For this essay, the assignment was to evaluate a health campaign. This is why I chose the “You're a cow if you stunt with fireworks” campaign because of the controversy that has arisen about this. The campaign fits the assignment well because it highlights multiple message factors. Rated 8.8.
Description of the campaign
In 1975, the firework campaign 'je bent een rund als je met vuurwerk stunt' was launched in
the Netherlands. This initiative was led by Stichting Ideële Reclame (SIRE), an independent
foundation established by the collective communication industry in 1967. The campaign ran from
1975 to 2000 but adopted the distinctive name 'je bent een rund als je met vuurwerk stunt' in 1989,
earning its place as one of SIRE's most impactful initiatives (SIRE, n.d-a).
The fireworks campaign was primarily targeted at the youth demographic and had the aim to
reduce firework-related injuries from irresponsible usage (Onkenhout, 2020). Still to this day,
hundreds of victims die or suffer due to irresponsible fireworks usage (VeiligheidNL, 2023). The
campaign garnered substantial attention over the years with its compelling slogans and impactful
visuals in television commercials and online posters (see Appendix A).
The campaign operates within the realm of primary prevention, as it aims to intervene before
any health effects manifest, particularly stemming from risky behaviors associated with a health
condition (Kisling, 2023). The campaign strives to educate individuals about the consequences of
irresponsible fireworks use, including potential health issues like the loss of hands or fingers.
Description of the message factor(s) in the campaign
As most of the campaign material consists of shocking imagery, it corresponds with the
message factor of fear appeal. Fear appeal is defined as: ‘persuasive messages that attempt to arouse
fear by emphasizing the potential danger and harm that will befall individuals if they do not adopt the
messages’ recommendations’ (Dillard, 1996; Maddux & Rogers, 1983; Ruiter, 2014). One of the two
predominant theories behind fear appeals is the extended parallel process model (EPPM) by Witte
(1992). The EPPM aims to guide the development of health messages, such as fear appeals, for
behavior change (Hatchell et al., 2013). In the EPPM, several constructs are centralized, including
message components, perceived threat, perceived efficacy, message appraisals, and outcomes (see
Appendix B) (Popova, 2012; Witte & Allen 2000). According to the EPPM, fear appeals consist of
two central components: a threat component and an efficacy component (Mongeau, 2013; Popova,
2012). This campaign only focuses on the threat component, consisting of perceived susceptibility and
perceived severity. Perceived susceptibility is the extent to which an individual believes they are
susceptible to personally experiencing the threat. Perceived severity is the belief about the seriousness
of the consequences of the threat (Popova, 2012). The appraisal of the perceived threat shapes the
outcome of the fear appeal (Popova, 2012; Witte & Allen, 2000)
The link between the definition and theory lies in how fear appeals leverage the components
of threat and efficacy to influence individuals’ perceptions and motivate behavioral responses to the
message components.
In the 'je bent een rund als je met vuurwerk stunt' campaign, emphasis is placed solely on the
aspect of threat, conveyed through both textual and visual elements. The severity of the consequences
1
, is illustrated by depicting hands with nine or no fingers, highlighting the inability to perform sign
language or hold a cigarette effectively (see Figures 3 and 5). Additionally, textual information is
utilized to underscore the prevalence of health risks associated with irresponsible fireworks usage,
further accentuating the severity of the issue (see Figure 5). The campaign emphasizes susceptibility
to hand mutilation by showcasing images of young men who have lost multiple fingers, thereby
highlighting the heightened vulnerability of this specific demographic (see Figures 2 and 3). As the
campaign primarily focuses on the perceived threat, there is a notable absence of emphasis on the
perceived efficacy. The campaign fails to provide examples of recommended preventive behaviors to
mitigate the health risks associated with irresponsible fireworks usage. In evaluating perceived threat,
one message appraisal may lead to two potential outcomes to fear appeal messages: no response or
fear control response (Popova, 2012; Witte & Allen, 2000)
Two of the most important determinants for behavior change are attitude and intention
(Zebregs, 2014). This campaign seeks to alter people’s attitude towards the irresponsible use of
fireworks by using shocking imagery that illustrates the health consequences. By demonstrating the
health consequences with the specific examples of irresponsible use of fireworks, a negative belief
towards this behavior can be the result. This belief can result in the intention to not participate in
certain behavior, which is in this case irresponsible use of fireworks. Therefore, in this instance,
attitude influences intention, as the negative attitude fostered by the display of shocking imagery
dissuades people from intervening in the irresponsible use of fireworks.
Reflection on the effectiveness of the message factor
The literature generally supports the effectiveness of fear appeals, showing that they tend to
be successful for most audiences and in most circumstances (Mongeau, 2013; Tannenbaum et al.,
2015). The study of Tannenbaum et al. (2015) has established a positive correlation between fear
appeals and changes in attitude, intention, and behavior. However, various factors influence the
efficacy of fear appeals. Firstly, the strength of the fear appeal plays a role. The study of Witte &
Allen (2000) has shown that the stronger the fear appeal, the greater the fear aroused, the greater the
severity of the threat perceived, and the greater the susceptibility to the threat perceived. Since the
campaign material of this campaign was not pretested, no statement can be made regarding the
strength of the fear appeal. Secondly, for a fear appeal to be persuasive, the campaign must not only
convey the threat but also indicate how the audience can avoid it (Mongeau, 2013). Looking back at
the EPPM, this means that the campaign must focus on both the threat component and the efficacy
component. When a campaign effectively incorporates both components, it heightens the perceived
threat- and efficacy, resulting in a shift towards danger control and subsequent changes in attitudes,
beliefs, intentions, and behaviors.
When employing a fear appeal, the intended outcome is typically danger control, as it
encourages individuals to actively address and eliminate the threat (Popova, 2012). According to the
2
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller lmterra. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $14.01. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
