Evaluating Military Advertising and Recruiting Theory and Methodology (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2. Theoretical Approaches
2. Theoretical Approaches
Pages 18-39
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 18... ...
For example, social-psychological theories of enlistment behavior tend to emphasize micro-level variables focused on characteristics of the individual and individual decision-making processes (relying on such constructs as beliefs, attitudes, perceived social pressures, and behavioral intentions) , whereas economic theories tend to emphasize macro-level variables focused on such constructs as recruitment resources, the general state of the economy, wages, and work opportunities in military and civilian sectors.
|
From page 19... ...
We then describe how the identified variables can be incorporated into the design and evaluation of programs and advertising campaigns aimed at increasing enlistments, drawing on both the theoretical work reviewed as well as facets of communication theory. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ENLISTMENT BEHAVIOR Perspectives from Behavioral Theory The general theory offered by the committee in its previous report is reproduced in Figure 2-1.
|
From page 20... ...
Thus, it is of key interest to understand what factors cause some individuals to have positive intent with respect to enlisting in the military and others to have negative intent. Determinants of Intentions to Enlist According to Figure 2-1, there are three immediate determinants of a person's intention to enlist.
|
From page 21... ...
is said to be a function of the individual's behavioral beliefs and outcome evaluations associated with those beliefs (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980~. To elaborate, individuals perceive certain advantages and disadvantages of enlisting in the military.
|
From page 22... ...
Psychologists, sociologists, and decision theorists are in disagreement about the nature of the function relating behavioral beliefs and outcomes to attitudes (Anderson, 1996; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Hastie and Dawes, 2001) , but as a general rule, individuals will have more positive attitudes if they perceive enlisting in the military as definitely leading to highly positively consequences and definitely not leading to negative consequences.
|
From page 23... ...
BRk) where BRF is the overall base rate factor for choosing a given career option, and BRk is the perceived base rate of choosing the option for group k.
|
From page 24... ...
In sum, each of the three core determinants of intentions to enlist have a set of immediate determinants themselves. The person's attitude toward enlisting is influenced by his or her behavioral beliefs and outcome evaluations, the person's overall subjective norm about enlisting is influenced by his or her perceptions of the opinions of specific referents and the motivation to please or comply with those referents, and the person's general feeling about self-efficacy is influenced by the perceived obstacles to behavioral performance and one's perceived ability (or power)
|
From page 25... ...
Importance of Decision Options Economic theories of enlistments often focus on individual decision making about whether to join the military or pursue a civilian alternative. Economic theory assumes that an individual who is considering military service makes the decision to join by comparing the perceived utility he or she expects to receive from military service (UM)
|
From page 26... ...
A crucial feature of this simplified economic analysis is the idea that, to understand enlistment decisions, one must not only study how individuals construe the option of a military career but also how they construe competing career options in the civilian sector. It is only when a theorist considers both choice options that proper perspectives on enlistment behavior emerge.
|
From page 27... ...
As opportunities for pursuing different career options occur over time, the individual chooses to pursue the first option encountered that meets or surpasses the minimum threshold. Such a satisficing rule can result in a career choice that is not optimal in the sense that the chosen option may not have the highest utility from those in the entire choice set.
|
From page 28... ...
This can be illustrated using the analysis of wage differentials described earlier. Recall that the overall utility associated with the military choice was defined as UM = WM + gM and the utility associated with the civilian choice is Uc = Wc + gc (where W is the compensation associated with a given option and g are nonpecuniary aspects of the option)
|
From page 29... ...
. Such variables are either distal variables in the model in Figure 2-1 or environmental facilitators that help individuals translate positive intentions into behavior.
|
From page 30... ...
A poor economy also may influence the kinds of behavioral beliefs that an individual takes into account when evaluating different options in the choice set. Issues of salary and benefit packages may take on increased importance in the cognitive calculus of the individual as he or she weighs the advantages and disadvantages of different career options (see the category "Behavioral Beliefs and Outcome Evaluation" in Figure 2-1~.
|
From page 31... ...
These foci include (1) thinking about how an intervention or campaign affects the placement or positioning of a military career to other career options that an individual might be contemplating, (2)
|
From page 32... ...
In general, individuals will be more likely to say they will pursue an option if their image of themselves maps onto the social prototype of the kind of individual who pursues the career option on dimensions that are positive in character. In sum, research on adolescent development suggests that self-image (and the notion of prototype)
|
From page 33... ...
The model in Figure 2-1 also recognizes that some individuals do not even consider the personal costs and benefits that will accrue to them if they make certain choices. Such behavioral beliefs are only one of three major variable categories that can impact enlistment decisions, the other two being normative pressures and self-efficacy considerations.
|
From page 34... ...
7. Alter any of the above for competing options in the choice set so that the options associated with a military career rise above those of their civilian competitors in terms of overall utility.
|
From page 35... ...
IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERVENTION EVALUATION, LONGITUDINAL ANALYSIS, AND DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS When a campaign or program to increase enlistments has been put in place, the above theoretical framework can be used to help evaluate why the program works, does not work, or ways that the program might be improved to enhance its effectiveness. As an example, consider a program designed to make a military career more attractive by offering a free laptop computer to those who enlist.
|
From page 36... ...
For example, the decreased pay for military careers might have changed behavioral beliefs about the salary associated with the military, which in turn would negatively impact the attitude toward enlisting. Lower pay structures also might have impacted the kinds of normative pressures that were brought to bear, as important referents (e.g., parents)
|
From page 37... ...
Group differences in enlistment behavior should be reflected in group differences in one or more of these variables. For example, it might be found that members of one group tend to perceive military careers as offering more opportunities for advancement than members of another group (a behavioral belief)
|
From page 38... ...
This simplified cognitive analysis underscores the complexity and challenges for fostering effective communication between change agents and potential recruits. The complexity is magnified when one realizes that the five facets of communication identified earlier (source, message,
|
From page 39... ...
Although a change agent may have a well-thoughtout meaning structure to communicate to a recruit and although the change agent may believe that effectively communicating this meaning structure will increase the likelihood of enlistment, it is possible that the change agent may be wrong in that the ultimate acceptance, retention, and retrieval of the meaning structure is irrelevant to enlistment behavior. This brief review of communication theory underscores an additional set of variables that program designers must take into account.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.