Babies Are Born To Be Breastfed: A Critical Review-Geetika Kalloo

Introduction

Breastfeeding is a beneficial practice for both mothers and infants and has been the focus of several recent public health interventions.[1] The focus of this critique are two advertisements released by the Department of Health and Human Services’ in their National Women’s Health breastfeeding campaign. The first featured two pregnant women who are competing in a log rolling tournament. Viewers watch as one of the pregnant women displaces the other, sending her plummeting into the water. The final shot of the women is with one woman celebrating her victory and the other being pulled out of the water in apparent dismay at her loss (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC1RAr52xFo).[2] The second advertisement is equally inappropriate. It features a pregnant woman at a “Ladies Night” in a rodeo bar. She is helped onto a mechanical bull by other pregnant women. She rides the bull with apparent glee for several seconds before she is thrown off. She jumps back up a big smile on her face (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM8NLxCXlp0&NR=1&feature =endscreen).[3] Both of the advertisements have the same voiceover and visual word prompts. They first question in words after the initial shot of the pregnant women participating in risky behaviors: “You wouldn’t take these risks before your baby was born. Why start after? Breast feed exclusively for 6 months.” It then follows with a voiceover message which states “Babies who are breastfed were less likely to develop ear infections, respiratory illness, and diarrhea. Babies were born to be breastfed!” [2, 3]

It is generally acknowledged that breastfeeding is one of the most complete forms of nutrition for infants, breast milk provides many benefits to infants’ health, immune system, and development.[4] Breastfeeding is inimitable source of food for a baby, and though many formulas have attempted to copy its nutritional qualities none have been completely successful. Many studies have demonstrated that breastfed children have increased immunity against disease and infection in their early childhood when compared to children who are formula fed. They are also less likely to contract a variety of diseases later in life, including juvenile diabetes, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, and cancer.[5]

Additionally, breastfeeding is also beneficial for the mother. Women who breastfeed have a decreased chance of developing osteoporosis later in life, have lower risks of breast, uterine, and ovarian cancer, and are able to lose weight gained during pregnancy with greater ease. Breastfeeding can also serve as a cost cutting method for young families. It is considerably more cost effective than buying formula. It also avoids medical bills associated with early childhood illnesses that infants are at greater risk for if they are formula fed.[6] Therefore, the goal of the Women’s Health campaign is well intentioned, but the campaign itself fails to effectively inform the viewer of any of the above mentioned benefits and risks. In fact the only emotions that the two advertisements manage to incite in viewers are of disgust and ridicule.

These two advertisements fail to properly address any of the benefits associated with breastfeeding. Rather they rely instead on ludicrous imagery which fails to serve any purpose. The predominant fault of this campaign is that it misapplies or utilizes outdated multiple public health theories. In analyzing these two advertisements it is clear that the Department of Health and Human Services has attempted to utilize the Health Belief Model, Theory of Reasoned Action and Social Expectations Theory. All three are well established models of public health change. However, the manner in which they are applied is not conducive with the subject matter at hand and therefore the campaign is ineffective. In order to better elucidate the flaws of the intervention an in depth review of this breastfeeding campaign is warranted.

Critique Argument 1- The Health Belief Model

The first fault of the Woman’s Health campaign is its use of the Health Belief Model (HBM). The HBM is a psychological model which attempts to predict behaviors related to health. The underlying theory of this model states that individuals make decisions after taking time to understand the perceived costs and perceived benefits of the health behavior, in this scenario breastfeeding.[7] The implications of the perceived benefits or harms are determined by how susceptible the target audience believes they are to the dangers outlined, and how severe they think the repercussion of the “incorrect” action would be. This model believes that individuals weigh both sides of the issue and come to a rational conclusion regarding the health behavior with the best outcome.[8]

Firstly, this campaign fails to correctly utilize the HBM. In order for the viewer to ascertain the perceived harms and perceived benefits of breastfeeding, they must be provided with complete and accurate information about the behavior. Both advertisements provide limited information about the benefits of breast milk. In fact they simply state a reduced risk of three minor ailments, whereas the benefits of the breastfeeding are far greater than these paltry reasons. Furthermore, viewers are provided with no actual perceived risks. In order for the HBM to work most effectively complete information about breastfeeding must be presented to the viewers. Without this mothers will be unable to fully weigh the perceived benefits and harms of the behavior. [8]

The creators of this campaign rely on the ridiculous scenarios in order to present the perceived risks associated with not providing a child with breast milk. They attempt to liken the harms of not breastfeeding with a pregnant woman being thrown of a mechanical bull or almost drowning. The fact of the matter is that the majority of woman formula feed their child at some point. In fact a study found that only 45% of infants were exclusively breastfed one week after being born.[9] Therefore, individuals know from the experience of others that not providing breast milk does not have the same dangers as a serious accident during pregnancy. Thus most individuals who view this commercial would discredit the entire campaign because it does not provide a sufficient number of perceived benefits and unrealistic perceived harms. The HBM is completely knowledge based, and seeks to provide information to individuals in order for them to assess their situation and make an appropriate decision.[10] But the implications regarding breastfeeding in this campaign are blatantly false and thus it is unsuccessful in part because the model is misapplied. They fail offer accurate information for mothers to utilize in making this decision.

If this campaign had more accurately used HBM, it would still fail to effectively convey its message. HBM is not a suitable model for an intervention regarding breastfeeding. It is an individual based model and stresses personal responsibility for health behavior. These commercials rely on the fact that it up to the woman to choose to breastfeed her child. This may lead people to feel it is they “fault” if they cannot are not capable of completing the action. Yet some women have to go back to work or are unable to produce breast milk, which are not factors that they have any control over. These advertisements would alienate rather than inform those individuals and make the campaign less successful.[7] Furthermore, HBM based interventions have been shown to work less effectively with decisions that are taken daily such as smoking, eating nutritiously, and exercising. Breastfeeding can be counted among these daily decisions as mothers can switch to formula at any point should it become too inconvenient to provide milk themselves. HBM assumes that what a person values and beliefs are static from one day to another. There is a complexity in making day to day decisions that is not accounted for in the HBM.[11] A mother might provide milk for her child while she’s on maternity leave but once she gets back to work, her priorities and perceived benefits and harms regarding the situation change. The information provided in this campaign using the HBM is not sufficient to persuade women continue with this positive health behavior.

Critique Argument 2-Theory of Reasoned Action

The use of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) in this intervention demonstrates that the creators believe that all individuals are rational and their behavior is determined by their intention to breastfeed. The TRA suggests that an individual’s behavior is determined by his intention to complete that behavior. Intention is defined as an individual’s readiness to perform a given health related action. An individual’s intention to complete an action is based on their attitudes towards that behavior, in our case breast feeding, as well as their perception of subjective norms associated with that activity.[12] Attitude in this scenario is derived from the sum and evaluation of an individual’s beliefs about breastfeeding. Subjective norms can be better understood as “the person's perception that most people who are important to him or her think he should or should not perform the behavior in question.”[13] The TRA component of this intervention is the explanation of positive outcomes for a child’s health to influence the attitudes of new mothers towards breastfeeding. They also attempt to use the mechanical bull riding and log rolling to demonstrate the subjective norms associated with formula feeding one’s child, in order to influence a woman’s intention to breastfeed her child.

As mentioned with the HBM critique this campaign fails to effectively provide many benefits or outline the harms associated with choosing to breast feed or formula feed. Therefore, TRA is not being properly utilized to influence the attitudes of the target audience or change how they view the subjective norms associated with this action. The campaign attempts to provide three potential health benefits to a child in comparison to a horrible accident to a pregnant woman. They expect women to evaluate the benefits and harms between the two scenarios. These advertisements may influence a woman’s attitude associated with log rolling during pregnancy or riding a mechanical bull, but the comparison is so ludicrous that it certainly will not change her attitude or influence her belief about how society views breastfeeding. Therefore this campaign fails to use TRA in order to change the intention of would-be mothers to breastfeed.

Furthermore, the use of the TRA in this particular scenario is flawed. “The aim of the TRA is to explain volitional behaviors. Its explanatory scope excludes a wide range of behaviors such as those that are spontaneous, impulsive, habitual, the result of cravings, or simply scripted or mindless. Such behaviors are excluded because their performance might not be voluntary or because engaging in the behaviors might not involve a conscious decision on the part of the actor."[14] Behaviors such as breastfeeding, which are habitual, do not fare well when targeted by a static model like the TRA because these decisions are not influenced by the same attitudes or subjective norms on a daily basis. It has also been shown that when a choice between alternatives exists, breastfeeding versus formula feeding, TRA functions much less effectively in creating intention. TRA functions best in a yes or no decision.[15] Therefore the TRA is not an appropriate mechanism to create the desired change in regards to breastfeeding.

Critique Reason 3- Misapplication of Social Expectation

This campaign relies most heavily on the Theory of Social Expectations. This paradigm relies on the fact that individuals’ behavior is dictated by social norms. Social norms are defined as the behavior patterns and expectation that people observe in the environment around them. Individuals comply with these behavioral patterns and beliefs without consciously engaging in them. In fact it has been "long argued that people tend to adopt group attitudes and act in accordance with group expectations and behaviors based on affiliation needs and social comparison processes, social pressure toward group conformity, and the formation and acquisition of reference group norms."[16] This implies that individuals generally prefer to conform to expectations of society rather than confront them. This is true regardless of whether these actions are concurrent with their belief systems, because most people place a high value on acceptance from their peers and society. Attitudes of groups can be changed en masse with first changing the behavior of the group and their beliefs regarding the action should follow suit.[17]

The Women’s Health campaign relies heavily on social expectations and norms surrounding motherhood. It appeals to the desire of women to be viewed as good mothers by society. As mentioned previously, the implications of the advertisements are that formula feeding your child is akin to log rolling or riding a mechanical bull whilst pregnant. The shock value of both these scenarios also attempts to elicit a reaction about the deviation from social norms. The commercials make it clear that it is not socially acceptable to participate in these risky behaviors during pregnancy. The intervention then attempts to draw a parallel between the disapproval that a woman would receive if she participated in these activities during pregnancy and if she chose to not breastfeed her child.

Social Expectations Theory is a perfectly legitimate model to use in case of a breastfeeding intervention. It is very likely that if women believed that society expected all mothers to breastfeed, we would see an increase the number of infants who exclusively given breast milk for the first 6 months of their lives. Unfortunately, this particular campaign blatantly misapplies this model. There is no doubt that the imagery in these advertisements will cause shock amongst the viewer. But because formula feeding is so common in society, women are fully aware that the social implications of not breast feeding one’s child are not as severe as those for willingly participating in the behaviors shown in these advertisements. In fact the stories presented in the Women’s Health Campaign only manage to reaffirm the societal condemnation regarding risky behavior and pregnancy. It fails to draw a parallel between those actions and breastfeeding. The social expectations paradigm is not at work within this campaign and only serves to add to the ludicrous nature of the commercial. Therefore their attempt at using Social Expectations Theory further adds to the ineffectiveness of this campaign.

Proposed Intervention

The goals of this campaign are quite noble and would benefit society greatly. In fact “widespread recommendations from health organizations encourage exclusive breastfeeding for six months.”[18] The Women’s Health Campaign would have been much more effective had they used different models to deliver their message. Therefore, the proposed intervention is a complete overhaul of the campaign presented by the Department of Health and Human Services. The goal behind the proposed intervention in to create change utilizing the irrational aspects of human nature, which studies have shown create greater change than those which are based on facts and statistics. This intervention is attempting to make group level change in behavior that will ultimately impact and change the attitudes that individuals have towards breastfeeding. This campaign will also be reliant of a series of commercials much like the Women’s Health intervention in order to reach the largest number of people. We will attempt to correctly apply Social Expectations Theory as well use Advertising Theory, Optimistic Bias and the Law of Small Numbers in order to produce the most effective campaign strategy. The target audience of this intervention are all women who are about become mothers and are physically capable of breastfeeding. My intervention techniques will positively enforce breastfeeding using stories that women can relate to and techniques that lead them to believe that breastfeeding is an expectation from all mothers.

Intervention 1- Proper Application of Social Expectation Theory

As mentioned in its critique Social Expectation Theory functions under the belief that norms outlined by society are the basis of how individuals determine what behavior is expected and acceptable in the environment in which they live. Social Expectations theory is a group level model which means that it attempts to make change by facilitating action amongst peer groups. Individuals can observe others in their environment participating in the positive behavior and follow suit whether or not their attitudes coincide with the actions they are taking.[17] Social expectations theory has been shown to be effective in several public health campaigns such as the use the seat belts in cars and the ban of smoking in Massachusetts bars and restaurants.[19]

In order to best use the Social Expectations paradigm with regards to breastfeeding we would focus on the positive health behavior that is expected of new mothers. Thus, rather than focusing on the disapproval one would receive for formula feeding their infant, the new campaign would focus on the respect and accolades one would receive for exclusively breastfeeding their child for six months. Our campaign would also emphasize the fact that the majority of mothers breastfeed with success, increasing the new mothers’ confidence that they could also complete this behavior.

The first series of advertisements of the new breastfeeding campaign would feature a variety of women from all different socioeconomic demographics breastfeeding children ranging from one to twelve months of age. Using a variety of women from different social demographic groups would emphasize the fact that individuals from all walks of life participate in this behavior. Enforcing the belief that breastfeeding is not specific to any particular group. We would show these actions occurring in a variety of “normal” places including at home, work, a park and other public places. The imagery would bring to light the fact it is easy and acceptable by society to breastfeed anywhere. All other individuals in the advertisement, who are present around the breastfeeding women, would have “Breastfed for X months” written on their shirts. The X would represent the number of months that the individual was supposedly breastfed. This would confirm that not only is it socially acceptable for new mothers to breastfeed but that also the majority of children are breastfed. Therefore utilizing the Social Expectations Theory in our campaign would encourage new mothers to believe that breastfeeding was the norm and increase the number of women who participate in this beneficial practice.

Intervention 2- Advertising Theory

Employing Advertising Theory to promote breastfeeding would significantly increase the effectiveness of the campaign. Advertising theory in public health implements the methods used by companies to sell products in endorsing positive health behaviors.[20, 21] Advertising theory uses print or TV media to tell a story with a promise of a positive health outcome and provide support, or evidence, for that promise. Both the promise and support are depicted through the imagery, dialogue or music in the advertisement, and attempt to elicit a response from the viewer based on their core values.[22] Core values can be defined as the deepest aspirations that individuals have, such as love, freedom, and independence etc. In the case of new mothers the proposed campaign will capitalize on the core value of maternal love and a mother’s desire to protect and nurture her child.[23]

Adoption of the Advertising theory is a more effective method of promoting breastfeeding than use of the Theory of Reasoned Action. The TRA believes that individuals behave in rational manner after weighing their personal beliefs and those of society, which has been demonstrated as an unsuccessful means of creating change in breastfeeding behavior. Advertising theory on the other hand capitalizes on the irrationality of individuals and the importance they place on their core values to effectively persuade them participate in positive health behaviors.[22] Unlike the TRA advertising theory does not rely on facts or statistics which are easy to disregard, but rather focuses on positive emotions to make promises that are easily relatable for the majority of people.[20]

The proposed campaign would also produce an advertisement in which mothers would we shown breast feeding their infants. The next shot would show the same woman twenty to thirty years later standing next to her son or daughter who in now the President of the United States, a famous scientist, or professional athlete etc. The promise of this campaign is that the benefits of breastfeeding are long reaching and promote development of the child so that they can grow up to accomplish great things. The support in these advertisements is provided the images of the aged mother standing next to her famous and successful child. The advertisement will be accompanied by a song that focuses on the beauty of the relationship between a mother and her child. This will emphasize the core value that is being expressed in the advertisement of maternal love. This commercial will provide essentially the same reasoning for breastfeeding as the Women’s Health campaign attempted with the use of the TRA, but this is more effective. Rather than stating bland facts, the new advertisement demonstrates the benefits of breast milk through compelling visual imagery. The use of advertising to convey a story, that takes advantage of core values and emotions of the audience, will lead to effective change in the perception of breastfeeding. This should result in an increased number of women participating in this positive health behavior.

Intervention 3- Utilizing Optimistic Bias and Law of Small Numbers

The final psychological models that the proposed campaign would utilize are the Optimistic Bias and the Law of Small Numbers. Optimistic bias theory states that when individuals are given facts and statistics about potential health risks they tend to believe that others fall within the risk but they are unlikely to be susceptible.[24] People generally over estimate the likelihood of positive outcomes and under estimate the chance of negative events. So individuals who are told that their children are at higher risk of disease if they are not breastfed are likely to consider this information more likely to be true for their peers rather than themselves.[25] Therefore, the information provided in the Women’s Health Campaign would be easily discredited by the viewer because they do not believe that they are susceptible to the harms outlined. Furthermore, the Law of Small Numbers explains that individuals are far more likely to believe a story told by one or a small group of individuals sharing personal experiences rather than a plethora of confusing statistics.[26]

The HBM provides facts and figures that attempt to explain the benefits and harms associated with breastfeeding. According to the Law of Small Numbers and the Optimistic Bias this method is ineffective in conveying information. Rather, it would be beneficial to provide an example of one woman who told her personal story regarding the positive impact that breastfeeding had on her child.[27] With this method it is possible to relay the same or even greater number of facts than presented in the Women’s Health campaign.

The new campaign would feature advertisements in which real mothers who had breastfed their children gave testimony to the fact that their children were far healthier than children who had been formula fed. Providing specific details about their experiences would make the stories seem more realistic and relatable for the target audience. This would in turn increase the validity of the advertisement. Utilizing a personal story, as suggested by the Law of Small Numbers, rather miscellaneous facts and statistics allows us to provide an increased amount of accurate information. Furthermore, this information is presented in a more appealing, relatable and effectual manner, and thus should persuade a greater number of women to breastfeed.

Conclusion

The new intervention is complete change from the campaign put forth by the Department of Health and Human Services. The proposed intervention attempts to make group level change utilizing Social Expectation Theory, Advertising Theory, and an understanding of the Optimistic Bias and Law of Small Numbers. Using these models allows us to put forth a campaign that is relatable and emotionally appealing for all women. It also emphasizes breastfeeding as a societal norm. Unlike the Women’s Health Campaign, our intervention does not rely on scare tactics, as those have been shown to be generally ineffective. This intervention attempts to modify behavior at the societal level, with an understanding that attitudes regarding breastfeeding will change as the practice becomes a usual occurrence amongst women.

References

1. L. Kaufman, S.D., A. Karpati, Breastfeeding or Formula? Women's Infant Feeding Experiences in North and Central Brooklyn. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Editor. 2009: New York City.

2. Department of Health and Human Services. Ad Council Breastfeeding PSA. National Women's Health Breastfeeding Campaign 2003 [cited; Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC1RAr52xFo.

3. Department of Health and Human Services. National Breastfeeding Campaign "Ladies Night" TV Advert National Women's Health Breastfeeding Campaign 2003 [cited; Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM8NLxCXlp0&NR=1&feature=endscreen.

4. CDC. Healthy People. 2010, Center for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, Georgia

5. M. Beaudry, R.D., S Marcoux, Relation between infant Feeding and infections during the first six months of life. Journal of Pediatrics, 1995(126): p. 191-197.

6. NRDC. Healthy Milk, Healthy Baby, National Resources Defense Coucil, Editor. 2005: New York City.

7. Champion, V.L., Instrument Development for Health Belief Model Constructs. Advances in Nursing Science, 1984(6 ): p. 73-85.

8. Rosenstock, I., Historical Origins of the Health Belief Model. Health Education Monographs, 1974. 2(4).

9. Martin, D. (2009) NHS' Obsession With Breastfeeding is Putting Bottle-Fed Babies at Risk. DailyMail Volume,

10. K. Glanz, B.K.R., F.M. Lewis, Theory at a Glance: A Guide for Health Promotion Practice 1997, National Institute of Health Bethesda.

11. M. Eisen, G.L.Z., A. L. Mcalister, A Health Belief Model-Social Learning Theory Approach to Adolescents' Fertility Control. Health Education Quarterly 1992. 19(2): p. 249-262.

12. Ajzen, I., From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior., in Action-control: From Cognition to Behavior, J.B. J. Kuhl, Editor. 1985, Springer: Heidelberg p. 1-63.

13. M. Fishbein, I.A., Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. . 1975, Reading: Addison-Wesley.

14. J.L. Hale, B.J.H., K.L. Greene, The Theory of Reasoned Action. , in The Presuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice, M.P. J.P. Dillard, Editor. 2003, Sage: Thousand Oaks. p. 259-286.

15. Sheppard, B.H., J. Hartwick, P.R. Warshaw, The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-Analysis of Past Research With Reccomendation for Modifications and Future Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 1998. 15: p. 325-343.

16. Perkins, H.W., Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol Misue in Collegiate Contexts. Journal of Studies in Alcohol 2002. 14: p. 164-172.

17. Sherif, M., Experiments in Norm Formation, in Classic Contributions to Social Psychology, R.G.H. E.P. Hollander, Editor. 1972, Oxford University Press: New York.

18. G.E. Becker, S.R., T. Remmington, Early Additional Foods and Fluids for Healthy Breastfed Full Term Infants in The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group.

19. Seigel, M., Social Expectations Theory, I.C. Lecture, Editor. 2011: Boston University.

20. W. Leiss, S.K., S. Jhally, Social Communications in Advertising: Person, Products and Images of Well-Being. 1990, New York Routledge

21. Lupton, D., Consumerism, Commodity Culture and Health Promotion. Health Promotion International 1994. 9(2): p. 111-118.

22. Steven M. Kates, C.G., Brand Morphing: Implications for Advertising Theory and Practice Journal of Advertising 2003. 32(1): p. 59-68.

23. Seigel, M., Advertising Theory, I.C. Lecture, Editor. 2011: Boston University.

24. Weinstein, N.D., Unrealistic Optimism About Future Life Events Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980. 39(5): p. 806-820.

25. D. Dunning, C.H., J.M. SUls Flawed Self-Assessment. Implications for Health, Education, and the Workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2004. 5(3): p. 69-106.

26. Rabin, M., Inference By Believers in the Law of Small Numbers. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2002. 117(3): p. 775-816.

27. G. Quattrone, E.E.J., The Preception of Variablity Within In-Groups and Out-groups: Implications for the Law of Small Numbers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980. 38(36): p. 141-152.

A Critique of the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign: Three Ways in Which the Campaign was Flawed- Rachel Bernier

Introduction

Breastfeeding is increasingly regarded to benefit the baby, mother and society. Breastfeeding benefits are so apparent that Healthy People 2o1o prioritized increasing breastfeeding rates as one of their goals (1). Additionally, the American Academy of Pediatrics highlighted the benefits of breastfeeding in its policy statement, “Breastfeeding and the use of human milk”(2). Studies show that infants who are breastfed have fewer occurrences of infectious disease, obesity, asthma, and several other health related outcomes (2). Breastfeeding also benefits the mother. Mothers who breastfeed are more likely to have a longer duration of time between the births of their children. They tend to have decreased bleeding after giving birth and a decreased risk of breast and ovarian cancers (2). Breastfeeding mothers benefit society because they are not producing waste from formula containers and infants who are breastfed are sick less often, resulting in lower health care costs (2). Furthermore, when an infant is sick less often, parents miss fewer days of work since they do not have to stay home to take care of a sick baby (2). Ultimately, Wolf (2007) states, “Human milk is the ‘gold standard’ when it comes to feeding babies” (3).

The Office of Women’s Health, a branch of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, launched the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign (NBAC) in June 2004 (4) . The campaign’s goal was to target first time mothers and African American mothers and convince them to breastfeed their infant (4-5). The campaign, and more specifically the media outreach campaign, consisted of several public service announcements in the form of television advertisements, radio advertisements, and print advertisements. The advertisements can be seen on the U.S. Office of Women’s Health website http://www.womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding/government-in-action/national-breastfeeding-campaign/#materials. The print advertisements displayed images of dandelions, ice cream or otoscopes and stated that babies should be breastfed exclusively for six months to reduce their risk of respiratory illness, obesity, and ear infections (4). The television ads showed either a pregnant woman log rolling or a pregnant woman riding a mechanical bull. The text on both television ads said “you wouldn’t take risks before your baby’s born, why start after” (4). The radio advertisements had two styles: a soul music song and a country music song (4). In each song, a man sang about the benefits of breastfeeding (4).

The NBAC intended to increase breastfeeding based on evidence suggesting healthier outcomes in breastfed babies, but the campaign had several flaws. First, the NBAC failed to address the barriers to breastfeeding that keep some mothers from breastfeeding their newborn baby. Second, the campaign did not address the fact that breastfeeding is not a social norm in this society, and is rarely portrayed in the media. Lastly, the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign did not deflect psychological reactance in their audience. The people used to deliver this message were not similar to the target audience.

Campaign did not address barriers to breastfeeding

The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign provided information regarding the many benefits of breastfeeding throughout their advertisements, but they failed to address the barriers to breastfeeding. Women may encounter several barriers, making breastfeeding difficult or inconvenient and this may cause these women not to breastfeed. A workplace that is not accommodating to breastfeeding mothers is an example of an environmental barrier that might discourage a woman from breastfeeding (5). A mother’s social group (family and friends) can be another barrier to breastfeeding if they are unsupportive of her decision to breastfeed (5). Since some women have difficulty breastfeeding, being surrounded by unsupportive people may discourage her from breastfeeding. Wolf (2007) states that the NBAC was not intended to be “supporting, or otherwise being sensitive to the concerns of women but rather an attempt to manufacture and exploit fear among pregnant women and new mothers” (3). The campaign provoked fear in women instead of addressing the barriers women may be facing.

Based on Bandura’s Social Learning Theory, public health campaigns must take into account the environment of the targeted individuals. The Social Learning Theory acknowledges that the environment plays a role in an individual’s decision to change a behavior or not (6). Moreover, the Social Learning Theory suggests that self-efficacy is a necessary component for a successful behavior change (6). An individual will not attempt a new behavior if they do not believe that they are capable of performing it (6). According to Grusec, people can gain self-efficacy “from observation of what others are able to accomplish” (6). However, women exposed to the NBAC were unable to achieve self-efficacy concerning breastfeeding in the workplace since the NBAC did not portray this in the ads. The NBAC failed to address the environment in the campaign and therefore mothers were unable to achieve self-efficacy.

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Perspective Theory also supports that it is critical to address the environment when trying to change a behavior (7 -8). This theory suggests that living conditions, neighborhoods and communities, institutions and social policies all play a role in one’s decision to change a behavior (7-8). The NBAC did not specifically influence multiple factors affecting a mother’s ability to breastfeed, specifically the workplace or social environment. A campaign that fails to address factors like the one’s included in the Ecological Perspective Theory will be unsuccessful in changing a behavior. The Ecological Perspective Theory shows that the NBAC campaign only focused on changing an individual’s “intrapersonal level factors” (8). The theory describes some of the intrapersonal factors as knowledge, attitude and beliefs (8). However, a crucial aspect of the theory is that a behavior is influenced by multiple levels of influence including not only intrapersonal level, but also interpersonal level and community level factors (8). The NBAC only addressed intrapersonal level factors (ie. Education) and therefore was unsuccessful.

Campaign did not address that breastfeeding is not a social norm

The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign was a media campaign, but it did not portray breastfeeding as a social norm or acknowledge that breastfeeding is not seen in the media in this society. The NBAC did not use any advertisements showing women breastfeeding, typical for today’s media. Television rarely depicts breastfeeding; babies are most often with a bottle. Many women feel uncomfortable breastfeeding in public because breastfeeding is not a social norm. Breastfeeding an infant can become quite challenging if a woman is uncomfortable to breastfeed in public. Since the NBAC did not acknowledge that breastfeeding is not a social norm in this society, the campaign was not as successful as it could have been.

According to the Social Learning Theory, people do what they see other people doing, often referred to as modeling (6). However, the NBAC advertisements did not actually depict women breastfeeding. Instead, the ads displayed women participating in log rolling, women riding a mechanical bull, and images of dandelions, ice cream and medical equipment (otoscopes). This campaign did not demonstrate the act that NBAC was established to encourage. This campaign suffered from this particular failure because people are likely to act in ways that they see other people acting. Since women are exposed to more images of babies being fed bottles than they are of babies breastfeeding, its sensible that breastfeeding is not more common. According to modeling, women who viewed the NBAC ads were more likely to ride mechanical bulls and participate in log rolling than they were to breastfeed (6).

Schultz et al (2007) suggest that social norms are an incredibly strong indicator of behavior (9). Many successful public health campaigns have recognized this and adopted a campaign method called social-norms marketing (9). Social-norms marketing campaigns work to impact the true social norms of a behavior instead of merely educating people on the benefits of the behavior (9). According to Schultz et al, people overestimate how common undesired behaviors are and they compare their own behaviors to those of their peers (9). Therefore, campaigns led by the social-norms marketing approach show people that a behavior is more common than they may have thought. This information causes people to be more likely to adopt the suggested behavior (9). However, the NBAC did not affirm breastfeeding as a social norm or convince people that it is more prevalent then they may think. Ultimately, the targeted women were unlikely to embrace the behavior of breastfeeding since they were not reassured that it was socially acceptable.

The Theory of Planned Behavior recognizes that people consider how they will be perceived by others before behaving in a particular manner (8). Not everyone supports breatfeeding, which is evident since it is not portrayed in the media and not always welcomed in public settings. Many women are influenced by the opinions that individuals in their lives hold concerning breastfeeding. According to the Theory of Planned Behavior, if these women do not feel that breastfeeding will be perceived positively by others, they will not breastfeed (8). The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign had insufficient results because their ads did not address this.

Campaign did not deflect reactance by having the message delivered by someone similar to the target audience

The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign’s goal was to increase the breastfeeding rates in first time mothers and in African American mothers (5). However, the advertisements did not suggest that these particular groups of women were the target of the intervention. When the recipient of a behavior change message believes that the message is threatening their freedom they display reactance and do the opposite of the message or merely ignore it (11). One way to avoid Psychological Reactance is by having the message delivered by someone with similarities to the recipient of the message (10-11). The NBAC’s advertisements were not delivered by a messenger similar to the target audience. The print ads were not even depictions of people, they were objects. The radio ads were delivered by singing men and the television ads were delivered by pregnant women partaking in strange activities. The NBAC did not display any breastfeeding mothers. Based on the Psychological Reactance Theory this may have caused reactance in the women viewing the ads and caused them to not breastfeed.

The Social Learn Theory also suggests that the role of the messenger is crucial (6). The theory acknowledges that the source of a message must be in some way attractive to the audience of the message (6). If the deliverer of the message is not attractive to the audience then they must possess a form of power that compels the recipient of the message to be interested (6). The audience will lack attention if a message is delivered without a powerful or attractive messenger. It can be argued that individuals are attracted in some way to people that have similar characteristic as themselves (12). Since the NBAC failed to use a source of the message that had similarities to the recipient of the message, the recipients were not receptive.

Additionally, individuals are more likely to try a behavior that they can picture themselves doing (13). This is referred to as self-referencing (13). Since the NBAC’s advertisements did not display breastfeeding women with similarities to the target audience, the target women were unable to self-reference. Because these women were unable to imagine themselves breastfeeding when viewing the ads, they were unlikely to breastfeed as a result of the ads (13). The campaign failed to include characters in the ads that the viewers could relate to, this was extremely apparent in the radio ads, which were sung by men.

The article “Is Breast Really Best? Risk and Total Motherhood in the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign,” suggests that the NBAC’s attempt to target African American women was unsuccessful (3). The campaign tried to target these women by using an African American woman in one of the television ads and by the genre of music in the radio ads (3). While the NBAC’s intention may have been the opposite, Wolf’s suggestions raise questions about stereotyping. Ultimately, the campaign would have been more successful if it had put in a much greater effort to learn about the culture of their target populations (11). If the NBAC researched the cultures of their target audience it would have been able to use people to deliver the message that were similar to the target audience, this would have deflected reactance (11).

Proposed Intervention

The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign had several flaws that reduced its success, but the motivation for the campaign was very important. The U.S. Office of Women’s Health was aware that increasing breastfeeding rates would benefit babies, mothers and society. According to Merewood and Heinig (2004), one goal of Healthy People 2010 was for 75% of mothers to initiate breastfeeding and for 50% of mothers to breastfeed their baby for six months (5). However, the NBAC was not able to increase the breastfeeding rates to the desired values. A more thorough intervention will need to be designed in order for breastfeeding rates to increase in the targeted population, striving for the Healthy People goal.

In order to reach women who were uninfluenced by the NBAC, a new intervention will be designed to promote breastfeeding in first time mothers and African American mothers. The new intervention will be multi faceted with the goal to provide mothers with the necessary support, education and convenience that is needed to breastfeed. One aspect of this intervention will be implemented during prenatal care and early pediatric doctor’s appointments. This will offer women a way to obtain knowledge concerning the importance of breastfeeding and the technical support to breastfeed successfully. The mother’s primary support group (family and friends) will also be educated at these doctors’ visits so that they can offer the breastfeeding women as much support and encouragement as possible. Additionally, mothers will be provided with a peer-support group of other breastfeeding women. The new campaign will also include workplace policy changes to make breastfeeding more convenient for working mothers. Furthermore, the new campaign will use advertisements depicting breastfeeding women. Each aspect of the new campaign will help the campaign be more successful than the NBAC.

Addressing Environmental Barriers to Breastfeeding

The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign was flawed in that it failed to address the barriers to breastfeeding, but this will be fixed in the new intervention. The new intervention will provide benefits to workplaces that accommodate breastfeeding mothers. Based on the Social Learning Theory, if there are environmental barriers to a behavior, individuals will not do this behavior (6). This suggests that barriers to breastfeeding in the workplace must be eliminated in order for working mothers to breastfeed. By offering benefits to employers that make the workplace conducive to breastfeeding, working mothers will realize that they are able to breastfeed and work. This realization or feeling of self-efficacy is highlighted by the Social Learning Theory as a necessary component for an intervention (6).

Similarly, family and friends can act as barriers to breastfeeding for some women. The NBAC did not educate the family and friends of a breastfeeding mother about the importance of being supportive. As described by the Ecological Perspective Theory, behavior is influenced by family, friends and peers (8). If a mother’s primary support group is not in favor of breastfeeding, why would the mother breastfeed? The new intervention will provide the mother’s support group with an educational experience to help them support the breastfeeding mother. This will occur during the doctor’s visits. Once these people learn about their role in the breastfeeding process, they will be able to support the mother and breastfeeding will be more successful. Ultimately, the new intervention will aim to eliminate barriers to breastfeeding in both the workplace and in a mother’s social environment.

Campaign will aim to make breastfeeding a social norm

The new intervention will strive to make breastfeeding a social norm in this society since the NBAC did not do so. According to the Social Learning Theory, people model the behavior that they see others doing (6). The NBAC did not model breastfeeding in any of the advertisements, which made women unlikely to breastfeed. The new campaign will accomplish modeling by including television advertisements that display mothers breastfeeding in various locations, for example in a restaurant, at home, on a bus, etc. By displaying mothers’ breastfeeding in the ads, mothers will see that it is socially acceptable to breastfeed, even in public. Also, the media will be urged to show breastfeeding as opposed to bottle feeding in movies, television shows and in commercials. The campaign will offer increased air time to media companies that incorporate breastfeeding. This will increase the frequency of breastfeeding modeling that women are exposed to.

Additionally, the NBAC did not acknowledge that free formula is distributed by maternity clothing stores, hospitals and formula companies. This undermines the social norm of breastfeeding, making formula seem more popular. Schultz et al (2007) state that people overestimate how many individuals partake in an undesired behavior (9). Schultz et al would argue that women believe that breastfeeding is less common than it really is and by dispensing free formula this idea is reinforced (9). The new campaign will discourage hospitals from providing free formula to mothers unless a mother and physician decide together that breastfeeding is not best in her particular situation. Mothers will believe that breastfeeding is common if free formula distribution is reduced.

Furthermore, the Theory of Planned Behavior suggests that people consider how they will be perceived by others before deciding to act themselves (8). Since the NBAC did not strive to make breastfeeding a social norm, women were unaware of how individuals would perceive their decision to breastfeed. The new campaign will make breastfeeding a social norm and therefore women will be more reassured that if they breastfeed, others will support their decision.

Campaign will deflect reactance by having the message delivered by someone similar to the target audience

The National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign failed to use a source of the message that had similarities to the recipient of the message. The implications for this were that the lack of similarity induced reactance to the message (11). Silvia (2005) conducted a study in which he found that when the communicator of the message is dissimilar to the recipient of the message, there is a “boomerang effect” (11). This suggests that people did the opposite of a message since the message was not delivered by someone similar to themselves (11). Additionally, if the audience can not relate to the messenger, the individuals targeted by the campaign are unable to self-reference (13). However, the new campaign will include a peer-support group, which will allow women to learn about the importance of breastfeeding from their peers. Women who take part in a peer support group will be able to interact with other women who have actually breastfed. The peers could be neighbors, co-workers or friends. Women interacting with their peers while learning about breastfeeding will be more likely to comply with the message (11).

Additionally, having a group of peers who are also breastfeeding mothers will allow the target audience to engage in self-referencing and imagine themselves breastfeeding (13). Burnkrant and Unnava (1995) state that self-referencing can be accomplished in a campaign that “addresses the audience directly and introduces experiences to which it can relate” (13). Not only will these women be able to self-reference as a result of the peer group, they will also become aware of the commonality of breastfeeding. While the NBAC did not deliver the message of their campaign by someone similar to the target audience, the new intervention will do this through the use of peers. Since the peers will share similarities with the targeted mothers, they will be able to contribute experiences that the targeted mothers can relate to. This will ultimately work in a persuasive way to promote breastfeeding and increase compliance (13).

Conclusion

The suggested intervention will be more successful than the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign in increasing breastfeeding rates because it takes into account flaws of the NBAC. First, many women face barriers to breastfeeding including lack of support from friends and family and also unaccommodating work environments. The new intervention addresses the environmental barriers in order to increase one’s feeling of self-efficacy (6-8). Second, breastfeeding is not a social norm in the United States society. The new intervention works to make breastfeeding become a social norm so people do not worry about how they will be perceived by others when breastfeeding (6-7). Also, people model the behavior they see; by seeing breastfeeding more often women will be more likely to model this behavior (6-7). Lastly, people are more likely to adopt a behavior change that is suggested to them if the message is delivered by someone similar to the recipient of the message (10-11). The new intervention recognizes this and delivers the message through peers. Using peers also allows mothers to self-reference and imagine that breastfeeding is something they are capable of doing (13).

The new intervention will incorporate improvements making it more successful than the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign’s attempt at increasing breastfeeding rates. The NBAC had several flaws that are corrected for in the new intervention and some of these concepts are recognized by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in its policy statement, “Breastfeeding and the use of human milk” (2). The AAP recognizes that a campaign’s promotion of breastfeeding must encourage breastfeeding to be a “cultural norm” (2). They also state that breastfeeding must be supported by families and society (2). The AAP believe that employers must provide “appropriate facilities and adequate time in the workplace” for breastfeeding mothers (2). Based on these recommendations by the AAP, it is clear that the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign was not sufficient in promoting breastfeeding. However, the proposed campaign recognizes the necessary aspects of breastfeeding campaigns as described by the AAP, and therefore will be more successful than the NBAC.

References

1. Healthy People 2010. 16 Maternal, Infant, and Child Health. Available at: http://www.healthypeople.gov/2010/Document/HTML/Volume2/16MICH.htm#_Toc494699668. Accessed December 10, 2011.
2. Section on Breastfeeding. Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk. Pediatrics. 2005;115(2):496 -506.
3. Wolf JB. Is Breast Really Best? Risk and Total Motherhood in the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. 2007;32(4):595 -636.
4. U.S Department of Health and Human Services. National Breastfeeding Campaign | womenshealth.gov. Available at: http://www.womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding/government-in-action/national-breastfeeding-campaign/. Accessed December 2, 2011.
5. Merewood A, Heinig J. Efforts to Promote Breastfeeding in the United States: Development of a National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign. Journal of Human Lactation. 2004;20(2):140 -145.
6. Grusec JE. Social learning theory and developmental psychology: The legacies of Robert Sears and Albert Bandura. Developmental Psychology. 1992;28(5):776-786.
7. Bronfenbrenner U. The ecology of human development: experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press; 1979.
8. Glanz K, Rimer BK. Theory at a glance: A guide for health promotion practice. Second Edition. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute
9. Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. The Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms. Psychological Science. 2007;18(5):429 -434.
10. Dillard JP, Pfau M. The persuasion handbook ... - James Price Dillard, Michael Pfau - Google Books. Available at: http://books.google.com.ezproxy.bu.edu/books?hl=en&lr=&id=lsF8zLomQOoC&oi=fnd&pg=PA213&dq=psychological+reactance+theory&ots=3-xUb5C0DO&sig=Y87th9UAemibPALaciQYP8bLPTU#v=onepage&q=psychological%20reactance%20theory&f=false. Accessed December 2, 2011.
11. Silvia PJ. Deflecting Reactance: The Role of Similarity in Increasing Compliance and Reducing Resistance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 2005;27:277-284.
12. Griffitt W, Veitch R. Preacquaintance Attitude Similarity and Attraction Revisited: Ten Days in a Fall-Out Shelter. Sociometry. 1974;37(2):163-173.
13. Burnkrant RE, Unnava HR. Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research. 1995;22(1):17-26.