SOCIAL NORMS 101
AN INTRODUCTION TO
THEORY AND RESEARCH
SOCIAL NORMS APPROACH TO
AT-RISK BEHAVIOR PREVENTION
An increasingly popular universal prevention
technique based upon sociological/psychological
theory and supported by an extensive empirical
study
 An “environmental” approach based upon sharing
accurate information with students
 Compatible with other prevention strategies

PURPOSE OF THIS PRESENTATION
Introduce the theoretical and research
underpinnings of social norms strategies and the
reasons they work
 Help identify the best way to use the social
norms approach as described in the Social Norms
Tool Kit with your students
 Provide practical implementation advice for
developing a local social norms campaign
 Provide information on evaluating the success of
a school’s social norms campaign

SOME DEFINITIONS
Social Norms Approach: a proactive prevention
program that communicates the “truth about
peer norms in terms of what the majority of
students actually think and do, all on the basis of
credible data drawn from the student population
that is the target.” (Perkins, 2003).
 Misperception: the “gap between the perceived
and the actual.”
 Bullying: “systematically and chronically
inflicting physical hurt and/or psychological
distress on one or more students” (National
Education Association, 2008).

SOME DEFINITIONS, CONT.
Bullying: “systematically and chronically
inflicting physical hurt and/or psychological
distress on one or more students” (National
Education Association, 2008).
 Binge Drinking or Heavy Episodic Drinking: The
consumption of four or five drinks in a row in a
short period of time.

AN ENVIRONMENTAL FOCUS

Contemporary, evidence-based prevention
strategies emphasize the importance of
environmental strategies for effecting positive
behavior change
THE THEORY BEHIND SOCIAL
NORMS STRATEGIES

Our behavior is influenced by our perceptions of
what others think and do … BUT
These perceptions are often inaccurate
 If we can correct the “misperceptions” that exist, over
the course of time behavior should reflect the more
accurate (and healthier) norms

EVIDENCE FOR THE IMPACT OF
NORMS ON BEHAVIOR

Social Comparison Theory:
We continuously compare ourselves to others in
our social group. If discrepancies exist, we
become motivated to reduce the discrepancies,
thus, bringing our behavior into congruence with
the norm, Festinger (1957).
SOCIAL COMPARISONS ARE OFTEN
BIASED


“Pluralistic ignorance”…Everybody else is
different from me! I am the only one who is NOT
doing it…(“Gee, I’d better do it.”)
But in reality there is typically much greater
similarity between one’s self and others
SOCIAL NORMS MAY BE ESPECIALLY
INFLUENTIAL FOR YOUNG PEOPLE



Peers become increasingly influential starting
in late childhood (beginning at age 10 or so)
Peer group norms are likely to dictate much
pre-adolescent and adolescent behavior
Adolescents want and need to be accepted by
their peers, and will work toward this goal
THE REALITY OF MISPERCEPTIONS

Over 50 published studies document the
existence of misperceptions (National Social
Norms Institute, University of Virginia)

Earliest was Perkins and Berkowitz (1986) – College
students believed peer norms for alcohol consumption
were much higher than they actually were
A MORE SPECIFIC EXAMPLE

Perkins, Haines & Rice (2005);
76,145 college students from 140 colleges and
universities nationwide
 71% misperceived the amount of alcohol consumed by
peers, overestimating both the quantity consumed by
peers and the frequency with which they drank

MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
ARE SIMILARLY AFFECTED

Perkins and Craig (2003)
Web-based survey of 8,860 middle and high school
students
 Actual alcohol use in middle school was 7%;
Perceived use in middle school was 23%
 Actual use in high school was 29%;
Perceived use in high school was 60%

MISPERCEPTIONS ABOUT
BULLYING

Perkins and Craig (2006)




Survey of 578 middle school students
63% did NOT tease others; 83% believed that their
peers DID
74% did NOT push or hit others; 83% believed that
their peers DID
The gaps noted in the figures above clearly indicate
the existence of misperceptions in this population
WHY DO MISPERCEPTIONS EXIST?


The “vividness effect” – behavior that stands out
in some way is better remembered and more
often discussed
Media depictions and even educational material
perpetuate the notion that “everyone” is drinking
MISPERCEPTIONS AND BEHAVIOR
Empirical research confirms that misperceptions
correlate with behavior
 In a nationwide sample of college students,
student perception of the drinking norm was the
strongest predictor of personal consumption
(Perkins et al., 2005)
 Among 29,976 NJ college students surveyed from
1998-2007, those who misperceived the peer
norm as 7+ drinks were twice as likely to drink
heavily themselves (LaMastro & LaMastro, 2007)

MISPERCEPTIONS AND BEHAVIOR:
MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
“Higher peer perceptions of alcohol use were
associated with subsequent escalations of
personal drinking.” (HS students) (D’Amico et al.,
2001)
 Estimates of peer alcohol use predicted one’s own
alcohol use one year later (Marks et al., 1992)

THE KEY QUESTION:
Does reducing or correcting misperceptions change
behavior?
 Given sufficient time and a strong social norms
marketing campaign, research suggests that the
answer is “YES”
 Research with college students revealed a 10%
campus-wide decrease in high-risk drinking over
the campaign period (Perkins & Craig, 2002)
 The percentage of college students with Blood
Alcohol Content over .05% declined 8% during
the campaign period (Foss et el., 2003)
AMONG MS AND HS STUDENT


In the “MOST of us” campaign in Montana: 10%
of 12-17 year olds in the campaign counties
initiated smoking, versus 17% in control (noncampaign) counties
Reductions in high-risk drinking among MS
students was associated with accurate
perceptions of peer norms following a two-year
campaign,(Botvin et al., 2001)
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOLISM
AND ALCOHOL ABUSE:

“Initial results from programs adopting an
intensive social norms approach are promising.
Several institutions that persistently
communicated accurate norms have experienced
reductions of up to 20% in high risk drinking over
a relatively short period of time…together these
findings provide strong support for the potential
impact of the social norms approach.” (NIAAA,
pg. 13, 2002)
REFERENCES
Botvin, G.J., Sussman, S. & Biglan, A. (2001). The
Hutchison smoking prevention project: A lesson
on inaccurate media coverage and the importance
of prevention advocacy. Prevention Science, 2, 6770.
D’Amico, E.J. (2001). Progression into and out of
binge drinking among high school students.
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15, 341-349.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive
Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford,
CA.
REFERENCES
Foss, R., et al. (2004). Social norms program
reduces measured and self-reported drinking at
UNC-CH. The Report on Social Norms: Working
Paper #14. Little Falls, NH, Paper Clip
Communications.
 LaMastro, V. & LaMastro, R. (2007). Looking
back, looking forward: Social norms
programming at New Jersey state colleges and
universities, 1997 to 2007. Monograph, New
Jersey Higher Education Consortium.

REFERENCES
Marks, G., Graham, J.W., & Hansen, W.B.
(1992). Social Projection and Social Conformity
in Adolescent Alcohol Use: A Longitudinal
Analysis. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 18, 96-101.
 NIAAA (2002). How to Reduce High Risk College
Drinking: Use Proven Strategies, Fill Research
Gaps. Final Report of the Panel on Prevention
and Treatment, Task Force of the National
Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism. Washington, DC. National Institutes
of Health.

REFERENCES
Perkins, H.W. & Berkowitz, A.D. (1986).
Perceiving the community norms of alcohol use
among students: Some research implications for
campus alcohol education programming.
International Journal of the Addictions, 21, 961976.
 Perkins, H.W. (Ed.) (2003). The Social Norms
Approach to Preventing School and College Age
Substance Abuse. San Francisco, CA. JosseyBass.

REFERENCES
Perkins, H.W., Haines, M.P., & Rice, R. (2005)
Misperceiving the college drinking norm and
related problems: A nationwide study of exposure
to prevention information, perceived norms, and
student alcohol misuse. Journal of Studies on
Alcohol, 66 470-478.
 Perkins, H.W., & Craig, D.W. (2003). The
imaginary lives of peers: Patterns of substance
use and misperceptions of norms among
secondary school students. In The Social Norms
Approach to Preventing School and College Age
Substance Abuse. H.W. Perkins (Ed.), San
Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
