A new method for evaluating compliance with industry self-regulation codes governing the content of alcohol advertising.
A new method for evaluating compliance with industry self-regulation codes governing the content of alcohol advertising.
复制标题
一种评估酒类广告内容行业自律规范合规性的新方法。
DOI：
10.1111/acer.12146
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Damon,Donna
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Babor,ThomasF;Xuan,Ziming;Damon,Donna
BackgroundThis研究评估了使用修改后的德尔菲技术结合以前开发的酒精广告评级程序，以检测内容违反美国啤酒协会代码。一个相关的目的是估计需要获得可靠的评价代码违规行为在television commercials.MethodsSix酒精广告的可能性，有代码违规行为进行了评价，由社区和专家参与者（N= 286）的最低数量的评级。根据酒类行业自律准则，使用定量评级量表来衡量酒类广告的内容。社区团体参与者代表了行业法规旨在保护的脆弱性特征（例如，年龄<21岁）;专家代表各种与健康有关的专业，包括公共卫生，人类发展，酒精研究和心理健康。酒精广告被分为两次，间隔1个月。完成时间1评级后，参与者被随机接受来自1组或其他的反馈。ResultsFindings表明，（i）在时间2的评级普遍降低了方差，这表明反馈后更大的共识，（ii）来自专家组的反馈比社区组在发展群体共识方面更有影响力，（iii）专家组发现的违规行为明显少于社区组，（四）代表不同专业背景的专家在查明的侵权行为数目方面没有差异，和㈤结论德尔菲技术有助于围绕酒类广告内容中的违规行为达成共识，并可能提高监管机构监控酒精饮料内容的能力广告与基于心理测量的评级程序相结合。
BackgroundThis study evaluated the use of a modified Delphi technique in combination with a previously developed alcohol advertising rating procedure to detect content violations in the U.S. Beer Institute Code. A related aim was to estimate the minimum number of raters needed to obtain reliable evaluations of code violations in television commercials.MethodsSix alcohol ads selected for their likelihood of having code violations were rated by community and expert participants (N= 286). Quantitative rating scales were used to measure the content of alcohol advertisements based on alcohol industry self‐regulatory guidelines. The community group participants represented vulnerability characteristics that industry codes were designed to protect (e.g., age <21); experts represented various health‐related professions, including public health, human development, alcohol research, and mental health. Alcohol ads were rated on 2 occasions separated by 1 month. After completing Time 1 ratings, participants were randomized to receive feedback from 1 group or the other.ResultsFindings indicate that (i) ratings at Time 2 had generally reduced variance, suggesting greater consensus after feedback, (ii) feedback from the expert group was more influential than that of the community group in developing group consensus, (iii) the expert group found significantly fewer violations than the community group, (iv) experts representing different professional backgrounds did not differ among themselves in the number of violations identified, and (v) a rating panel composed of at least 15 raters is sufficient to obtain reliable estimates of code violations.ConclusionsThe Delphi technique facilitates consensus development around code violations in alcohol ad content and may enhance the ability of regulatory agencies to monitor the content of alcoholic beverage advertising when combined with psychometric‐based rating procedures.