Year of Award


Document Type


Degree Type

Master of Science (MS)

Department or School/College

Department of Health and Human Performance

Committee Chair

Laura Dybdal

Commitee Members

Annie Sondag, Curtis Noonan


At-Risk Populations, Evaluation, HIV Prevention, Montana, Social Marketing Campaign


University of Montana


The purpose of this descriptive study was to evaluate Montana’s 2006 HIV Prevention Social Marketing Campaign in two intervention communities: Flathead and Silver-Bow Counties and one comparison community: Lewis and Clark County. The intervention began in March 2006, and data was collected in the intervention communities for the first four months of the campaign and included four areas. First, HIV testing data was evaluated throughout the campaign to assess the number of individual’s receiving HIV counseling and testing in the intervention communities. Second, a survey quantitatively evaluated the campaign among individuals receiving an HIV test at the Flathead and Silver Bow County Health Departments. A chi-square test of independence was calculated for the major trends in the data. Third, focus groups and interviews were conducted with MSM in the intervention communities to qualitatively evaluate campaign awareness, perceptions, and attitudes toward the HIV Prevention Social Marketing Campaign. Finally, the HIV testing data and survey results from the intervention communities were compared to a comparison community. Findings from this study strongly suggest that Montana’s HIV Prevention Social Marketing Campaign was effective in increasing HIV testing behaviors and HIV risk perception in the intervention communities during the first four months of the campaign. Analysis of the data revealed individuals that saw the campaign were significantly associated with getting HIV tested and becoming more aware of HIV in Montana. The campaign was successful in meeting its goals to increase HIV awareness and HIV risk perception, and HIV testing behaviors. Focus group and interview participants reported positive campaign effects and agreed with the majority of campaign messages. Recommendations for future research include: multiple measures of campaign awareness, discontinuing the use of open-ended campaign exposure assessments, measuring campaign effects, influence of the campaign on an individuals decision to test, investigating long-term effects of the campaign, investigating campaign effects in segmented populations, and utilizing a comparison group.



© Copyright 2006 Helen Catherine Burnside