Sexual Behavior
Conditions
Keywords
Adolescent sexual health, Media literacy education, Web-based programming
Brief summary
The main aim of this study is to conduct a pretest-posttest RCT with a three-month follow-up to investigate the sustainability of outcomes in students who use the Media Aware program. Media Aware, a web-based media literacy education program for high school students to promote sexual and relationship health. Media Aware is designed to provide high school students with sexual health knowledge, media literacy skills, and the skills to make healthy decisions about sexual activity. This study will examine if behavioral indicators among students in the intervention group sustain, emerge, or diminish over time compared to students in the delayed intervention group.
Interventions
Media Aware is an online media literacy and sexual health education program developed for high school students that addresses the influence of media on sexual behaviors explicitly using established message processing theory. The program consists of 4 self-paced modules each with two to three lessons. Broadly, the modules cover healthy and unhealthy relationships, sexually transmitted infections, consent, substance use, pregnancy, protection and contraception, and communication between adolescents and their partners, parents, or health providers. Users also learn media literacy skills including message deconstruction to help examine the truth behind media messages.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
SCHOOL SITES: Inclusion: 1. Schools must have students in 9th or 10th grade health education as this program is designed for use in these grades during health education classes. 2. Schools must agree to provide the Media Aware program during class periods as their sexual health education which means that an educator will facilitate the students taking the program. 3. Schools must have adequate technology for the students to use the web-based Media Aware program and complete the online questionnaires. 4. It must be feasible for iRT project staff members to travel to the school sites for the three data collection time points. TEACHER PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion: 1. Teacher's classrooms must have students in 9th or 10th grade as this program is designed for use in these grades. 2. Teachers must be able to ensure that participating students have computers and internet access during class periods as the program and questionnaires are web-based. STUDENT PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion: 1. Students must be in grades 9 or 10. 2. Students must be able to speak and read English because the study materials (e.g., questionnaires) are in English. However, parent permission and youth assent forms for the research study will be available in both English and Spanish. 3. Students must have appropriate parent permission to receive sexual health education per school districts' policy (i.e., opt-in policy or opt-out policy).
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Protection Intentions During Oral Sex | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to decide to have oral sex, how likely would you be to use a condom or dental dam?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991) |
| Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms) | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to have vaginal sex, how likely would you be to use birth control other than condoms?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991) |
| Willingness to Have Sex | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to have sex in a relationship context. (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend and they say they love you. They want to have sex. In this situation, how willing would you be to have sex?). |
| Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to engage in unprotected sex (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend. They want to have sex, but neither of you have any form of protection. In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and have sex anyway?). (adapted from Gibbons, Gerrard, Blanton, & Russell, 2014) |
| Willingness to Hook up | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to have hook up even if they are not sure that they really want to (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend. They want to hook-up, but you are not sure that you want to. In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and hook-up anyway?). (adapted from Gibbons, Gerrard, Blanton, & Russell, 2014) |
| Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to engage in sexual activity in the next year (How likely is that you will have any type of sexual contact with another person (oral sex, anal sex, vaginal sex, or genital-to-genital contact) in the next year?). α = 0.77 (adapted from L'Engle, Brown, and Kenneavy, 2006) |
| Condom Use Intentions | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to have vaginal or anal sex, how likely would you be to use a condom?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991) |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Acceptance of Rape Myths | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to myths about rape (e.g., It shouldn't be considered rape if a guy is drunk and didn't realize what he was doing.). (adapted from Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance-Short Form (IRMA-SF; 7 pt. scale); Payne et al., (1999); McMahon & Farmer (2011), α=0.88) |
| Intentions to Intervene as Bystander | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not likely at all; 2=Unlikely; 3=Likely; 4=Extremely likely) how likely they would be to intervene as a bystander (e.g., Approach a friend if I thought they were in an abusive relationship and let them know that I am here to help.). (adapted from Banyard, 2005) |
| Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a scale of 0 (Can't do) to 100 (Very Certain) their degree of confidence in several behaviors (e.g., I could talk to a friend who I suspected is in an abusive relationship.). (adapted from Banyard, 2005) |
| Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens engage in sexual activity (e.g., oral sex, vaginal sex, anal sex). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018) |
| Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens engage in risky sexual activities (e.g., What percentage of teens have sex with someone who is much older?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018) |
| Sexual Health Knowledge | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked several multiple choice and True/False questions about sexual health (e.g., True or false: You can tell someone has an STI by looking at him/her.). |
| Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens communicate with parents, health providers, or another trusted adult (e.g., Before deciding to have sex, what percentage of teens talk with their boy/girlfriend about sexual health?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018) |
| Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could get and use contraception (e.g., If I wanted to, I could get condoms or another form of contraception.). |
| Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens use contraception (e.g., What percentage of teens who have oral sex use a condom or a dental dam?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018) |
| Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could communicate with others about sexual health (e.g., I could talk with a boy/girlfriend about using condoms for sexually transmitted infection protection.). (adapted from Scull, Malik, & Kupersmidt, 2014) |
| Intent to Communicate Before Sex | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to communicate with others before sexual activity (e.g., Before deciding to have sex, how likely would you be to talk with your parents or another trusted adult about sexual health?). (adapted from Scull, Malik, & Kupersmidt, 2014) |
| Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not much at all; 2=a little; 3=a good amount; 4=a lot) the extent to which they: 1) thought about the ad; 2) spent time thinking about the ad; and 3) paid attention to the ad. (adapted from Shiv, Britton, and Payne, 2004) |
| Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a doctor or other health professional (e.g., How often do you talk with a doctor or other health professional about sexual health?). |
| Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a doctor or trusted adult (e.g., How often do you talk with a parent or other trusted professional about sexual health?). |
| Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a boyfriend/girlfriend (e.g., How often do you talk with your boyfriend/girlfriend about sexual health?). |
| Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could convince a partner to use contraception (e.g., If I decided to have sex, I could talk to any potential partner to make him/her understand why we should use condoms or other contraception.). |
| Perceived Realism of Media Messages | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) the degree to which they agreed that teens on the media (e.g., Teens in the media do things that average teens do.). (adapted from Austin and Johnson, 1997, α=0.80) |
| Acceptance of Dating Violence | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly 2=disagree; 3=disagree; 4=agree; strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to dating violence (e.g., It is okay for people to hit their girlfriends/boyfriends if they did something to make them mad.). (adapted from Foshee, Bauman, Ennett, Suchindran, Benefield, and Linder, 2005 α=0.73) |
| Advertisement Deconstruction Skills | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to describe it in detail including noting marketing strategies and any missing information (e.g., How are advertisers trying to get someone to buy this product?). Qualitative responses to the questions are coded by trained project staff members once inter-coder reliability is established, and scores will be summed to create an overall deconstruction skills composite variable. (adapted from Kupersmidt, Scull, & Benson, 2012) |
| Media Message Completeness | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=incomplete to 4=complete) how complete the information included in an advertisement is (e.g., How complete is the information in this advertisement?). |
| Media Skepticism | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) the degree to which they agree with several statements about media (e.g., Media are dishonest about what happens if people have sex.). (adapted from Scull, Malik, and Kupersmidt, 2014, α=0.86) |
| Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to strict gender role stereotypes (e.g., Raising children is primarily a woman's responsibility.). (adapted from Foshee, Bauman, Ennett, Suchindran, Benefield, and Linder, 2005 α=0.87) |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not much at all; 2=a little; 3=a good amount; 4=a lot) the extent to which they: 1) wanted to argue back to what it was saying; 2) thought of ways they disagreed with what was presented; 3) thought of ways that the information being presented was inaccurate or misleading; and 4) found themselves looking for flaws in the way information was presented in the ad. (adapted from Moyer-Gusé and Nabi, 2010) |
| Advertisement Credibility | posttest (approximately one week after pretest) | Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (variable) how 1) believable; 2) truthful; 3) trustworthy they find the advertisement. (adapted from MacKenzie, Lutz, and Belch, 1986) |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Intervention Participants will receive access to Media Aware.
Media Aware Sexual Health - High School: Media Aware is an online media literacy and sexual health education program developed for high school students that addresses the influence of media on sexual behaviors explicitly using established message processing theory. The program consists of 4 self-paced modules each with two to three lessons. Broadly, the modules cover healthy and unhealthy relationships, sexually transmitted infections, consent, substance use, pregnancy, protection and contraception, and communication between adolescents and their partners, parents, or health providers. Users also learn media literacy skills including message deconstruction to help examine the truth behind media messages. | 374 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control Participants will receive their regular health education programming not related to sexual health education or media literacy education. | 216 |
| Total | 590 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Intervention | Delayed-Intervention Control | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Academic Grades As and Bs | 131 Participants | 59 Participants | 190 Participants |
| Academic Grades Bs and Cs | 23 Participants | 22 Participants | 45 Participants |
| Academic Grades Cs and Ds | 7 Participants | 5 Participants | 12 Participants |
| Academic Grades Mostly As | 139 Participants | 70 Participants | 209 Participants |
| Academic Grades Mostly Below Ds | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Academic Grades Mostly Bs | 25 Participants | 9 Participants | 34 Participants |
| Academic Grades Mostly Cs | 4 Participants | 4 Participants | 8 Participants |
| Academic Grades Mostly Ds | 4 Participants | 2 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Academic Grades Unknown or Not Reported | 41 Participants | 44 Participants | 85 Participants |
| Age, Continuous | 14.33 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.58 | 14.60 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.86 | 14.41 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.7 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 45 Participants | 27 Participants | 72 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 313 Participants | 167 Participants | 480 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 16 Participants | 22 Participants | 38 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 1 Participants | 3 Participants | 4 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 21 Participants | 22 Participants | 43 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 36 Participants | 50 Participants | 86 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 51 Participants | 43 Participants | 94 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 21 Participants | 27 Participants | 48 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 243 Participants | 71 Participants | 314 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 374 Participants | 216 Participants | 590 Participants |
| Romantic Relationship Status No/Unsure | 275 Participants | 134 Participants | 409 Participants |
| Romantic Relationship Status Unknown or Not Reported | 44 Participants | 43 Participants | 87 Participants |
| Romantic Relationship Status Yes | 55 Participants | 39 Participants | 94 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Female | 197 Participants | 96 Participants | 293 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Male | 146 Participants | 93 Participants | 239 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Nonbinary | 17 Participants | 7 Participants | 24 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Unknown or Not Reported | 14 Participants | 20 Participants | 34 Participants |
| Sexual Experience No | 280 Participants | 137 Participants | 417 Participants |
| Sexual Experience Unknown or Not Reported | 54 Participants | 44 Participants | 98 Participants |
| Sexual Experience Yes | 40 Participants | 35 Participants | 75 Participants |
| Socioeconomic Status (SES) No/Unsure | 265 Participants | 104 Participants | 369 Participants |
| Socioeconomic Status (SES) Unknown or Not Reported | 66 Participants | 41 Participants | 107 Participants |
| Socioeconomic Status (SES) Yes | 43 Participants | 71 Participants | 114 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 374 | 0 / 216 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 374 | 0 / 216 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 374 | 0 / 216 |
Outcome results
Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms)
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to have vaginal sex, how likely would you be to use birth control other than condoms?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms) | 2.83 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms) | 2.76 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.17 |
Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms)
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to have vaginal sex, how likely would you be to use birth control other than condoms?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms) | 2.99 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Birth Control Use Intentions (Other Than Condoms) | 2.89 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
Condom Use Intentions
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to have vaginal or anal sex, how likely would you be to use a condom?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Condom Use Intentions | 3.53 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Condom Use Intentions | 3.51 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Condom Use Intentions
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to have vaginal or anal sex, how likely would you be to use a condom?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Condom Use Intentions | 3.46 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Condom Use Intentions | 3.42 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to engage in sexual activity in the next year (How likely is that you will have any type of sexual contact with another person (oral sex, anal sex, vaginal sex, or genital-to-genital contact) in the next year?). α = 0.77 (adapted from L'Engle, Brown, and Kenneavy, 2006)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person | 2.03 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person | 1.96 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to engage in sexual activity in the next year (How likely is that you will have any type of sexual contact with another person (oral sex, anal sex, vaginal sex, or genital-to-genital contact) in the next year?). α = 0.77 (adapted from L'Engle, Brown, and Kenneavy, 2006)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person | 1.97 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Intentions to Engage in Sexual Activity With Another Person | 2.00 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Protection Intentions During Oral Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to decide to have oral sex, how likely would you be to use a condom or dental dam?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Protection Intentions During Oral Sex | 2.83 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Protection Intentions During Oral Sex | 2.68 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.15 |
Protection Intentions During Oral Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to use protection (if you were to decide to have oral sex, how likely would you be to use a condom or dental dam?). (adapted from Jemmott and Jemmott, 1991)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Protection Intentions During Oral Sex | 2.94 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Protection Intentions During Oral Sex | 2.77 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to engage in unprotected sex (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend. They want to have sex, but neither of you have any form of protection. In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and have sex anyway?). (adapted from Gibbons, Gerrard, Blanton, & Russell, 2014)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex | 1.72 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex | 1.83 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to engage in unprotected sex (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend. They want to have sex, but neither of you have any form of protection. In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and have sex anyway?). (adapted from Gibbons, Gerrard, Blanton, & Russell, 2014)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex | 1.69 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Willingness to Engage in Unprotected Sex | 1.75 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Willingness to Have Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to have sex in a relationship context. (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend and they say they love you. They want to have sex. In this situation, how willing would you be to have sex?).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Willingness to Have Sex | 2.26 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Willingness to Have Sex | 2.42 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Willingness to Have Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to have sex in a relationship context. (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend and they say they love you. They want to have sex. In this situation, how willing would you be to have sex?).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Willingness to Have Sex | 2.22 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Willingness to Have Sex | 2.30 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Willingness to Hook up
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to have hook up even if they are not sure that they really want to (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend. They want to hook-up, but you are not sure that you want to. In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and hook-up anyway?). (adapted from Gibbons, Gerrard, Blanton, & Russell, 2014)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Willingness to Hook up | 1.98 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Willingness to Hook up | 2.13 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
Willingness to Hook up
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=very unwilling; 2=unwilling; 3=willing; 4=very willing) how willing they are to have hook up even if they are not sure that they really want to (Imagine you were with a boyfriend/girlfriend. They want to hook-up, but you are not sure that you want to. In this situation, how willing would you be to go ahead and hook-up anyway?). (adapted from Gibbons, Gerrard, Blanton, & Russell, 2014)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Willingness to Hook up | 2.02 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Willingness to Hook up | 1.98 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
Acceptance of Dating Violence
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly 2=disagree; 3=disagree; 4=agree; strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to dating violence (e.g., It is okay for people to hit their girlfriends/boyfriends if they did something to make them mad.). (adapted from Foshee, Bauman, Ennett, Suchindran, Benefield, and Linder, 2005 α=0.73)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Acceptance of Dating Violence | 1.40 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.04 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Acceptance of Dating Violence | 1.48 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.04 |
Acceptance of Dating Violence
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly 2=disagree; 3=disagree; 4=agree; strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to dating violence (e.g., It is okay for people to hit their girlfriends/boyfriends if they did something to make them mad.). (adapted from Foshee, Bauman, Ennett, Suchindran, Benefield, and Linder, 2005 α=0.73)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Acceptance of Dating Violence | 1.36 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Acceptance of Dating Violence | 1.36 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Acceptance of Rape Myths
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to myths about rape (e.g., It shouldn't be considered rape if a guy is drunk and didn't realize what he was doing.). (adapted from Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance-Short Form (IRMA-SF; 7 pt. scale); Payne et al., (1999); McMahon & Farmer (2011), α=0.88)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Acceptance of Rape Myths | 1.35 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.04 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Acceptance of Rape Myths | 1.33 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.04 |
Acceptance of Rape Myths
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to myths about rape (e.g., It shouldn't be considered rape if a guy is drunk and didn't realize what he was doing.). (adapted from Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance-Short Form (IRMA-SF; 7 pt. scale); Payne et al., (1999); McMahon & Farmer (2011), α=0.88)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Acceptance of Rape Myths | 1.31 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.05 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Acceptance of Rape Myths | 1.28 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to strict gender role stereotypes (e.g., Raising children is primarily a woman's responsibility.). (adapted from Foshee, Bauman, Ennett, Suchindran, Benefield, and Linder, 2005 α=0.87)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes | 1.44 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes | 1.45 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) their level of agreement on several items pertaining to strict gender role stereotypes (e.g., Raising children is primarily a woman's responsibility.). (adapted from Foshee, Bauman, Ennett, Suchindran, Benefield, and Linder, 2005 α=0.87)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes | 1.51 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.04 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Acceptance of Strict Gender Role Stereotypes | 1.52 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.05 |
Advertisement Deconstruction Skills
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to describe it in detail including noting marketing strategies and any missing information (e.g., How are advertisers trying to get someone to buy this product?). Qualitative responses to the questions are coded by trained project staff members once inter-coder reliability is established, and scores will be summed to create an overall deconstruction skills composite variable (adapted from Kupersmidt, Scull, & Benson, 2012).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Advertisement Deconstruction Skills | 5.30 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.35 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Advertisement Deconstruction Skills | 5.37 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.55 |
Advertisement Deconstruction Skills
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to describe it in detail including noting marketing strategies and any missing information (e.g., How are advertisers trying to get someone to buy this product?). Qualitative responses to the questions are coded by trained project staff members once inter-coder reliability is established, and scores will be summed to create an overall deconstruction skills composite variable. (adapted from Kupersmidt, Scull, & Benson, 2012)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Advertisement Deconstruction Skills | 4.46 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.52 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Advertisement Deconstruction Skills | 3.47 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.53 |
Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not much at all; 2=a little; 3=a good amount; 4=a lot) the extent to which they: 1) thought about the ad; 2) spent time thinking about the ad; and 3) paid attention to the ad. (adapted from Shiv, Britton, and Payne, 2004)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement | 2.01 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement | 1.86 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not much at all; 2=a little; 3=a good amount; 4=a lot) the extent to which they: 1) thought about the ad; 2) spent time thinking about the ad; and 3) paid attention to the ad. (adapted from Shiv, Britton, and Payne, 2004)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement | 1.94 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Cognitive Elaboration While Viewing an Advertisement | 2.02 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health
Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a boyfriend/girlfriend (e.g., How often do you talk with your boyfriend/girlfriend about sexual health?).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health | 1.93 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health | 1.77 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health
Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a boyfriend/girlfriend (e.g., How often do you talk with your boyfriend/girlfriend about sexual health?).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health | 1.95 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Communication With a Boyfriend or Girlfriend About Sexual Health | 1.96 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health
Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a doctor or other health professional (e.g., How often do you talk with a doctor or other health professional about sexual health?).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health | 1.83 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health | 1.79 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health
Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a doctor or other health professional (e.g., How often do you talk with a doctor or other health professional about sexual health?).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health | 1.98 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Communication With a Doctor or Other Health Professional About Sexual Health | 1.97 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health
Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a doctor or trusted adult (e.g., How often do you talk with a parent or other trusted professional about sexual health?).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health | 2.15 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health | 1.95 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health
Participants are asked on a 4-point Likert scale (1never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often) about their frequency of sexual health communication with a doctor or trusted adult (e.g., How often do you talk with a parent or other trusted professional about sexual health?).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health | 1.95 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Communication With a Parent or Other Trusted Adult About Sexual Health | 2.00 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens communicate with parents, health providers, or another trusted adult (e.g., Before deciding to have sex, what percentage of teens talk with their boy/girlfriend about sexual health?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication | 40.97 percentage of teens communicating | Standard Error 2.27 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication | 39.41 percentage of teens communicating | Standard Error 3.15 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens communicate with parents, health providers, or another trusted adult (e.g., Before deciding to have sex, what percentage of teens talk with their boy/girlfriend about sexual health?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication | 39.95 percentage of teens communicating | Standard Error 1.88 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Sexual Health Communication | 37.16 percentage of teens communicating | Standard Error 2.08 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens use contraception (e.g., What percentage of teens who have oral sex use a condom or a dental dam?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use | 54.09 percentage of teens using BC | Standard Error 1.86 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use | 58.34 percentage of teens using BC | Standard Error 2.07 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens use contraception (e.g., What percentage of teens who have oral sex use a condom or a dental dam?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use | 53.89 percentage of teens using BC | Standard Error 2.64 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Birth Control Use | 52.52 percentage of teens using BC | Standard Error 3.93 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens engage in risky sexual activities (e.g., What percentage of teens have sex with someone who is much older?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity | 30.89 percentage of teens having risky sex | Standard Error 2 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity | 37.35 percentage of teens having risky sex | Standard Error 2.18 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens engage in risky sexual activities (e.g., What percentage of teens have sex with someone who is much older?). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity | 36.39 percentage of teens having risky sex | Standard Error 2.19 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Risky Sexual Activity | 35.17 percentage of teens having risky sex | Standard Error 3 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens engage in sexual activity (e.g., oral sex, vaginal sex, anal sex). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity | 36.10 percentage of teens sexually active | Standard Error 1.85 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity | 43.02 percentage of teens sexually active | Standard Error 2.01 |
Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity
Participants are asked to indicate what percentage \[0% = no teens; 100% = all teens\] of teens engage in sexual activity (e.g., oral sex, vaginal sex, anal sex). (adapted from Scull, Kupersmidt, Malik, and Keefe, 2018)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity | 38.65 percentage of teens sexually active | Standard Error 2.67 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Descriptive Norms Regarding Teen Sexual Activity | 40.89 percentage of teens sexually active | Standard Error 4.11 |
Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could communicate with others about sexual health (e.g., I could talk with a boy/girlfriend about using condoms for sexually transmitted infection protection.). (adapted from Scull, Malik, & Kupersmidt, 2014)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex | 2.93 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex | 2.79 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could communicate with others about sexual health (e.g., I could talk with a boy/girlfriend about using condoms for sexually transmitted infection protection.). (adapted from Scull, Malik, & Kupersmidt, 2014)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex | 2.92 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Communicate Before Sex | 2.74 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander
Participants are asked to indicate on a scale of 0 (Can't do) to 100 (Very Certain) their degree of confidence in several behaviors (e.g., I could talk to a friend who I suspected is in an abusive relationship.). (adapted from Banyard, 2005)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander | 75.96 units on a scale | Standard Error 1.9 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander | 70.97 units on a scale | Standard Error 2.7 |
Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander
Participants are asked to indicate on a scale of 0 (Can't do) to 100 (Very Certain) their degree of confidence in several behaviors (e.g., I could talk to a friend who I suspected is in an abusive relationship.). (adapted from Banyard, 2005)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander | 74.26 units on a scale | Standard Error 1.68 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Intervene as Bystander | 71.28 units on a scale | Standard Error 1.85 |
Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could convince a partner to use contraception (e.g., If I decided to have sex, I could talk to any potential partner to make him/her understand why we should use condoms or other contraception.).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use | 3.19 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use | 3.11 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could convince a partner to use contraception (e.g., If I decided to have sex, I could talk to any potential partner to make him/her understand why we should use condoms or other contraception.).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use | 3.30 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Negotiate Contraception/Protection Use | 3.39 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could get and use contraception (e.g., If I wanted to, I could get condoms or another form of contraception.).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection | 3.22 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection | 3.23 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) how effectively they could get and use contraception (e.g., If I wanted to, I could get condoms or another form of contraception.).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection | 3.06 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Efficacy to Use Contraception/Protection | 3.00 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Intentions to Intervene as Bystander
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not likely at all; 2=Unlikely; 3=Likely; 4=Extremely likely) how likely they would be to intervene as a bystander (e.g., Approach a friend if I thought they were in an abusive relationship and let them know that I am here to help.). (adapted from Banyard, 2005)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Intentions to Intervene as Bystander | 3.10 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Intentions to Intervene as Bystander | 3.08 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
Intentions to Intervene as Bystander
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not likely at all; 2=Unlikely; 3=Likely; 4=Extremely likely) how likely they would be to intervene as a bystander (e.g., Approach a friend if I thought they were in an abusive relationship and let them know that I am here to help.). (adapted from Banyard, 2005)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Intentions to Intervene as Bystander | 3.13 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Intentions to Intervene as Bystander | 3.11 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.15 |
Intent to Communicate Before Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to communicate with others before sexual activity (e.g., Before deciding to have sex, how likely would you be to talk with your parents or another trusted adult about sexual health?). (adapted from Scull, Malik, & Kupersmidt, 2014)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Intent to Communicate Before Sex | 2.82 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Intent to Communicate Before Sex | 2.64 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
Intent to Communicate Before Sex
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not at all likely; 2=unlikely; 3=likely; 4=extremely likely) how likely they are to communicate with others before sexual activity (e.g., Before deciding to have sex, how likely would you be to talk with your parents or another trusted adult about sexual health?). (adapted from Scull, Malik, & Kupersmidt, 2014)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Intent to Communicate Before Sex | 2.80 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Intent to Communicate Before Sex | 2.60 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
Media Message Completeness
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=incomplete to 4=complete) how complete the information included in an advertisement is (e.g., How complete is the information in this advertisement?).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Media Message Completeness | 2.27 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Media Message Completeness | 2.23 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |
Media Message Completeness
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=incomplete to 4=complete) how complete the information included in an advertisement is (e.g., How complete is the information in this advertisement?).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Media Message Completeness | 2.17 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Media Message Completeness | 2.20 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Media Skepticism
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) the degree to which they agree with several statements about media (e.g., Media are dishonest about what happens if people have sex.). (adapted from Scull, Malik, and Kupersmidt, 2014, α=0.86)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Media Skepticism | 3.04 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.09 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Media Skepticism | 3.01 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
Media Skepticism
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) the degree to which they agree with several statements about media (e.g., Media are dishonest about what happens if people have sex.). (adapted from Scull, Malik, and Kupersmidt, 2014, α=0.86)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Media Skepticism | 2.93 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Media Skepticism | 2.78 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Perceived Realism of Media Messages
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) the degree to which they agreed that teens on the media (e.g., Teens in the media do things that average teens do.). (adapted from Austin and Johnson, 1997, α=0.80)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Perceived Realism of Media Messages | 2.02 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.05 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Perceived Realism of Media Messages | 2.23 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.06 |
Perceived Realism of Media Messages
Participants are asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree) the degree to which they agreed that teens on the media (e.g., Teens in the media do things that average teens do.). (adapted from Austin and Johnson, 1997, α=0.80)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Perceived Realism of Media Messages | 2.03 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Perceived Realism of Media Messages | 2.19 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.11 |
Sexual Health Knowledge
Participants are asked several multiple choice and True/False questions about sexual health (e.g., True or false: You can tell someone has an STI by looking at him/her.).
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Sexual Health Knowledge | 11.34 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.18 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Sexual Health Knowledge | 11.06 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.24 |
Sexual Health Knowledge
Participants are asked several multiple choice and True/False questions about sexual health (e.g., True or false: You can tell someone has an STI by looking at him/her.).
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Sexual Health Knowledge | 11.38 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.13 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Sexual Health Knowledge | 10.72 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.14 |
Advertisement Credibility
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (variable) how 1) believable; 2) truthful; 3) trustworthy they find the advertisement. (adapted from MacKenzie, Lutz, and Belch, 1986)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Advertisement Credibility | 2.12 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Advertisement Credibility | 2.20 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
Advertisement Credibility
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (variable) how 1) believable; 2) truthful; 3) trustworthy they find the advertisement. (adapted from MacKenzie, Lutz, and Belch, 1986)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Advertisement Credibility | 2.01 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.08 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Advertisement Credibility | 2.14 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.12 |
Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not much at all; 2=a little; 3=a good amount; 4=a lot) the extent to which they: 1) wanted to argue back to what it was saying; 2) thought of ways they disagreed with what was presented; 3) thought of ways that the information being presented was inaccurate or misleading; and 4) found themselves looking for flaws in the way information was presented in the ad. (adapted from Moyer-Gusé and Nabi, 2010)
Time frame: posttest (approximately one week after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points and participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement | 2.01 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement | 1.90 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.07 |
Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement
Participants are shown an advertisement and asked to indicate on a 4-point Likert scale (1=not much at all; 2=a little; 3=a good amount; 4=a lot) the extent to which they: 1) wanted to argue back to what it was saying; 2) thought of ways they disagreed with what was presented; 3) thought of ways that the information being presented was inaccurate or misleading; and 4) found themselves looking for flaws in the way information was presented in the ad. (adapted from Moyer-Gusé and Nabi, 2010)
Time frame: follow-up (approximately three months after pretest)
Population: The number of participants analyzed for this measure differs from the numbers in the Participant Flow module due to the fact that not all participants completed questionnaires at all time points, participants were able to skip questions on the questionnaire. In addition, participants whose follow-up data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic were excluded from the analyses.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement | 1.87 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.1 |
| Delayed-Intervention Control | Counterarguing While Viewing an Advertisement | 1.92 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.16 |