Background
Since 1988, obesity
rates in the United States have increased from 7.2% to 11.1% in children 2-5
years old; 11.3% to 18.8% in children 6-11 years old; and 10.5% to 18.2% in 12-19
year olds (1). Childhood obesity has become a wide-spread public health concern
which has initiated several national as well as state-level interventions in
response to this issue. A recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association that used a U.S.
nationally representative sample, found that adolescent obesity has a
significant association with severe obesity in adulthood with variations in
race/ethnicity and sex (2). Therefore, it is crucial to direct efforts towards
reducing childhood obesity to avoid or minimize health concerns in the future.
In
the state of Alaska, the prevalence of childhood obesity exceeds the national
average with 36% of children ages 5-18 above the normal weight. In an effort to
reduce these rates in Alaska, the Alaska Division of Public Health launched the
“Get Out and Play Every Day” campaign in 2012 to promote physical activity and
raise public awareness of childhood obesity. The main goal of this campaign is
to have every child complete at least 60 minutes of physical activity each day
to “feel great and maintain a healthy weight.” (3) The campaign’s website and
advertisements provide facts and statistics on obesity among Alaskan children,
the number of hours spent in front of a television or computer and also the
economic impact of the yearly obesity-related medical expenses of $459 million
dollars. The daunting facts will hopefully encourage children and parents to
engage in more physical activity and successfully meet the daily 60-minute
goal.
Summary
of Critique
Although
the “Get Out and Play Every Day” campaign provides important public health facts
to raise awareness of childhood obesity and intends to encourage children to be
active, it relies on components of the traditional Health Belief Model that will
ultimately make this campaign unsuccessful. It assumes that individuals are in
complete control of their health and they will easily change their behavior to
meet the campaign’s 60 minute-goal (4). The campaign does not address important
external factors that are potential barriers to achieving 60 minutes of
physical activity a day nor does it provide alternative ways to stay healthy if
physical activity is not possible due to either a disability or other
constraints. Lastly, the campaign places the responsibility to be physically
active not only on the individual child, but also on parents who may not model
healthy lifestyles themselves and can trigger psychological reactance in their
children.
Critique 1: Using the Health Belief Model
as a foundation
The
“Get Out and Play Every Day” campaign is built on components of the Health
Belief Model (also known as a value expectancy model) which focuses on the
individual as the primary source of behavior change. It assumes that the
targeted audience will engage in healthy behavior if they value the outcome and
believe that the behavior is likely to result in that outcome. The Health
Belief Model also hopes to change an individual’s behavior through rational
decision-making to prevent the adverse outcomes, which in this case is obesity
(4). The campaign assumes that all children and parents value health (good
health) and therefore the presentation of statistics on childhood obesity and
creating videos stating that the life expectancy of Alaskan children is
declining will trigger a rational decision-making process to adopt a healthy
lifestyle. The answer to solving
this problem is simple and viable in the campaign’s eyes – children just need
to get out and play for 60 minutes every day. However, every Alaska resident
does not place a value on health so the campaign’s strategy of simply
presenting facts to raise awareness and preaching this one solution will not be
effective. If there is little or no value placed on health, it will be difficult
for children to fully comprehend the benefits of physical activity and how it
will shape a healthy future for them. Though the tone of the campaign promotes
a sense of urgency and the health consequences are severe, the individual must
perceive the susceptibility to the health problem, the benefits of adopting a
healthy lifestyle, and value the outcome in order to take action. For example,
if a child’s friend does not engage in physical activity and his parents allow him
to watch television all day, the child would not feel susceptible to a health
problem or see a perceived benefit to physical activity because there is no
immediate risk to him or his friend. Also, humans tend to act irrationally and are
inclined to act on intuition or emotion so one cannot assume that shocking
statistics will motivate an individual to change his or her behavior through
rational-decision making (5). The campaign’s message is targeted directly to
the individual without promoting confidence, success and empowerment.
The Health Belief
Model only focuses on the individual and does not address the external social
and environmental factors that contribute to childhood obesity. An individual
is a product of his or her environment so one cannot expect to change an individual
without changing the environment that surrounds him or her (6). The “Get Out
and Play” campaign’s failure to address the multiple levels that influence a
child’s values and behavior make it a weak and ineffective campaign. Studies
suggest that health outcomes are associated with social and environmental
factors and tend to be lower in less active communities (7). The lack of
consideration of external factors that also influence a child’s behavior change
weakens the “Get Out and Play Every Day” campaign and make it ineffective.
Critique 2: Barriers to Get Out and Play
The
“Get Out and Play Every Day” campaign fails to consider the physical, environmental
and social barriers and limited access and resources for families. If barriers
to affordable, safe, and achievable physical activity exist, the intervention
will not be successful even if the individual intends to be healthy. Sallis and
Glanz (2006) found that the recent changes in the “built environment,” such as
the lack of sidewalks and long distances to schools, parks and recreational
facilities, promote a sedentary lifestyle (8). For many Alaska residents,
highways are the only roads that connect recreational facilities and schools,
even in the largest city of Anchorage. Although Anchorage is the largest city
in Alaska that holds half of the state’s population, it is not a densely
populated city with a well-functioning public transportation system or sidewalks
that connect neighborhoods which is a barrier to physical activity. Studies
show that walking or commuter cities tend to have lower obesity rates but
Alaska’s “built environment” discourages people to integrate this simple
exercise into a daily routine and also establishes driving as the social norm (9).
There is a social stigma against those who are seen walking, especially during
the winter, because Alaska’s “built environment” caters to drivers. This social
stigma will discourage people from walking because spectators may associate
them with a lower socioeconomic status or someone without the means to buy a
car.
Alaska’s
“built environment” as well as its natural environment can be unsafe for
children to participate in outdoor activities. Alaska is a rural state that is
not densely populated so a simple exercise such as walking around in the
neighborhood may be a safety risk. There is a lack of local neighborhood parks
or safe spaces for children to play because most funding and attention is
placed on the National and State Parks. During the seven month long winter, Anchorage
has an average of five hours of daylight with below zero temperatures. These
weather conditions will discourage parents from letting their kids outside but
instead allow them to watch television indoors because it is safer. The campaign’s
website has announcements on local events to promote safe avenues of physical
activity, however, they do not occur every day and several of these events
require a fee to participate which may not be feasible for some families. This
campaign focuses on the simplicity of exercising 60 minutes a day when in
reality, there are many barriers to achieving this goal.
Critique 3: Dependence on Parental
Involvement
The campaign
emphasizes the importance of parental involvement in a child’s level of
physical activity and places responsibility on the parents to plan activities and
motivate their children. They suggest that scheduling time for family exercise
is just as important as scheduling a doctor’s appointment. The campaign’s
message is based on the assumption that all parents have the time and
capability to spend an hour a day to do family activities together. However,
this campaign would not effectively change behavior of parents who work nights,
multiple jobs, have busy schedules because their value is not in health and
have other priorities such as, providing for the family financially. Parents
simply may not know how to build in time for physical activity with the family
because being active may be a new concept for them. The campaign does not
adequately equip parents with the necessary tools or realistic examples of achievable
activities or how they can motivate their children to exercise. Moreover, the
emphasis on the simplicity of the goal has the potential to create feelings of
failure among parents who cannot schedule time to be active together. Parents will
lose confidence in their ability as caregivers and may give up on incorporating
physical activity into the family routine.
If the campaign is placing responsibility on the parents, there
must be behavior change in the child as well as in the parent’s behavior
because the lifestyle of the parents is a determinant of a child’s health outcome.
Agras et. al. (2003) assessed five independent risk factors for the development
of overweight children and found that an overweight parent was the strongest
risk factor (10). The findings in the study support the Social Learning Theory,
which states that people learn new behaviors from modeling and observing in
their environment. Children are more likely to learn through observational
learning and if parents are adopting an inactive and unhealthy lifestyle
themselves and do not promote health as value within the household, it will
negatively impact the children’s behavior.
Parents that
value health that attempt to instill that value in their children by scheduling
family activities may trigger psychological reactance in the child and actually
deter them from exercising or playing outside. Psychological reactance is a
motivational state that people experience when there is a perceived threat to
their freedom and autonomy and they try to restore it. Although parents are encouraging
something positive for the best interest of the child, the child experiences a
stronger force of reactance in an attempt to restore the threatened freedom and
could create an issue that is more severe (11). For example, if a parent limits
the number of hours that a child can spend watching television and tells them
to play outside instead, it will trigger psychological reactance and children will
do the opposite. Children’s resistant to physical activity will probably make
parents give up easily if their schedules are already hectic as it is and
relapse into their old ways. Using parents as a model and motivator for
children can actually have a negative effect thus generating an ineffective
campaign.
Shifting the Focus of the Intervention
The Get Out and
Play Every Day campaign must develop a framework based on theory-based interventions
that use a multilevel approach. The campaign should broaden its strategy to a
community level intervention and involve stakeholders that can contribute to
combating childhood obesity in Alaska rather than placing all of the
responsibility on the individual or parents. There should be a message of
empowerment in the campaign to increase self-efficacy because it will build
confidence in the children to believe they can achieve their goals. Lastly, the
use of role models and community leaders that the children can identify with
should be mobilized to deter psychological reactance and increase the
likelihood of adopting a healthy lifestyle.
1. Individual to Community Level
The
Get Out and Play Every Day campaign places the burden of physical activity on
the children and parents and does not address community involvement. If this
initiative’s focus shifted from an individual to a community level campaign,
there will be more positive reinforcements and accountability for individuals
to remain active. A community level intervention would involve not only the
family but educators, local government, health practitioners and even local
business owners. Community-based programs use multiple
interventions, targeting change among individuals, groups, and organizations,
and they often incorporate strategies to create policy and environmental
changes and this ecological approach will increase its success (12). Mittelmark, Hunt,
Heath and Schmid (1993) explains that the key
characteristics of successful community-based health promotion programs include
mobilizing communities to actively participate in achieving program goals;
implementing interventions in multiple community settings; using multiple
individual-level intervention strategies; and developing environmental
interventions (13). The Get Out and Play Campaign must engage the community as
a whole in order to successfully reduce childhood obesity because it cannot
rely on the individual alone, especially if they do not value health. If the
community participates, there will be different avenues to achieve this goal
and may the campaign may even expand beyond 60 minutes of physical activity but
include things like nutrition and education with community participation. This
will also display positive health behavior in the community that children will
observe and learn from to adopt a healthy lifestyle. As the community
actively participates in this campaign to fight childhood obesity in Alaska,
the local government may respond by providing accessible and affordable spaces
for safe physical activities such as neighborhood parks, after-school programs,
and subsidized sports leagues.
2. Promoting Self-efficacy to Empower Children
The intervention
must adopt a strategy that will promote self-efficacy to build confidence and
empowerment in order to be successful. Self-efficacy is an important factor
that will affect the likelihood of a person to change his or her health behavior
because it is built upon the idea than an individual’s perception on his or her
ability to change will determine its success towards that behavior (14). An
adoption of physical activity is largely a matter of individuals with stronger
self-efficacy because they will expect to reap the benefits associated with
being active and likely maintain a healthy lifestyle in the long run. Children must be empowered to have
personal expectations and have confidence to take action and overcome obesity. The
goal cannot seem too overwhelming or the children will lack confidence if the
goal does not seem achievable. Instead of emphasizing the 60 minutes a day, the
campaign should first focus on small incremental steps that are surely
attainable such as, walking up two flights of stairs at school or eating one
vegetable a day. Parents should also be involved in having a formal contract or
rewards for children and constantly give positive reinforcement which will
increase a child’s likelihood that they will repeat the behavior. In a study by
Andersen et al. (2010), they found that change in self-efficacy for physical
activity was related to change in self-regulation which was found to be a
potential mediator of the effect of self-efficacy on physical activity. Participants
in a community level intervention who gained confidence in their abilities to
be active engaged in more frequent goal setting, planning and monitoring behaviors,
which led to increased physical activity so shifting the focus from the
individual to the community will create a successful public health campaign.
3. The Use of Peer
Role Models
Replacing parents
as the primary influencer in a child’s active lifestyle with role models that
are identifiable and similar to the children will minimize psychological reactance. Silvia (2005) suggests that a strategy to deflect
reactance is to utilize interpersonal similarity between the communicator and
receiver of a particular message because it will increase the positive force
toward compliance. In an experiment that matched people with a communicator
with the same birthday, name, gender and year in school, they found a
correlation between similarity of these characteristics and agreement. People tended
to agree with the similar communicator when the threat was high and low which
suggests that similarity is a strong force that will determine agreeability despite
the threat level (16). Schunk (1987) found within existing educational research
that peer models had beneficial effects compared with dissimilar-age models.
Schunk also found that peer models can enhance children’s self-efficacy for
learning better than adult models suggesting that model-observer similarity in
age is an important factor for raising self-efficacy. Therefore, peers may be
more influential when encountered with difficulties, such as not being able to
exercise every day, and are uncertain about their capabilities (17).
The main mode of
learning is through observation of other’s behavior according to the Social
Learning Theory, so modeling is an important means of shaping a person’s
behavior, attitude and beliefs. The use of age-similar role models will create
a trust between the communicator so the children will not interpret the
campaign’s message as a threat to their freedom and autonomy. Furthermore, humans
influence other humans easily because they like to conform (18). If a youth
role model frames health in a way that speaks to a child’s set of core values
and can identify with the model, they will have a desire to adopt this value as
their own and conform to the model’s behavior. Based on this evidence, the campaign should utilize youth
role models and match them with children two or three years younger to increase
self-efficacy, effectively spread the campaign’s message and promote active
lifestyles.
Conclusion
The “Get Out and
Play Every Day” campaign’s goal is to raise public awareness of childhood
obesity and encourage children and families to perform at least 60 minutes of
physical activity a day. Instead of aiming to change behavior on the individual
level, the campaign should engage the community and broaden this campaign to a
community level intervention. The participation of the community will create
more opportunities to display positive health behavior that children can learn
from and provide accountability to achieve this goal. The campaign should also
focus on empowering the individuals to promote self-efficacy and make the
individuals believe they can accomplish this health goal. The use of peer role
models in addition to parental influence will create similarity among the
children and increase the likelihood that children will adopt a healthy
lifestyle for themselves. These interconnected interventions will complement each
other and form an effective public health campaign to minimize childhood
obesity in Alaska.
References
1. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2011:
With Special Features on Socioeconomic Status and Health. Hyattsville, MD; U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services; 2012.
2. The NS, Suchindran C, North KE, Popkin BM,
Gordon-Larsen P. Association of Adolescent Obesity With Risk of Severe Obesity
in Adulthood. JAMA. 2010;304(18):2042-2047.
doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1635.
3. Alaska department
of public health website
4. Individual health
behavior theories (chapter 4). In: Edberg M. Essentials of Health Behavior: Social and Behavioral Theory in Public
Health. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2007, pp.35-49.
5. DeMartino B,
Kumaran D, Seymour B, Dolan RJ. Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in
the human brain. Science 2006;
313:684-687.
6. National Research Council (US) Panel on Race, Ethnicity, and Health in
Later Life; Anderson NB, Bulatao RA, Cohen B, editors. Critical Perspectives on
Racial and Ethnic Differences in Health in Late Life. Washington (DC): National
Academies Press (US); 2004. 17, Behavioral Health Interventions: What Works and
Why?
7.
Greiner KA, Li C, Kawachi I, Hunt
DC, Ahluwalia JS. The relationships of social participation and community
ratings to health and health behaviors in areas with high and low population
density. Soc Sci Med. Dec
8. Sallis JF, Glanz K. The Role of Built Environments in Physical
Activity, Eating, and Obesity in Childhood. The Future of Children 2006;
16(1): 89-108.
9. Pucher J, Buehler
R, Bassett DR, Dannenberg AL. Walking and cycling to health: a comparative
analysis of city, state, and international data. American Journal of Public Health.
2010;100(10):1986–1992.
10. Agras WS, Hammer
LD, McNicholas F, Kraemer HC. Risk Factors for Childhood Overweight: A
Prospective Study from Birth to 9.5 Years. Journal of Pediatrics 145, no. 1
(July 2004): 20–25, doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.03.023.
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.
Elder JP, Schmid TL, Dower P, Hedlund S. Community
heart health programs: components, rationale, and strategies for effective
interventions. J Public Health Policy. 1993;14:463–479.
13. Mittelmark MB,
Hunt MK, Heath G, Schmid TL. Realistic outcomes: lessons from community-based
research and demonstration programs and the prevention of cardiovascular
diseases. J Public Health Policy. 1993;14:437–462.
14. National Cancer
Institute. Theory at a Glance: A Guide for Health Promotion Practice. Part 2.
Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 2005, pp. 9-21 (NIH Publication No.
05-3896).
15. Andersen ES,
Winnett RA, Wojcik JR and Williams DM (2010) Social cognitive mediators of
change in a group randomized nutrition and physical activity intervention.
Journal of Health Psychology15: 21–32.
16. Silvia PJ.
Deflecting reactance: The role of similarity in increasing compliance and
reducing resistance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 2005; 27:277-284.
17. Dale H. Schunk.
Peer Models and Children's Behavioral Change. Review of Educational Research
, Vol. 57, No. 2 (Summer, 1987), pp. 149-174. Published by: American Educational Research
Association.
18. Following the
herd (Chapter 3). In: Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: Improving Decisions About
Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008, pp.
53-71.
