TY - JOUR
T1 - Partisan differences in the effects of economic evidence and local data on legislator engagement with dissemination materials about behavioral health
T2 - a dissemination trial
AU - Purtle, Jonathan
AU - Nelson, Katherine L.
AU - Gebrekristos, Luwam
AU - Lê-Scherban, Félice
AU - Gollust, Sarah E.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - Background: State legislators make policy decisions that influence children’s exposure to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), such as child maltreatment, and their effects on behavioral health. Effective dissemination of scientific research can increase the likelihood that legislators’ decisions are aligned with evidence to prevent ACEs and their consequences, and effective dissemination requires legislators to engage with dissemination materials. Informed by the elaboration likelihood model of persuasive communication and Brownson’s Model of Dissemination Research, we tested the hypothesis that inclusion of economic evidence and local data would increase legislator engagement with dissemination materials about evidence-supported policies related to ACEs and behavioral health. Methods: A three-arm randomized dissemination trial was conducted. A university researcher e-mailed dissemination materials which contained evidence about ACEs and behavioral health problems to state legislators (two e-mails sent 2 weeks apart, 12,662 e-mails delivered to 6509 legislators). The e-mail subject lines, text, and policy brief content were manipulated across the study arms. The intervention condition received state-tailored data about rates of ACEs and state-tailored economic evidence about the costs of ACEs for public systems, the enhanced control condition received state-tailored data and not economic evidence, and the control condition received national data and not economic evidence. Outcomes were rates of e-mail views, policy brief link clicks, requests for researcher consultation, and mentions of child maltreatment terms in legislators’ social media posts. Results: For the first e-mail, the e-mail view rate was 42.6% higher in the intervention than in the enhanced control condition (22.8% vs. 14.8%) and 20.8% higher than in the control condition (22.8% vs. 18.5%) (both p <.0001). Similar results were observed for the second e-mail. These differences remained significant after adjustment for demographic differences across study conditions in individual-level models, but not multilevel models. There was a significant interaction between the experimental condition and political party (p <.0001) in which the intervention increased e-mail view rates among Democrats but not Republicans. The intervention had no effect on policy brief link clicks or requests for consultation and a mixed effect on social media posts. Conclusions: Inclusion of state-tailored economic evidence in dissemination materials can increase engagement with research evidence among Democrat, but not Republican, legislators. Dissemination strategies tailored for legislators’ political party affiliation may be needed.
AB - Background: State legislators make policy decisions that influence children’s exposure to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), such as child maltreatment, and their effects on behavioral health. Effective dissemination of scientific research can increase the likelihood that legislators’ decisions are aligned with evidence to prevent ACEs and their consequences, and effective dissemination requires legislators to engage with dissemination materials. Informed by the elaboration likelihood model of persuasive communication and Brownson’s Model of Dissemination Research, we tested the hypothesis that inclusion of economic evidence and local data would increase legislator engagement with dissemination materials about evidence-supported policies related to ACEs and behavioral health. Methods: A three-arm randomized dissemination trial was conducted. A university researcher e-mailed dissemination materials which contained evidence about ACEs and behavioral health problems to state legislators (two e-mails sent 2 weeks apart, 12,662 e-mails delivered to 6509 legislators). The e-mail subject lines, text, and policy brief content were manipulated across the study arms. The intervention condition received state-tailored data about rates of ACEs and state-tailored economic evidence about the costs of ACEs for public systems, the enhanced control condition received state-tailored data and not economic evidence, and the control condition received national data and not economic evidence. Outcomes were rates of e-mail views, policy brief link clicks, requests for researcher consultation, and mentions of child maltreatment terms in legislators’ social media posts. Results: For the first e-mail, the e-mail view rate was 42.6% higher in the intervention than in the enhanced control condition (22.8% vs. 14.8%) and 20.8% higher than in the control condition (22.8% vs. 18.5%) (both p <.0001). Similar results were observed for the second e-mail. These differences remained significant after adjustment for demographic differences across study conditions in individual-level models, but not multilevel models. There was a significant interaction between the experimental condition and political party (p <.0001) in which the intervention increased e-mail view rates among Democrats but not Republicans. The intervention had no effect on policy brief link clicks or requests for consultation and a mixed effect on social media posts. Conclusions: Inclusion of state-tailored economic evidence in dissemination materials can increase engagement with research evidence among Democrat, but not Republican, legislators. Dissemination strategies tailored for legislators’ political party affiliation may be needed.
KW - Adverse childhood experiences
KW - Behavioral health
KW - Child maltreatment
KW - Dissemination
KW - Legislators
KW - Partisanship
KW - Policymakers
KW - Politics
KW - United States
KW - Humans
KW - Child
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85132181003&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85132181003&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s13012-022-01214-7
DO - 10.1186/s13012-022-01214-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 35729630
AN - SCOPUS:85132181003
SN - 1748-5908
VL - 17
JO - Implementation Science
JF - Implementation Science
IS - 1
M1 - 38
ER -