For his evaluation of approaches to reducing college drinking, Dwight Haynes selected two criteria: the overall effectiveness of programs that used a particular approach and the effort required to create programs based on an approach. To sort through his notes and decide what information would best support his evaluation, he created a table that identified possible evidence for his criteria as they applied to two competing approaches and then made preliminary judgments about each approach.
Approach | Criterion | Evidence | Judgment |
Social norms | Effort | Relatively low effort. Turner says it focuses on marketing and education, using ads on Facebook, campus posters, etc. | Easy to start and maintain without tons of work. |
Effectiveness | Some research raises concerns about effectiveness (Wechsler et al.), but DeJong et al. found it associated with lower perceptions of student drinking levels and lower alcohol consumption. | Effective. Good choice for smaller schools or those without the resources for another approach. | |
Environmental | Effort | Larger and more ambitious than social norms programs. Includes collaborations with local law enforcement agencies, the local business community, and local health care providers (Weitzman et al.). | Complex, but justified by effectiveness. |
Effectiveness | Effective because it addresses more of the factors involved in student drinking (Weitzman et al. and Dowdall interview). | Most effective. |