30

13

17

20

23

12

15

15

17

15

15

17

25

31

Poster on bus

Magazine

13

15

Young male drivers Jan 09

All respondents Jan 09

All respondents July 08


All respondents Sept 07

Base: All respondents: Sept 07 (1,993), Jan 08 (2,030), July 08 (2,014), Jan 09 (2005),Young male drivers Jan 09 (91)


Chart 3b: Where seen/heard/read publicity about drinking and driving (prompted)

Other TV programme

In the pub/ beermats

TV plays/ soaps

Posters in pub toilets

Cinema

6

8

9

7

8

9

13

12

12

9

11

8

9

10

12

11

8

8

9

10

13

17

Radio programme

Indoor poster

Leaflet/ booklet picked up

Through the internet/ a website

Signs at garages/ service areas

5

6

5

4

5

8

9

4

5

10

13



All respondents July 08


All respondents Sept 07

Base: All respondents: Sept 07 (1,993), Jan 08 (2,030), July 08 (2,014), Jan 09 (2005),Young male drivers Jan 09 (91)

Eight in ten adults (81%) recalled seeing or hearing something in any of the campaign sources for the Christmas Drink Drive campaign, the same level as in both July 2008 (80%) and January 2008 (81%). A TV ad was the most commonly cited source, being chosen by almost eight in ten adults (78%). Other campaign sources were recalled by fewer respondents; 15% had heard a radio ad, 9% had seen something in the pub or on beermats, 8% had seen something at the cinema, 8% on posters in pub toilets, 5% had seen indoor posters and 4% had seen something online. These are all at similar levels to July and January 2008.

The subject of drink driving continued to be newsworthy, as national newspapers

(30%) and TV news (28%) remained the second and third most mentioned media sources.

The target audience of young male drivers aged 17-29 had higher awareness of all campaign sources when compared with all adults. Almost nine in ten (87%) had seen or heard something in at least one of the media sources used at the latest campaign. Most of these had seen a TV ad (86% of all 17-29s), a quarter

(25%) were aware of a radio ad, just under two in ten (17%) had seen something at the cinema, 13% recalled a poster in pub toilets, 13% had seen something on indoor posters, 12% in the pub or on beermats and one in ten

(9%) had seen something online.


The target group were also much more aware of seeing something on road signs

(31%, compared with 17% of all adults), on non-news TV programmes (13%, compared with 9% of all adults) and at signs at garages and service areas (10%, compared with 4% of all adults).

Drivers were more likely than non drivers to recall advertising in any of the campaign sources (83% compared with 77%). Men were more likely to be aware of advertising on the radio (18% compared with 13% of women), and ABC1s had higher awareness of drink drive advertising at the cinema (11% compared with

6%).

Unsurprisingly, heavier viewers of commercial television were more likely to recall a TV advert about drink driving (82%, falling to 66% of light viewers) and heavier listeners of commercial radio were more likely to remember hearing a radio ad

(34% of heavy listeners, falling to 20% of light listeners and 5% of nonlisteners).

3.2

Proven recall

In order to gain an unprompted measure of campaign recall, those who had seen or heard any drink drive advertising or publicity in the media sources used at the latest campaign were asked to describe in their own words what they had seen or heard. A wide variety of responses were given, as shown in Chart 3c.


Chart 3c: Proven recall of publicity and advertising about drinking and driving

(spontaneous)

Don't drink and drive

Accident/car crash scene

Barman in pub acts as different people/characters

Shock/shocking/hard hitting

Barman/bartender in pub goes through consequences

Good/memorable/effective ad

The consequences/impact

11%

16%

11%

14%

7%

8%

7%

8%

6%

6%

7%

2%

5%

8%

7%

12%

11%

2%

5%

5%

4%

6%

3%

4%

3%

4%

4%

6%



All respondent Jul 08


25%

GENERAL MENTION OF DRINK DRIVE

CAMPAIGN/MESSAGE

37%

35%

45%

MOMENT OF DOUBT TV AD MENTION

16%

14%

20%

4%

All mentions of 4% or above

Base: All respondents who have seen something in media source used at latest campaign – Jan 08 (1,610), Jul 08 (1,603), Jan 09

(1605), Young male drivers Jan 09 (79)

Christmas 2008 was the fourth time that the ‘Personal Consequences’ campaign had been aired (spontaneous recall was not asked in September 2007 after the first burst). The proportion able to give a description that could be directly attributed to the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad (the part of the campaign with the greatest spend) increased from 4% in January 2008 to 14% in July 2008, remaining stable at this level in January 2009 (16%). Specific descriptions of the

‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad included reference to the barman, which remained unchanged in January 2009: 6% described the barman acting as different characters and 5% talked about the different consequences the barman goes through.

Overall, the most common description was the general ‘don’t drink and drive’ message (16%, up from 11% in July 08). Other things that were described included an accident or car crash scene (8%), something being shocking or hard hitting (5%, a drop from 8% in July 2008), that they had seen a good, memorable or effective ad (4%) and the consequences or impact (4%). In total, almost four in ten (37%) mentioned something that was related to a general drink drive campaign or message, but could not specifically be attributed to the


Personal Consequences campaign. This is stable from July 2008 (35%), following a fall from January 2008 (45%), coinciding with an in crease in the proportion who specifically described the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad.

The target group were more likely than all adults to describe the ‘Moment of

Doubt’ TV ad (20% compared with 16%), and in particular the barman going through the consequences (11% compared with 5%) but were less likely to mention general messages about not drinking and driving (25% compared with

37%). Young male drivers were however more likely to talk about what they ha d seen as being shocking or hard hitting (12% compared with 5% of all adults).

3.3

What was said – examples

Some examples of verbatim descriptions of the campaign are provided below.

Drink Drive campaign – Personal Consequences ad recall

“…barman with lots of faces”

"Fellow in pub and barman asking ‘do you really want a drink?’"

“Man talking in different voices about drinking”

“Goes up to bar and barman is lots of characters, it’s shocking…”

“There was a Scottish bloke standing behind a bar. He was changing his voice, playing three differen t parts. He was the barman, he was the drink driver and he was the policeman”

“The guy is by the bar and is changing to different accents and is warning hims elf it’s up to you if you want to drink and drive, you could lose your home, job…”

“A barman serving drinks recites how he lo st his job, his car and is talking to another person who wants another drink”

“Don't drink and drive. That's the main one. It was the one where there’s the man behind the ba r and he changes personality… he’s a policeman then his boss, then the judge…”

“The barman was saying, are ‘you sure you want this drink?’, an d he said everything that might happen as a consequence of drinking”

“Fine and ban, losing job, the barman takes on different voices”

“The graphic details where it shows a man asking for more beer and then it shows the conse quences of him having another drink like losing his job, his car, and his


licence.”

3.4

Prompted recognition of Personal Consequences Drink Drive campaign

After asking respondents what they could spontaneously recall about advertisin g and publicity about drink driving, the TV ad ‘Moment of Doubt’, radio ad ‘Cell’ and poster ad ‘Locked In’ were played or sh own on a laptop, in order to accurately measure prompted recognition. Chart 3d shows recognition of th e ‘Moment of

Doubt’ TV ad.

Chart 3d: Prompted recognition of the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad

%

Recognise TV ad

54

65

69

78

91

Do not recognise TV ad 46

35

31

Sept 2007 Jan 2008 July 2008

22

9

Jan 09 Young male drivers – Jan 09

B ase: All respondents: Sept 07 (1,993), Jan 08 (2,010), July 08 (2,014), Jan 09 (2005), Young male drivers Jan 09 (91)

Recognition of ‘Moment of Doubt’ has increased each time the ‘Personal

Consequences’ campaign has been aired. In January 2009, it was recognised by just eight in ten adults (78%) an increase from 69% in July 2008. This was achieved from an exposure of 366 TVRs, compared with 347 16-34 male TVRs in

July 2008. Amongst young male drivers, nine in ten (91%) recognised the ad, indicating it is almost at saturation point amongst the target group.

As well as the target males, all men were more likely to recognise the ‘Momen t of

Doubt’ ad when compared with women (83% compared with 73%), as were younger people (89% of 15-29s, falling to 63% of over 5 5s). Respondents in


social grades C2DE were slightly more likely to have seen the ad (80%) than those in the ABC1 social grades (76%).

As expected, a higher proportion of heavy commercial television viewers (84%) recognised the ad compared with medium to light viewers (72%).

Chart 3e shows prompted recognition of the ‘Cell’ radio ad from January 2009. As this was part of a campaign in which several similar ads were played, respondents were given the option to say that they heard that ad or that they had heard one very similar to it. Chart 3e shows the combined figure for hearin g the ‘Cell’ ad or hearing one similar to give an indication of overall recognition of the radio element of the campaign. Recognition is compared with the ‘937 Cats’ and ‘Kiss’ radio ads played in July 2008, ‘The List’ from January 2008 and the

‘Story’ campaign from September 2007. In September 2007 and July 20 08 a split sample approach was taken , with half the sample being played stories 1 and 2 and the other half stories 3 and 4 in 2007, and half of the sample being played

‘937 Cats’ and the other half ‘Kiss’ in 200 8. All data is shown based on commercial radio listeners.

Chart 3e: Prompted recognition of ‘Cell’

%

Split sample in Sept

07 – half played

Stories 1/2 and half

Stories 3/4

29 29

Split sample in July 08 – half played 937 Cats and half played Kiss

21

11

13

Any radio

(4 stories)

Sept 07

The List

Jan 08

937 Cats Kiss Cell

Jan 09 July 2008

Base: All commercial radio listeners: Sept 07 (1,158: split sample, Story 1/2 – 582, Story 3/4 - 576 ), Jan 08 (1,227),

July 08 (937 Cats – 963, Kiss - 1051), Jan 09 (1,094)

Two in ten (21%) commercial radio listeners recognised the ‘Cell’ radio ad, or one very similar to it. This is made up of 14% who said they had heard that particular


ad and a further 7% who had heard one very similar. Overall recognition was higher than for ‘937 Cats’ (11%) & ‘Kiss’ (1 3%), but lower than recognition of

‘The List’ from January 2008 and the ‘Story’ campaign from September 2007

(both 29% of commercial radio listeners).

Seven in ten young male drivers listened to commercial radio (7 1%), however this base was too small to analyse by (65 respondents). Within young male drivers as a whole, 22% had heard ‘Cell’ or something similar.

Amongst all adults, men were broadly more likely than women to recognise ‘Cell ’ or something similar (16% compared with 11%), as were younger adults (20% of

15-29s , falling to compared with 6% of those 55+), however this is likely to be related to the demographic profile of those who actually listen to commercial radio.

Chart 3f shows prompted recognition of the ‘Locked In’ poster ad, which was placed in pub toilets as part of the Christmas campaign and linked with the message of the ‘Cell’ radio ad. This is compared with the ‘Pink ’ and ‘Yellow’ poster ads used in the summer 2008 campaign and were evaluated in July 2008 using a split sample approach, with half the sample shown each ad.

Chart 3f: Prompted recognition of ‘Locked In’ poster ad

Recognise poster ad 5 6

12 11 %

Do not recognise poster ad

95 94

88 89

Pink Yellow Locked In

(all adults)

Locked In

(young male drivers)

Jan 09 July 2008

Base: July 2008 – split sample Pink ad (1,007), Yellow ad (1,007); Jan 09 - All adults (2,005), Young male drivers (91)


One in ten (12%) respondents had seen the ‘Locked In’ poster ad before, as had one in ten of the target group (11%). This is more than had seen the ‘Pin k’ (5%) and ‘Yellow’ (6%) ads which appeared in pub toilets in summer 2008. There were no differences in recognition of ‘Locked In’ between different subgroups.


4 Campaign communication

This section looks at the main messages, and the thoughts and feelings surrounding the ads used in the ‘Personal Consequences’ drink drive campaign, both spontaneous and prompted.

4.1

Communication of the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad

Directly after being shown the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad, all respondents were shown a series of communication statements, and asked which they felt applied to the ad.

Table 4a: Which of the following do you personally feel about the ‘Moment of Doubt’

TV ad (prompted) – all adults over time

* indicates significant change from previous wave

Sep 07 Jan 08 July 08 Jan 09

(1,993) (2,010) (2,014) (2,005)

It sticks in my mind

It made me stop and think about the range of consequences of drink driving

I like this ad

It made me think about the dangers of driving even after a small amount of alcohol

It made me think about the impact that drinking and driving could have on my lifestyle

It will make me think twice before I drink and drive

It is the sort of ad I would talk about with other people

I found it irritating

I found it confusing

It told me something new

It’s aimed at people like me

It made me think about my own driving

It made me think about my own drinking

I’m tired of seeing it

It has made me drive more carefully

21

17

10

8

12

9

5

8

6

2

4

28

31

21

26

35* 36 36

29 31 31

17* 22* 30*

20* 23 28

13* 15 21*

13* 14 19

12 13 11

10 9 9

9 9 8

14* 15 7*

7 8 7

10 12 6*

11* 11 6*

3 5* 5

6 6 4


A third (36%) of respondents stated that the ad stuck in their mind, which is a core measure of its cut through. This is stable from January and July 2008.

Another measure of cut through, in terms of emotional engagement with the ad, is how much it is enjoyed. This had slipped back between September 2007 (21%) and January 2008 (17%), but recovered to 22% in July 2008 and has increased further up to three in ten (30%) at the latest wave – therefore it seems affinity with the ad is on the rise. There was no real change in the proportion who said they would talk about it with other people (11% in January 2009), nor was there a change in the proportion who felt the ad was targeted at them (7% in January

2009).

Despite being used in four bursts, the ‘Moment of Doubt’ ad is still showing no signs of wear out - with no change in the proportion of people agreeing that it is irritating (9%), confusing (8%) or that they were tired of seeing it (5%).

However, the increased use of the ad is causing the ‘new news’ measure of the ad to drop, from 15% in July 2008 to 7% in January 2009, which is unsurprising.

Three in ten people (31%) agreed that ‘Moment of Doubt’ made them think about the range of consequences associated with drinking and driving – the main message of the ad. This has been stable since September 2007.

There was further recovery in agreement that it made people think about the dangers of driving even after a small amount of alcohol (28%). Agreement had slipped to two in ten (20%) in January 2008, from an initial 26% in September

2007, but has now returned to the launch level. Encouragingly, agreement also recovered in terms of making respondents think about the impact that drinking and driving could have on their lifestyle (21%), again a key message of the ad, and making them think twice before they drink and drive (19%). Agreement with these statements had previously declined between September 2007 and January

2008, but has steadily recovered since then. Between September 2007 and July

2008 there were increases in the proportion of people who agreed that ‘Moment of Doubt’ made them think about their own drinking (up from 6% to 11%) and their own driving (up from 8% up to 12%). However, agreement with these statements decreased following the latest burst, down to 6% for each.

In terms of a behavioural measure, one in twenty (4%) respondents agreed that the ads made them actually drive more carefully, stable over time.

Table 4b shows agreement with communication statements amongst drivers in different subgroups at the latest wave. The shading indicates significant differences seen between the subgroups.


Table 4b: Which of the following do you personally feel about the ‘Moment of

Doubt’ TV ad (prompted) - subgroups

It sticks in my mind

It made me stop and think about the range of consequences of drink driving

I like this ad

It made me think about the dangers of driving even after a small amount of alcohol

It made me think about the impact that drinking and driving could have on my lifestyle

It will make me think twice before

I drink and drive

It is the sort of ad

I would talk about with other people

I found it irritating

I found it confusing

It told me something new

It’s aimed at people like me

It made me think about my own driving

It made me think about my own drinking

I’m tired of seeing it

It has made me drive more carefully

Total

All drivers

Young male drivers

Ages

15-29

Ages

30+

Men Women

(1,619) (943) (1,062)

% % %

36 35 45 38 35 39 32

31 34 45 35 30 31 31

30 31 33 29 30 33

28 29 30 33

21 25 40

19 21 30

25

23

27 27 30

20

9 9 7 7 9 9 9

8 8 4 6 9 7 9

7 7 8 10

7 8 18

5 6 9 9

BMRB Report THINK! Post Drink Drive February 2009

10

6 7 8

6

25

17 21 16

11 11 13 12 11 11 11

9 4

6 8 13 7 6 8 5

6 7 10 7 5 8

4 7 4

4 5 10 5 4 6

26

18

4

2

20

As Table 4b demonstrates, there was little difference between the views of drivers and the population in general. However, young male drivers (the core campaign target) tended to relate more closely to ‘Moment of Doubt’. As seen in previous waves they were more likely to agree that it was aimed at people like them (18% compared with 8% of all drivers) and were also more likely to take out key messages. The consequences of drink driving was a key take out for young male drivers (45% compared with 34% of all drivers), as was the impact it would have on their lifestyle (40% compared with 25% of all drivers). These appear to be particularly hard hitting messages for this group, and encouragingly they were also more likely to agree that the ad also actually made them more likely to think twice before they drink and drive (30% compared with 21% of all drivers) and drive more carefully (10% compared with 5% of all drivers), which implies that they are linking the action with the consequences. The stronger association with the messages is likely to explain why the ad was felt to be more memorable amongst this group; 45% said that it stuck in their mind compared with 35% of drivers generally. These results were very similar to what we saw for the target group compared with the rest of the population following last summer’s burst.

Younger people aged 15-29 were more likely than those aged 30 and over to agree with a number of cut through and message take out measures for the

‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad. Following the latest burst they were slightly more like to agree they were the target of the ads (10% compared with 6% of those 30 or over). They were also more likely to agree that the information in the ads was new news to them (again, 10% compared with 6% of those 30 or over).

In terms of message take out, younger people were more likely to agree that the ad made them think about the dangers of driving after even a small amount of alcohol (33% of 15-29s compared with 27% of the over 30s) and that the ad made them think about the impact drink driving could have on their lifestyle

(25% compared with 20%) – a key message of the ads. They were also more likely to say the ad would make them think twice before drinking and driving

(23% compared with 17%). Younger people were, however, also more likely to feel they were getting tired of seeing the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad (9% compared with 4%).

Men were more likely to relate to ‘Moment of Doubt’ than women; 9% of men compared with 4% of women agreed that it was aimed at people like them. They were also more likely to say that it stuck in their mind (39% compared with 32% of women) and that they liked the ad (33% compared with 26% of women).

For message take out, it was more likely to make men think about the impact drinking and driving could have on their lifestyle (25% compared with 18% of women) or about their own drinking, (8% compared with 4%). Men were also


more likely to agree that the ads had made them drive more carefully (6% compared with 2% of women).

4.2

Believed main message of the ‘Cell’ radio ad

Respondents who said they recognised the ‘Cell’ radio ad (or one similar to it) used at the Christmas burst were asked to describe, in their own words, what they felt was the main message of the ad. As recognition of the radio campaign was relatively low, analysis was not possible for any subgroups. In particular, amongst the core target of young male drivers, only 19 respondents recognised the ad and went on to answer this question.

Chart 4c: Main message of ‘Cell’ radio ad

Don’t drink and drive (non specific)

Go to prison/locked up

Treated/processed like (any other) criminal

Consequences of being caught drink driving

Could get a criminal record/legal problems

It’s/you are criminal


Don’t Drink and Drive/you will get caught

Poor ad/not catchy (all negative references)

Think before you drink and drive

(Only include mention of Think!)

Good ad/impact

4%

4%

5%

5%

8%

7%

11%

10%

15%

20%

26%

None

Don’t know

3%

7%

Base: All who recognise the ad (261)

The main message taken out of the radio ads was simply ‘don’t drink and drive’.

This was mentioned by a quarter (26%) of respondents who had recognised the ad. Two in twenty (20%) took out the message of going to prison or being locked up as a result of drink driving, obviously the key focus of the ad. Similarly, 15% said the main message was that you will be treated or processed the same as any other criminal. One in ten mentioned the possibility of getting a criminal record

(10%). Similarly, 8% said the message of the ad was that you are a criminal if you drink drive.

Around one in ten (11%) gave a general mention of there being consequences of

being caught drink driving, whilst 7% gave a slightly difference response


mentioning a consequence of drink driving (i.e. without necessarily being caught doing it). One in twenty, said that the main message of the ad was not to drink drive as you will be caught (5%) or that you should think before you do it (4%).

There was also a balance of opinions given about the ad for this measure, with

5% deeming it a poor ad whilst 4% saying they thought it was a good ad with impact.

One in ten (10%) respondents were unable to give any answer at all or say that they didn’t know what the main message was.

4.3

Thoughts or feelings about the ‘Cell’ radio ad

Reactions towards the ‘Cell’ radio ads were explored by asking all respondents to explain in their own words what thoughts or feelings had occurred to them when they heard the ads. A range of responses were given, as shown in Chart 4d.

Chart 4d: Thoughts or feelings about ‘Cell’

Don’t drink and drive

You will go to jail/prison/be a criminal/have a record

Difficult to make out the ad/muffled/sound poor

Ad recall


Never heard it before

Doesn't affect me as I don't drink and drive

Effective/gets message across

Boring

Takes too long to get to the point

Shocking/hard hitting

Don't drink and drive you will get caught

#

3%

2%

3%

2%

4%

1%

3%

1%

6%

5%

6%

4%

5%

3%

4%

6%

3%

3%

3%

3%

1%

3%

9%

None

Don’t know


All adults Jan 09

11%

15%

25%

26%

All mentions of 3% or above

Base: Jan 09 - All adults (2,005), Young male drivers (91)

There were no differences in the thoughts and feelings taken from the ‘Cell’ radio ad by the target group of young male drivers compared with those taken out by adults generally.

As with the main message measure (Chart 4c), of those who mentioned something, the thought most described by respondents in reaction to the ‘Cell’


radio ad was that you should not drink and drive (6% of all adults). One in twenty

(6%) said that you would go to prison or have a criminal record and 3% described general consequences of drink driving.

There were some negative reactions to the radio ad with some respondents saying that they thought the ads were hard to follow or make out what was happening (5%), and others saying they thought it was boring (1%) or took too long to get to the point (1%). Young male drivers were slightly more likely to think it was boring (4%) or took too long to get to the point (3%).

Balanced with this there were also positive reactions to the ad with some saying they thought the ad was effective or that it got the message across (2%) or that they thought it was shocking or hard hitting (1% of all adults, increasing to 3% of the target group).

Three percent of the target group mentioned that they should not drink or drive or they would get caught – this is interesting as it is a core message of the ad, they were the target of the ad, and this was not a thought provoked among all adults.

A large proportion, a third (36%), said the ad did not provoke any thoughts or feeling for them, or they did not know what these were when asked.


5 Attitudes towards drinking and driving

This chapter looks at attitudes towards drinking and driving. Measures taken in

July 2007 prior to the new ‘Personal Consequences’ drink drive campaign served as benchmark attitudes. These were measured again at the post evaluation stages (the first post taking place in September 2007, followed by a second in

January 2008, a third in July 2008 and most recently, the focus of this report, in

January 2009 following Christmas activity) in order to identify any shifts in awareness or attitudes that may be attributed to the new campaign approach.

In general, results discussed in this chapter have changed little between evaluation stages. There are, however, some differences when looking at these results alongside the young male drivers target group (those aged 17-29 years old).

5.1

Perceived safety of drink driving

All drivers who drink alcohol (aged 18 years or more), and all 17 year old drivers, were asked their agreement on a number of statements to do with the perceived safety of drink driving.

Chart 5a: Agreement with statement - Driving after having one or two drinks would make me more likely to have an accident

Strongly agree

59

53

60 59 63 60

%

30

Slightly agree 28 25 25 22 27

Neither

Slightly disagree

Strongly disagree

5

6

2

July 07

5

6

4

Sept 07

5

7

3

Jan 08

5

8

3

July 08

5

6

2

Jan 09

9

7

1

Jan 09

Young male drivers

Base: All drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol and 17 year olds - July 07 (978), Sept 07 (1,031), Jan 08 (1,065), July 08

(1,022), Jan 09 (1,043), Jan 09 young male drivers (72)


There was no real change in the belief that driving after one or two drinks would make you more likely to have an accident. Over eight in ten (87%) drivers agreed with this in January 2009, in line with previous waves (86% in July 2007,

85% in September 2007 and 84% in January 2008, 84% in July 2008). Six in ten

(60%) strongly agreed (also in line with previous waves).

Slightly fewer of the target of young male drivers, eight in ten (83%), agreed that driving after having one or two drinks would make them more likely to have an accident. This decreased from nine in ten (90%) in July 2008. The reason for this decrease among the target group is unclear; however it may be linked with a seasonal effect. Over the Christmas period when drinking is more prevalent, peoples attitudes towards drink driving may soften as an attempt to justify their own drink driving behaviour.

Female drivers were more likely to agree (90% compared with 84% of men).

Unsurprisingly, those who found it unacceptable to drive after 2 pints also agreed that driving after having one or two drinks would make you more likely to have an accident (91% compared with 66%).

Drivers who drink alcohol and all 17 year old drivers were asked whether they believed it to be safe to drive after having one or two drinks. This was to gauge the difference in opinion about the ‘two pint threshold’ which is most commonly held to be the ‘tipping point’ of being unsafe to drive (Chart 5b).


Chart 5b: Agreement with statement – It is safe to drive after…

Jan 09 - Young male drivers

Jan 09

July 08

One Drink

Jan 08

Sept 07

July 07

10

12

13

14

13

14

27

28

28

28

31

26

Jan 09 - Young male drivers 1

Jan 09 4

July 08 3

13

9

8

Two Drinks

Jan 08 3

Sept 07 3

July 07 3

7

9

9

6

5

6

6

7

12

15

18

19

18

18

23

15

9

11

9

8

9 17

20

20

20

17

31

62

65

69

63

64

51

30

34

32

29

29

18

%

Agree strongly Agree slightly Neither Slightly disagree Strongly disagree

Base: All drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol and 17 year olds - July 07 (978), Sept 07 (1,031), Jan 08 (1,065), July 08

(1,022), Jan 09 (1,043), Jan 09 young male drivers (72)

Having two drinks and driving was still considered to be far less safe than having a single drink, with six in ten drivers who drink alcohol strongly disagreeing that this is a safe behaviour (62%, compared with 30% strongly disagreeing for one drink).

The proportion of drivers agreeing it was safe to drive after a single drink had increased between September 2007 (41%) and January 2008 (44%), but this returned to 41% in July 2008 and remained at that level (40%) in January 2009 following the latest burst of activity. There has been no real change over time in the proportion agreeing it is safe to drive after two drinks (13% in January 2009).

Among young male drivers, attitudes were slightly different. Young male drivers were less likely to strongly disagree it was safe to drive after having after one drink (18% strongly disagreed compared with 30% of all drivers and 27% of male drivers aged 30+), and driving after two drinks (51% strongly disagreed compared with 62% of all drivers).

When asked about driving after one drink, women were more likely to disagree strongly that this was a safe behaviour (36% compared with 25% of men). They were also more likely to disagree strongly that driving after two drinks was safe

(69% compared with 56% of men).


Driving after one drink was, unsurprisingly, more likely to be considered safe by those who believe driving after two pints is acceptable (76% in agreement compared with 33% of those who did not think driving after two pints was acceptable). They were also more likely to believe driving after having two drinks was safe (57% compared with 6%).

5.2

Perceived acceptability of drinking and driving

One of the aims of the ‘Moment of Doubt’ drink drive campaign is to reinforce the social stigma around drinking and driving. Therefore all respondents (including non drivers) were asked to rate how acceptable or unacceptable they found driving after drinking two pints.

Chart 5c: Acceptability of driving after drinking two pints

Fairly acceptable - 1

2

3

4

4

9

4 20

3

3

9

16

4

3

8

17

10

18

4

3

9

19

6

17

%

28

Extremely unacceptable - 5 63

68 67 67

64

49

July 07 Sept 07 Jan 08 July 08 Jan 09 Jan 09


Base: All respondents - July 07 (2,030), Sept 07 (1,993), Jan 08 (2,010), July 08 (2,014), Jan 09 (2,005), Jan 09 young male drivers (91)

The acceptability of driving after two pints changed little between all campaign stages among all adults. Over eight in ten respondents (83% in January 2009) believed it was unacceptable to drive after drinking two pints (a rating of 4 or 5), with two thirds considering it extremely unacceptable (64%, dropping back slightly from 67% in July 2008 to the baseline measure of 63% in July 2007). The number of respondents who found this behaviour acceptable (a rating of 1 or 2) has also remained stable since the July 2007 pre stage at just over one in twenty

(7% at latest burst).


Young male drivers were less likely overall to find driving after drinking two pints unacceptable (77% compared with 83% of all drivers) and especially less likely to find the behaviour extremely unacceptable (49% compared with 62% of all drivers).

Men overall were less likely than women to judge driving after drinking two pints as extremely unacceptable (58% compared with 70% of women), as were younger respondents (56% of those aged 15 to 29 compared with 67% of respondents of other ages). Social grades ABC1 were also less likely to see this behaviour as extremely unacceptable (61% compared with 69% of C2DEs).

Perhaps predictably, those who don’t drink out of the home were more likely to believe that driving after two pints was extremely unacceptable (81% of non drinkers compared with 59% of those who drank alcohol out of the home).

As this measure has been used as a key performance indicator for the drink drive campaigns, data for drivers have been collected over time (Chart 5d).

Chart 5d: Acceptability of driving after drinking two pints (over time)

%

90

80 76

74

70

71

76

73

60

50

40

30

58

Unacceptable - 4

Unacceptable - 5

19

20

13

10

14

13

12

15

0 a

J n

0

5

A p l ri

5

0 u

J ly

0

5

O c

0 t

5 a

J n

0

6

Base: All drivers (January 2009 – 2,005) u

J ly

0

6

60

20 a

J n

0

7

60

22

66

18 u

J ly

0

7 e

S t p

7

0

63

20 a

J n

0

8

63

20 u

J ly

0

8

64

19 a

J n

0

9

*significant decrease in those deeming the behaviour ‘extremely unacceptable’ between Jan 06 and

July 06 is likely to be a result of change in the way this question was asked (from part of a list of behaviours to a single measure)


The proportion of drivers who rated drink driving as slightly unacceptable (4 out of 5 on the scale – the bottom line in chart 5d), has remained fairly stable since

July 2006 at around one in five (19% in January 2009). The proportion of drivers who rated drink driving as extremely unacceptable (5 out of 5 on the scale – the top line in chart 5d), increased from 60% in July 2007 to 66% in September 2007 but dropped back down slightly in 2008, resting at 64% at the latest wave.


6 Consequences of drink driving

In this chapter, a focus is placed on the personal and social consequences of drink driving. As with the last chapter, measures for the latest drink drive campaign were benchmarked at the pre stage in July 2007. These measures were tracked again post the launch burst of the campaign in September 2007, post Christmas activity in January 2008, in July 2008 after the summer burst and then most recently in the latest wave in January 2009 to identify any shifts in awareness or attitudes that may be attributed to the new campaign focus.

6.1

Perceived likelihood of getting caught by the police

In the previous chapter, Chart 5a showed that almost nine in ten drivers believed they would be more likely to have an accident if they were to drink drive. A different outcome could be that the person would be caught in the act of drink driving before an accident even happens. Chart 6a shows the proportion of drivers aged 18 years and over who drink alcohol and 17 year old drivers (who could not be asked if they drank alcohol) who believed they would be likely to be caught by the police if they were to drink drive.

Chart 6a: Agreement with statement – If I were to drink and drive I would be likely to get caught by the police

Strongly agree

30

33

30

25

36 35

%

Slightly agree 28

34

27

30

32

32

Neither

Slightly disagree

19

16

Strongly disagree 6

July 07

16

15

17

13

6

3

Sept 07 Jan 08

15

18

5

July 08

15

25

14

12

4

Jan 09

2

Jan 09


Base: All drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol and 17 year olds – Jul 07 (978), Sept 07 (1,031), Jan 08 (1,065), July 08

(1,022), Jan 09 (1,043), Jan 09 Young male drivers (72)


In January 2008, two thirds (67%) of drivers who drank alcohol felt that they would be likely to be caught by the police if they were to drink drive, with one in three (35%) strongly agreeing. This is a return to levels seen in January 2008, higher than summer 2008 and summer 2007 (around six in ten agreed), which suggests that it is affected by seasonality, with a greater perceived police presence over the Christmas period.

The target group of young male drivers aged 17-29 were less likely than all drivers to agree that if they were to drink drive they would be likely to be caught by the police: six in ten (60%) agreed overall and one in four (25%) agreed strongly. There was, however, no difference between drivers aged 17-29 and drivers aged 30 years and over (67% of each age group agreed), the difference was between men and women overall: 75% of women agreed compared with

61% of men.

Drivers from the lower social grades (78% of C2DEs compared with 62% of

ABC1s) were also more likely to agree they would be caught by the police if they were to drink drive.

6.2

Likelihood of consequences of drink driving

Drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol were asked to rate how likely they felt it was that each of a list of ten consequences would happen if they were caught drink driving. Chart 6b shows the top three thought as very likely to happen. The remaining seven consequences are shown in Charts 6c, 6d and 6e.


Chart 6b: Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (1)

Young male drivers Jan-09

Jan-09

Your insurance cost would increase

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07


Your family/ partner would be disappointed

Jan-09

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

81

81

86

81

83

84

87

90

89

88

88

97

%

3

11 1 1

9

8 1 1

1 1 1

9

9

1 1 1

1 1 1

16

15

9

14

12

12

1 1

3 1

2 2 1

3 2

2 2 1

3 1 1


Jan-09

12 month driving ban

Very likely

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

Fairly likely

69

67

68

71

67

69

Not very likely Not at all likely Don't know

22

23

21

19

24

22

6

7

7

5

2

3

6 1 2

7 1 2

1 3

1 3

Base: All drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol – July 07 (967), Sept 07 (1,023), Jan 08 (1,062), July 08 (1,018), Jan 09 (1,038), Young male drivers (67)

Almost all drivers (98%) felt that, as a result of being caught drink driving, it would be likely that their insurance cost would increase. This has changed little over time. Young male drivers were more likely to think it was very likely that their insurance cost would increase (97% compared with 87% of all drivers). Men were generally more likely to see this as very likely (89%, compared with 83% of women), whereas there was little difference by age of driver.

It was also the case that almost all drivers (96%) thought it would be likely that their family or partner would be disappointed if they were caught drink driving.

Eight in ten (81%) felt this was very likely, which was a slight drop from July

2008 (86%), but in line with January 2008. Views of young male drivers were very similar to drivers overall.

Nine in ten (91%) drivers felt it was likely that they would get a 12 month driving ban and two thirds (67%) felt this was a very likely consequence. This has remained relatively stable over time and young male drivers were similar to drivers overall. Those in social grades C2DE were more likely to think a 12 month driving ban was a very likely consequence than those in social grades ABC1 (74% compared with 63%).

33 BMRB Report THINK! Post Drink Drive February 2009

Chart 6c: : Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (2)


Jan-09

Jul-08

You would get a criminal record

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07 55

64

61

62

62

60

24

23

22

21

20

30 4 2 2

7 3 6

%

9 4 5

12

9

8 3 4

4 5

5 4


Your lifestyle would change dramatically

Jan-09

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

49

58

62

62

63

63

19

24

22

23

20

19

29

13

11

11

12

12

3

4

3

3

1

4 1

5 1

Very likely Fairly likely Not very likely Not at all likely Don't know


The proportion who thought it was very likely that they would get a criminal record if they were caught drink driving increased pre to post campaign from

55% in July 2007, peaking at 64% in January 2008. In January 2009, this stood at 62%. Overall, 85% felt this was a likely consequence, in line with January

2008 (84%), and above the pre campaign measure of 79%. Young male drivers were no more likely than all drivers to think getting a criminal record was a very likely consequence (62%) but a slightly higher proportion felt it very or fairly likely (92%). Belief that this was likely tended to drop with age, from 90% of 18-

29s, falling to 79% of those aged 55 and over.

There was a slight fall in the proportion who believed it was very likely that their lifestyle would change dramatically as a result of being caught drink driving: 58% in January 2009, down from 62-63% at previous waves of research, including the pre stage in July 2007. However, the proportion who felt this was likely overall has remained relatively unchanged (82% in January 2009). Young male drivers were much less likely to think that being caught drink driving would dramatically change their lifestyle: 49% thought this was very likely and 68% thought it was likely overall. There was little difference overall by gender; it tended to be younger drivers generally (rather than specifically young male drivers) who were


less likely see a dramatic change in lifestyle as a likely consequence of being caught drink driving (71% of 18-29s compared with 84% of those aged 30 and over).

Chart 6d: : Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (3)


Jan-09

It would be harder to get a job or keep your job

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

46

46

45

49

48

58

29

26

27

26

28

21

14

18

16

12

11

14

11

%

11 2

8 3

9 2

8 2

8 4


Your drink driving conviction would be recorded on your licence for 11 years

Jan-09

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

33

34

34

34

33

39

27

38

22

28

24

23

14

19

10

7

7

18

12

13

6

7

15

17

17

17

20

7

8 16

Very likely Fairly likely Not very likely Not at all likely Don't know


Three quarters (75%) of drivers, unchanged from previous waves, believed that it was likely that it would be harder to get a job or keep their job, a key personal consequence mentioned in the campaign. Young male drivers were more likely than drivers overall to think this was a very likely consequence (58% compared with 49% of all drivers).

The summer 2008 campaign included the new message that a drink driving conviction would be recorded on your licence for 11 years, and in July 2008 the proportion who believed this was a very likely consequence increased from 34% to 39%. This message was not repeated as part of the Christmas 2008 activity and the proportion who felt that an 11 year record on their licence was a very likely consequence returned to previous levels of around one in three (34% in

January 2009). Young male drivers were no more likely to see this as a very likely consequence, but were more likely to view it as likely overall (71%


compared with 61% of all drivers). Overall, men were more likely than women to think this was a likely consequence (65% compared with 57%).

Chart 6e: : Likelihood of consequences of being caught drink driving (4)


Jan-09

You would have to sell your car

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07


Jan-09

Jul-08

Up to £5000 fine

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

34

31

30

32

26

31

30

31

30

31

31

46

20

21

22

23

23

24

30

32

31

29

27

32

26

27

26

25

30

20

20

18

12

18

20

28

19

21

25

22

24

19

6

8

2 5

15

8

7

8

6 8

9

11

%

2

1

2

2

1

2


Jan-09

Up to 6 months imprisonment

Very likely

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

18

19

16

18

14

26

Fairly likely

28

29

27

29

29

Not very likely

31

Not at all likely

37

33

37

38

35

23

Don't know

13

12

13

12

11

11

6

6

7

6

8

5


Half (52%) of drivers thought it likely that they would have to sell their car as a result of being caught drink driving, holding the increase on the pre campaign measure (46%). Three in ten (31%) felt this was a very likely consequence.

There was no real difference between young male drivers and drivers generally.

Those in social grades C2DE were more likely than ABC1s to see selling their car as a likely consequence of being caught drink driving (61% compared with 47%).

This may be because they are less well equipped to deal with the financial implications of being caught drink driving, such as a fine or an increase in insurance costs.

Six in ten (60%) believed a fine of up to £5,000 was likely, unchanged from previous waves. Young male drivers were more likely to see this as a likely consequence (74%) and also to find it very likely (46%, compared with 30% of all drivers). Overall, both men and young drivers were more likely to think a fine of up to £5,000 was a very likely consequence (34% of men compared with 26% of women and 38% of 18-29s compared with 29% of those aged 30 and over).


The Christmas 2008 campaign contained the message that if you are caught drink driving you could end up in prison. This may just be for a short period of time, such as 24 hours or overnight, in order to ‘cool down’, but up to six months imprisonment is also a possibility. However, there was no change in the proportion of drivers who felt it was likely (47%) or very likely (18%) that they would have to face up to six months in prison. Young male drivers, who were the core target of the campaign, were more likely than all drivers to see this as likely

(57%) and also very likely (26%). There was little difference overall by gender, but younger drivers were generally more likely to think this was a likely consequence (55% of 18-29s, falling to 38% of those aged 55 and over) and also that it was very likely (24% of 18-29s, falling to 12% of those aged 55 and over).

6.3

Consequences most concerned about

After being asked how likely a number of consequences were as a result of drink driving, all drivers aged 18+ who drank alcohol were then asked to state which of a list of consequences they would be most likely to worry about (Chart 6f).

Chart 6f: Consequences of drink driving most likely to worry about (prompted) – over time

36%

Getting up to 6 months imprisonment

Getting a 12 month driving ban

Losing your job

Getting a criminal record

Getting up to a £5,000 fine

Disappointing your family/partner

Your lifestyle changing dramatically


2%

Your insurance cost increasing

Having to sell your car

1%

1%

1%

1%

3%

11%

16%

15%

19%

17%

10%

11%

15%

7%

7%

4%

6%

5%

8%

10%

3%

5%

8%

10%

12%

15%

Jan-09

Jul-08

Jan-08

Sep-07

Jul-07

Base: All drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol – July 07 (967), Sept 07 (1,023), Jan 08 (1,062), July 08 (1,018), Jan 09 (1,038)

As at previous waves, the drink drive consequences that drivers would most worry about happening to them were related to legal implications. These were a


prison sentence, chosen by just over a third (36%) drivers who drink alcohol, followed by a 12 month driving ban (16%). The possibility of gaining a criminal record was stated by 11%, while 7% were most likely to worry about a £5,000 fine. There has been no change in any of these in the most recent wave, in particular the worry of getting up to six months imprisonment (a new message in the Christmas 2008 campaign) has not changed, but the increase recorded between September 2007 and July 2008 has been maintained.

Of the more personal consequences, the one which most drivers were most likely to worry about was losing their job (16%). One in twenty (6%) said they would be most worried about their family or partner being disappointed. This has remained stable since January 2008 (4%), but is lower than in September 2007

(10%). The proportion of drivers who were most likely to worry about a dramatic change in their lifestyle has been gradually falling, from 10% pre campaign in

July 2007, down to 3% in January 2009.

In line with previous waves, only a handful of drivers were most likely to worry about a drink drive conviction being recorded on their licence for 11 years, their insurance cost increasing or having to sell their car.

Chart 6g: Consequences of drink driving most likely to worry about (prompted) – young male drivers vs. all drivers

Getting up to 6 months imprisonment

Getting a 12 month driving ban

Losing your job

Getting a criminal record

Getting up to a £5,000 fine

Disappointing your family/partner

1%

6%

16%

7%

11%

12%

16%

17%

22%

6%

Your lifestyle changing dramatically


3%

2%

1%

Your insurance cost increasing

1%

Having to sell your car

1%


All drivers Jan-09

35%

36%

Base: Jan 09 - All drivers aged 18+ who drink alcohol (1,038), Young male drivers (67)


As with all drivers, young male drivers were most likely to worry about getting up to six months in prison as a result of being caught drink driving (35%, in line with all drivers). Although younger drivers were most likely to worry about this (44% of 18-29s compared with 35% of those aged 30 and over), more women tended to worry about it than men (42% compared with 32%).

Young male drivers were more likely than all drivers to worry about losing their job (22% compared with 16%), getting a criminal record (17% compared with

11%) and getting up to a £5,000 fine (12% compared with 7%). They were less likely to worry about getting a 12 month driving ban (6% compared with 16%) and disappointing their family or partner (1% compared with 6%).


APPENDIX A: Sample Profile

Driving status

In order to identify drivers, all respondents were asked whether they drove a car, van or motorcycle at least once a month.

Chart A1: Driving Status

77% Yes - car/van mainly for leisure use

Yes - car/van equally for work/leisure use

Yes- car/van mainly for work use

Yes - motorbike mainly for leisure use

2%

1%

Yes - motorbike equally for work/leisure use

#

2%

Yes - motorbike for work/business use

#

1%

9%

14%

8%

5%

No don't drive nowadays

57%

32%


All respondents

Base: All respondents (2,005), Young Male Drivers (91)

Two thirds (68%) of respondents were drivers. This is in line with previous waves of research. Over half (57%) of all respondents drove a car mainly for leisure use.

One in ten (9%) used a car or van equally for work and leisure use, and 5% drove a car or van mainly for work.

As at previous waves, men were more likely than women to be drivers (76% of men drove compared with 60% of women), as were those in the higher social grades (77% of ABC1s drove, compared with 57% of C2DEs).

Amongst young male drivers just over three quarters (77%) drove a car or van mainly for leisure, around one in six (14%) drove a car or van equally for work and leisure use and a further one in ten (8%) drove a car or van mainly for work.


Drinking alcohol out of the home

All respondents aged 18 and over were asked how often they drank alcohol at a friend’s house, in a pub, club, or restaurant.

Chart A2: Frequency of drinking alcohol out of the home

More than once a week

Never drink alcohol

10%

22%

18%

About once a week

Never drink away from home

7%

12%

18%

12%

Less than once a month

Two or three times a month

About once a month

Base: All respondents aged 18 years and above (1,952)

Never drink alcohol

21%

Never drink away from home

Less than once a month

About once a month

5%

6%

10%

11%

17%

30%

More than once a week

About once a week

Two or three times a month

Base: Young male drivers aged 18-29 years (86)


Seven in ten (70%) respondents aged 18 and over drank alcohol away from home and two in ten (22%) answered that they did not drink at all. A minority

(7%) said that they never drank alcohol away from home.

Two in ten (18%) drank alcohol about once a week, with one in ten (10%) drinking more than once a week. One in four (24%) drank one to three times a month, and 18% less than once a month.

Men were more likely to drink out of the home (76% compared with 65% of women), as were those in the higher social grades (77% of ABC1s compared with

62% of C2DEs). Those aged 45-54 were more likely to drink out of the home than those in other age groups (78% compared with 69%).

Two in ten (21%) young male drivers never drank alcohol, and one in twenty

(5%) never drank out of the home. Half (47%) drank once a week or more often, just over one in ten (11%) drank two or three times a month, 10% about once a month and 6% less than once a month. Young male drivers, therefore, were more likely to drink more frequently when compared with all respondents (47% compared with 28% drinking once a week or more often).


Commercial radio listenership

Commercial radio listenership is shown in Chart A3.

Chart A3: How often listen to commercial radio

More than 15 hours a week

5 to 15 hours per week

11%

7%

44%

39%

Less than 5 hours a week

Base: All respondents (2,005)

More than 15 hours a week

5 to 15 hours per week

16%

9%

29%

Do not listen to commercial radio

Do not listen to commercial radio

45%

Less than 5 hours a week

Base: Young male drivers (95)


Over four in ten (44%) respondents did not listen to commercial radio stations.

Four in ten (39%) were defined as light listeners (less than 5 hours per week),

11% were medium listeners (5 to 15 hours) and 7% were heavy commercial radio listeners (more than 15 hours per week).

Men were more likely to listen to commercial radio than women (61% compared with 51%), as were those aged 54 and under (66% compared with 38% of those aged 55 and over).

Young male drivers were more likely to listen to commercial radio than the general population (71%, compared with 57% of other drivers and 56% of all respondents). One in ten (9%) young male drivers listened to more than 15 hours per week (heavy listeners), one in six (16%) were medium listeners (5-15 hours per week), and just under half (45%) were light commercial radio listeners, listening to 5 hours or less a week.


APPENDIX B – Sampling Method

The sampling technique used in this survey is a tightly controlled form of random location sampling developed within BMRB, and is the basis of most consumer surveys which BMRB conducts.

The aim of random location sampling is to eliminate the more unsatisfactory features of quota sampling without incurring the cost and other penalties involved in conducting surveys according to strict probability methods.

One of the principal advantages of probability techniques of sampling is that selection of respondents is taken from the hands of interviewers. In conventional quota sampling, on the other hand, interviewers are given quotas to fill, usually from within specified administrative areas. When, for example, an interviewer is asked to complete a quota of AB respondents, she will tend to go to a part of the district where she knows such individuals to be available. AB individuals living in mixed social class areas will have little chance of inclusion. This and similar defects lead to biases which are concealed by superficial agreements between sample profiles and accepted standard statistics.

The principal distinguishing characteristic of random location sampling, as operated by BMRB, is that interviewers are given very little choice in the selection of respondents. Respondents are drawn from a small set of homogenous streets, selected with probability proportional to population after stratification by their

ACORN characteristics and region. Quotas are set in terms of characteristics which are known to have a bearing on individuals' probabilities of being at home and so available for interview. Rules are given which govern the distribution, spacing and timing of interviews.

The sample of areas takes as its universe all sample units (groups of Census 2001

Output Areas, on average, 300 households) in Great Britain. Output areas are stratified in the following manner:

(ii) Within Standard Region - by Acorn type

(iii) Within Standard Region by County and ITV Region

Thus, the design is single stage, using direct selection of appropriate groups of

Output areas, rather than taking streets at random from larger units such as wards or parishes.


APPENDIX C: Weighting Procedures

The data are weighted to ensure that demographic profiles match those for all adults in Great Britain aged 15 or over. A rim weighting technique is used in which target profiles are set for eight separate demographic variables. The computer system then allocates a weight to each individual such that the overall composition of the sample is balanced in terms of the targets set.

The actual weights applied thus vary slightly between surveys; precise figures for specific cases are available from BMRB if required.

Target Weights Applied

Sex 1

%

Men 48.55

Women without children

Women with children

32.65

18.80

Sex 2

%

Men working full time 25.63

Men not working full time

Women working at all

Women not working at all

22.92

24.08

27.37

Age within Sex


Social Grade within Sex

Standard Region

%

Scotland 8.68

North West 10.79

North 5.24

Yorkshire/Humberside 8.65

East Midlands

East Anglia

South East

Greater London

7.37

3.95

19.52

12.84

South West 8.80

Wales 5.08

West Midlands 9.08

(Source of profile data: BMRB Target Group Index, 2007 and NRS, 2007)


APPENDIX D: Questionnaire

A4

A3

DD11

DD11

Question

Do you drive a car, van or motorcycle nowadays, at least once a month?

Yes, a car or van mainly for leisure/personal use

Yes, a motorcycle mainly for leisure/personal use

Yes, a car or van for work/business use

Yes, a motorcycle for work/business use

Yes, a car or van equally for leisure/work use

Yes, a motorcycle equally for leisure/work use

No, don’t drive nowadays

DK

How often, if at all, do you drink alcohol away from home, that is at a friend's house, in a pub, club or restaurant?

More than once a week

About once a week

Two or three times a month

About once a month

Less than once a month

Never away from home

Never drink alcohol

DK

Agreement with statement –

‘driving after having one or two drinks would make me more likely to have an accident’

Agree strongly

Agree slightly

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree slightly

Disagree strongly


‘if I were to drink and drive I would be likely to get caught by the police’

Agree strongly

Agree slightly


Disagree slightly

Disagree strongly


R1b

R1

R3

NDD2


‘it is safe to drive after one drink’

Agree strongly

Agree slightly


Disagree slightly

Disagree strongly


‘it is safe to drive after two drinks’

Agree strongly

Agree slightly


Disagree slightly

Disagree strongly

On a scale of 1 to 5, where a score of 1 means you think the behaviour is fairly acceptable and a score of 5 means it is extremely unacceptable, how acceptable do you think it is for people to

drive after drinking two pints?

1 Fairly acceptable

2

3

4

5 Extremely unacceptable

(DK)

If you were to be caught drink driving, how likely do you think it would be that each of the following would happen?

Very likely, fairly likely, not very likely, not at all likely, don’t know

You would get up to a £5000 fine.

You would get a 12 month driving ban

You would get up to 6 months imprisonment

You would get a criminal record

It would be harder to get a job or keep your job

Your insurance cost would increase

You would have to sell your car

My family/partner would be disappointed

Your lifestyle would change dramatically

'Your drink driving conviction would be recorded on your driving licence for 11 years'


NDD3 And which of the following would you be most likely to worry about happening?

Getting up to a £5000 fine.

Getting a12 month driving ban

Getting up to 6 months imprisonment

Getting a criminal record

Losing your job

Your insurance cost increasing

Having to sell your car

Disappointing your family or partner

Your lifestyle changing dramatically

'Your drink driving conviction would be recorded on your driving licence for 11 years'

Other (specify)


DD1

KYS2

DD3

Can I just check, have you seen or heard anything about drinking and driving in any of these ways?

01: National newspaper

02: Local newspaper

03: TV advert

04: TV plays\soaps

05: TV news

06: Other TV programmes

07: Radio advert

08: Radio programme

09: Magazine

10: Cinema

11: Poster on bus

12: Poster hoarding

13: Indoor poster

14: Signs at garages\service areas

15: Road signs

16: Through the internet\a website

17: Leaflet\booklet picked up

18: In the post\through the letterbox

19: At school

20: In the pub\beermats

21: On backs of lorries

22. Posters in pub toilets

23: Other (specify)

(None of these)

(DK)

What do you remember about the publicity and advertising for drinking and driving?

PROBE: What else?

PROBE FULLY

OPEN ENDED – FULLY RECORD VERBATIM

SHOW ‘MOMENT OF DOUBT’ TV AD (30 SECS)

Have you seen this advertisement on TV?

Yes

No

DK


R2

R3

DD7

R1a

Here are some things that other people have said about the advert I have just shown to you. Which of these do YOU personally feel about the advert? Please mention all that you agree with.

RANDOMISE ORDER

01: It told me something new

02: I'm tired of seeing it

03: It made me think about my own driving

04: It's aimed at people like me

05: I found it confusing

06: I found it irritating

07: It has made ME drive more carefully

08: It made me think about my own drinking

09: It sticks in my mind

10: It is the sort of ad I would talk about with other people

11: I like this ad

12: It made me think about the range of consequences of drink driving

13: It made me think about the impact that drinking and driving could have on my lifestyle

14: It made me think about the dangers of driving even after a small amount of alcohol

15: It will make me think twice before I drink and drive

(None of these)

(DK)

PLAY ‘NEW: CELL’ radio ad

Have you heard this advert on the radio?

Yes

No

DK

What do you think was the main message of the radio advert which I have just played to you?

(open ended – record verbatim)

What thoughts or feelings, if any, occurred to you when you heard this ad?

OPEN ENDED - Probe: What else?


NEW

POSTER

1

MA1

SHOW NEW IN DOOR POSTER AD 1 – LOCKED IN

Have you seen this poster recently?

Yes

No

Don’t know

How often do you listen to commercial radio stations? By that I mean radio stations that play adverts.

Do not listen to commercial radio

Less than 5 hours a week

5-15 hours a week

More than 15 hours a week

(DK)


THINK! Road Safety Campaign Evaluation

THINK! Road Safety Campaign Evaluation

Post evaluation of the ‘Personal Consequences’

Drink Drive campaign

Report

February 2009

Prepared for:

Department for Transport

Table of Contents

Index of Charts

1 Introduction

1.1

Research objectives and method

1.1.1

Drink Drive

1.2

Arrangement of this report

2 Management summary and recommendations

2.1

Introduction

2.2

Campaign awareness

2.3

Campaign communication

2.4

Attitudes towards drinking and driving

2.5

Consequences of drink driving

2.6

Conclusions and recommendations

3 Campaign awareness

3.1

Awareness of sources of publicity/advertising about drinking and driving

3.2

Proven recall

3.3

What was said – examples

3.4

Prompted recognition of Personal Consequences Drink Drive campaign

4 Campaign communication

4.1

Communication of the ‘Moment of Doubt’ TV ad

4.2

Believed main message of the ‘Cell’ radio ad

4.3

Thoughts or feelings about the ‘Cell’ radio ad

5 Attitudes towards drinking and driving

5.1

Perceived safety of drink driving

One Drink

Two Drinks

5.2

Perceived acceptability of drinking and driving

6 Consequences of drink driving

6.1

Perceived likelihood of getting caught by the police

6.2

Likelihood of consequences of drink driving

6.3

Consequences most concerned about

APPENDIX A: Sample Profile

Driving status

Drinking alcohol out of the home

Commercial radio listenership

APPENDIX B – Sampling Method

APPENDIX C: Weighting Procedures

Target Weights Applied

APPENDIX D: Questionnaire

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib