Communication 620: Health Communication
Communication 616
Health Communication:
Social Science Approaches to Behavioral Prevention
Annenberg School for Communication
Spring 2016
Instructor: Professor Lynn Carol Miller
Annenberg.usc.edu/faculty/communication/lynn-carol-miller
Email: lmiller@usc.edu
Class time: Monday 2-4:50 PM
Room: ANN 210
Office hours: Monday 4:30-5:30 and by appointment
Instructor: Professor Miller
Texbook:
Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (2015). Health behavior: Theory, Research, and Practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. order at . (be sure to get the latest edition)
Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
(be sue to get the 2nd edition)
\
Noar, S. M., & Harrington, N. G. (Eds., 2012). eHealth applications: Promising strategies for behavior change. New York: Routledge. (selected chapters from this volume will be available on blackboard).
Software: Comprehensive Meta-Analysis
(this is the easiest meta-analysis software to use)
(student version – annual fee for students using meta-analysis in a course is now $195 for the Professional version which I would recommend.) You could team up with someone else (and share the program on ONE of your computers) or you can use a trial version (but then wait to do this until you are ready and you can use it for one month free – be sure to save your files. I’m trying to see if the school could get a separate copy so you could access it). For the project for the semester you may do it by yourself or you may do it with one other person. I would recommend that if there are not very many articles in your review (under 50 that you search through as possibilities – you will end up with far fewer than that in the end that meet all your criteria) then you should do it alone. If there are potentially 100’s of articles then you should do this with another person (and/or cut it down to be more specific).
Readings as assigned will be posted via blackboard.
Requirements/Evaluation Criteria:
10% Class Participation
20% non-MH Assignments
20% Oral Presentation of Final Review & Meta-Analysis Paper (April 25th)
25% Meta-Analysis Homework (MH)
25% Final Meta-Analysis Paper (April 27th)
Final Project Papers will consist of a data-based review (i.e., meta-analysis). Meta-analyses are often the first (publishable) step in getting a handle on a research area, planning a grant, and identifying what research is most needed (and therefore more likely to be published, funded, etc.). Assuming you get out your meta-analysis in an area before a similar one in a given time frame, this should be highly publishable. It’s a great way for new scholars to establish credentials in an area even when they haven’t themselves done any primary research in that area.
Graded Assignments
| # |Date Due |Nature of Assignment |Points |
|1 |January 11th |a. MH: Preliminary Search for Focus | |
| |10AM |b. Individual Models: Identify article | |
| |January 18 |addressing possible health focus (see detailed | |
| |Holiday |description) relevant to individual models. | |
| | |c. Arrange meeting with Professor Miller during week | |
| | |of 18th to zero in on topic. | |
|2 |January 25th |a. MH: Specify Review Area (see detailed description) |2+4 |
| |10 AM |b. Review an article from one of the meta-analyses for | |
| | |individual models. Discuss mapping within that | |
| | |meta-analysis (see detailed assignment #1 blackboard; provide powerpoint slides for class | |
| | |discussion) | |
|3 |February 1 |Review a research article that has addressed this |2 |
| |10AM |focus using one or more of the interpersonal theories reviewed | |
| | |(also see articles in meta-analysis from readings). | |
| | |PP slides due. | |
|4 |February 8 |MH: Collect 10 studies in specified focus area suitable for planned meta-analysis. Provide all |2 |
| |10AM |abstracts with | |
| | |references; Be prepared to discuss in class; powerpointslides. | |
|5 |February 22th |Review article that has addressed this focus using |2 |
| |10 AM |one or more of the theories (community and | |
| | |group models reviewed). Powerpoint presentation due | |
|6 |February 29st |MH:Collect all studies; Code studies and compute effect |3 |
| |10AM |sizes (distribution of). Be prepared to present | |
| | |powerpoint presentation of this. | |
|7 |March 7 |a. Review article from meta-analysis or one that has addressed your |2+4 |
| |10AM |focus involving participation. Powerpoint presentation due | |
| | |b. MH: Initial draft of Method section due | |
|8 |March 21 |a. MH: Examine effect sizes (distribution of) and |2+4 |
| |10AM |examine/analyze potential role of moderators. Powerpoint presentation prepared due | |
| | |b. MH: Initial Draft of Outline for Introduction due | |
|9 |March 28 |Review article from meta-analysis or one that has addressed |2 |
| |10AM |your focus involving personalization. | |
| | |Powerpoint presentation due | |
|10 |March 27 |a. MH: Review paper results draft due |4+2 |
| |10AM |b. Review article from e-health meta-analysis or one | |
| | |involving your focus on online samples. | |
| | |Powerpoint presentation due. | |
|11 |April 4 |Review article from mobile health meta-analysis or |2 |
| |10AM |one involving your focus on mobile health. | |
| | |Powerpoint presentation due. | |
|12 |April 11 |Review article from serious games meta-analysis or one |4+2 |
| |10AM |involving your focus serious games. | |
| | |Powerpoint presentation due. | |
| | |MH: Revised Draft of Intro, Methods, Results with discussion | |
| | |Due | |
|13 |April 18 |SOLVE assignment (see more detail below) |2 |
|OR |April 25 |Oral Report on Meta-Analysis |15% |
|MF |April 29 |Final Draft of Meta-Analysis Due |25% |
Course Description:
Health Communication takes place at every levels of analysis (i.e., individual, interpersonal, group/network, organizational, and societal). Communicating about health can also involve mass media as well as online and via new/emerging technologies. Health communication is a broad, growing, and exciting field with exceptional career opportunities (e.g., for academic positions in health communication; for a visible national/international presence and impact beyond, as well as within, the field of communication, for large federal research grants). Many of our faculty at USC’s Annenberg School for Communication conduct research in and have federal and other grants this area.
Researchers in health communication tend to focus on communication approaches in support of one of two broad behavioral goals:
1) preventing, via behavioral action, diseases/adverse physical and mental health outcomes in the first place, or
(2) understanding/supporting early and accurate disease/health condition diagnosis, effective treatment, and adequate maintenance of a drug/therapy regimen to ameliorate or best control adverse effects of that health condition.
This course is designed to provide an overview of health communication approaches aimed at the prevention (or pre-emption) of diseases (e.g., cancers, infections) or other adverse physical (e.g., injury, violence, suicide, birth defects) or mental health outcomes by the promotion of behavior change (away from risky; towards healthier decisions/behavior). Another Annenberg course (i.e., on Health Communication) is focused on providing an overview of the second domain. In addition to a focus on health communication theory and research on prevention and pre-emption, this course is focused on enhancing participation and personalization of interventions, especially using new communication technologies (e.g., interactive technologies, games, intelligent agents, mobile technologies, social media, etc.). These new technologies afford exceptional opportunities for communication interventions that can incorporate and test new interventions while reaching and personalizing interventions for diverse individuals.
The specific objectives of this course are to provide students with background in:
a. major theories of behavioral prevention.
b. a sampling of empirical research in health communication relevant to behavioral prevention.
c. major methodological approaches in this domain, including the use of randomized longitudinal designs and meta-analyses.
d. how researchers link theory to research and interventions,
e. cutting-edge domains (e.g., using interactive technologies and gaming environments to produce communication interventions over the web).
f. funding priorities in health communication (by major
funding organizations such as the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) that will help shape the future of research in this area.
g. key socialization information in this domain (e.g., Where should I
look for information in this domain? What conferences should I go to? Who should I network with?; where grant funding is available (how would I start thinking about grants?) Etc.)
• Opportunities to develop skills in:
a. Approaching problems encountered in health communication (prevention).
b. Critiquing/Reviewing literature in this domain (as well as searching the literature in health communication and allied disciplines).
c. Meta-analysis.
d. Orally presenting work in conference-like format.
• Opportunities to develop a professional portfolio of work (e.g., conference presentations /potentially publishable work) that can further your career.
These include:
a. Presentation slides for research and teaching health communication (your own associated with a given topic (for your review) as well as those developed by the class). These are associated with weekly assignments.
b. Meta-Analysis: Review of the prevention literature in a given domain to address a theoretical question using meta-analysis. This could be submitted to a conference/provide the basis for a potentially publishable paper and serve to specify what research questions in an area need to be addressed.
c. Conference Style Presentation Slides on your individual project.
Background
Many of the leading causes of death domestically and internationally, such as chronic diseases, acute infections, accidents, suicide, and homicide, are preventable with health education/promotion efforts, or other behavioral interventions. That change may involve reducing individuals’ risky decision-making behaviors, encouraging them to engage in healthier choices, or persuading individuals to be tested for diseases. For example, reducing tobacco use, moderating alcohol use, maintaining a healthy diet, engaging in safer sexual practices, exercising regularly, reducing -- or learning to cope more effectively with --chronic stressors, and behaving in ways that reduce toxin/foodborne illness and illicit drug exposure could reduce the incidence of many chronic diseases. Changing health behaviors, however, often involves more than the individual level of analysis alone: Successful health communication interventions often address social and behavioral factors at one or more levels of analysis (e.g., individual, interpersonal, institutional, community, and policy levels).
Successful prevention (or pre-emption) interventions may use interpersonal or community or media-based, increasingly are using interactive media and advanced communication technologies (e.g., interactive agents, games, social media, smartphones/mobile health/health apps, etc. and interventions delivered “on-line” are part of the mix. Targeting diverse populations, tailoring messages and interventions to those audiences, and personalizing those interventions to optimize risk reduction and health promotion are also major foci in health communication. Increasingly, there is also a focus at major federal agencies charged with promoting the nation’s health (e.g., National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) on encouraging the participation of diverse populations at risk for specific deleterious health outcomes in the research process and reaching (and reducing health disparities in) diverse, often hard to reach audiences. An additional week is devoted to international health communication.
Prevention often involves changing decision-making and behavior. Historically, many of these “decisions” have been thought to involve primarily more rational factors such as cognitions (that implicate more cognitive educational efforts to change beliefs and skills, etc.): And the theories underlying these approaches are typically consistent with that view. Increasingly, we are realizing and formulating theory consistent with the view that many risky decisions are automatic and affectively-based. And, in fact, both cognitive and affective factors appear to predict change in behavior (e.g., change in risky behavior).
Virtual environments (and intelligent agents and games) and on-line interventions for changing behaviors are proving to be especially promising tools for challenging and changing risky behaviors, including changing HIV risk behaviors. We discuss some of these enabling communication technologies and the communication theory and research that underpin their use.
Another topic we discuss throughout is how to review the literature to determine what needs to be done and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for changing behavior. As relevant, we discuss methods that are used in brief “modules” for clarification, drawing on the examples that we are discussing in class. Students will conduct their own potentially publishable meta-analysis for their project paper.
Learning Objectives:
1. Learn how to use meta-analysis and write up a meta-analysis article relevant to health communication prevention for your outlet of interest.
2. Become familiar with areas of focus for health communication prevention research
3. Gain experience reviewing and critiquing journal articles in health communication prevention
4. Special focus on target populations particularly at risk for mental and physical health disorders.
Classes Content
______________________________________________________________________
January 11, 2016 Introduction
Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (2015). The scope of health behavior. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (2015). Theory, research, and practice in health behavior. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Phelan, J. C., & Link, B. G. (2013). Stigma as a Fundamental Cause of Population Health Inequalities. American Journal of Public Health, 103(5), 813–821.
Luquis, R. R. (2014). Health Education Theoretical Models and Multicultural Populations, In 145-170. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
Note: By January 18th identify a potential “health area of focus” that you will investigate more deeply during the course of the semester. This needs to be more “firmed up” by January 25th.
Arrange time to meet with Prof. Miller the week of the 18th to work out your focus for the semester
Prediction and Pre-Emption
January 25, 2016 Individual Models of Health Behavior
Theory – review
Skinner, C. S., Tiro, J., & Champion, V.L. & (2015). The Health Belief Model. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Montano, D. E. & Kasprzyk, D. (2015). Theory of Reasoned Action, Theory of Planned Behavior and the Integrated Behavioral Model. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Prochaska, J. O., Redding, C.A., Evers, K.E. (2015). The Transtheoretical Model and Stages of Change. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Perez, M. A. & Luquis, R.R. (2014). Implications of Changing US Demographics for Health Educators. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
Diaz-Cuellar & Evans, S. F. (2014). Diversity and Health Education. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
February 1, 2016 Meta-analysis Overview (Individual Model examples)
Albarracín, D., Johnson, B. T., Fishbein, M., & Muellerleile, P. A. (2001). Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 142-161. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.142
Albarracin, D.; Gillette, J. C.; Earl, A. N.; Glasman, L, R., Durantini, M. R.; et al. A Test of Major Assumptions About Behavior Change: A Comprehensive Look at the Effects of Passive and Active HIV-Prevention Interventions Since the Beginning of the Epidemic. Psychological Bulletin, 131. 6 (Nov 2005): 856-897.
Selected articles as assigned on blackboard
February 8, 2016 Interpersonal Models of Health Behavior
Theory/research-review
Heaney, C.A., & Viswanath, K. (2015). Introduction to Models of Interpersonal Influences on Health Behavior. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Kelder, S.H., Hoelsher, D., & Perry, C.L. (2015). How individuals, environments, and
health behavior interact. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Holt-Lunstad, J., & Uchino, B. N. (2015). Social support and health. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Valente, T. W. (2015). Social Networks and Health Behavior. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Wetherington, E., Glanz, K., & Schwartzk M. D. (2015). Stress, coping, and health behavior. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Duggan, A., & Street, R. L., Jr. (2015). Interpersonal Communication in Health and Illness. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
February 22, 2016 Meta-analysis (Interpersonal Model Examples)
Durantini, M. R.; Albarracin, D.; Mitchell, A. L.; Earl, A. N.; Gillette, J. C. (2006). Conceptualizing the influence of social agents of behavior change: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of HIV-prevention interventionists for different groups. Psychological Bulletin 132,2: 212-248.
Graves, K. D. (2003). Social cognitive theory and cancer patients quality of life: A meta-analysis of psychosocial intervention components. Health Psychology, 22(2), 210-219. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.22.2.210
Selected articles as assigned on blackboard
February 29, 2016 Community and Group Models of Health Behavior Change
Glanz, K., & Ammerman, A. (2015). Introduction to Community and Group Models of Health Behavior Change. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Wallerstein, N., Minkler, M., Carter-Edwards, L., Avila, M., Sanchez, V. (2015). Improving health through community engagement, community organization, and community building. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Brownson R. C., Tabak, R. G., Stamatakis K. A., & Glanz, K. (2015). Implmentation, Dissemination, and Diffusion of Public Health Interventions. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Viswanath, K., Finnegan, J. R., Jr., & Gollust, S. (2015). Communication and health behavior in a changing media environment. In Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (5th edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Vaugh, E. J., & Krenz, V. D. (2014). Planning, Implementing, and Evaluating Culturally Appropriate Programs. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
March 7, 2016 Meta-analysis (Community and Group models of Health
Behavior Change)
LaCroix, J. M., Synder, L.B., Huedo-Medina, T. B., Johnson, B.T. (2014). Effectiveness of Mass Media Interventions for HI Prevention, 1986-2013: A Meta-Analysis. In JAIDS, 66, p S329-S340. Doi: 10.1097
Selected articles (on blackboard as assigned)
Personalization & Participation
March 31, 2016 Health Communication Interventions: Enhancing
Participation
Perloff, R. M. (2006). Introduction: Communication and Health Care Disparities. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, pp. 755-759. (read in order)
Kreps, Gary L.
(2006). Communication and Racial Inequities in Health Care.
American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 760-774.
Kreuter, M. W., & Haughton, L. T.
(2006). Integrating Culture Into Health Information for African American Women. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 794-811.
Schneider, T. R.
(2006). Getting the Biggest Bang for Your Health Education Buck: Message Framing and Reducing Health Disparities. American Behavioral Scientist, Feb 2006; vol. 49: pp. 812-822.
Shaw, B., Gustafson, D. H., Hawkins, R., McTavish, F., McDowell, H., Pingree, S., & Ballard, D.
(2006). How Underserved Breast Cancer Patients Use and Benefit From eHealth Programs: Implications for Closing the Digital Divide. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 823-834.
Cegala, D. J., & Post, D. M.
(2006). On Addressing Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities: The Potential Role of Patient Communication Skills Interventions. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 853-867.
Hornik, R. C., Ramirez, A. S. (2006). Racial/Ethnic Disparities and Segmentation in Communication Campaigns. American Behavioral Scientist; 49, pp. 868-884
Perloff, R. M., Bonder, B., Ray, G. B., Ray, E. B., & Siminoff, L. A.
(2006). Doctor-Patient Communication, Cultural Competence, and Minority Health: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 835-852.
Zografos, K.N. & Perez, M. A. (2014). Health Disparities and Social Determinants of Health: Implications for Health Education. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
Luquis, R. R. (2014). Culturally Appropriate Communication. Zografos, K.N. & Perez, M. A. (2014). Health Disparities and Social Determinants of Health: Implications for Health Education. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
March 7, 2016 Meta-analyses (Participation)
Webb, M. S. (2008). Treating tobacco dependence among african americans: A meta-analytic review. Health Psychology, 27(3), S271-S282. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.27.3(Suppl.).S271
Seo, D. & Sa J. (2010). A Meta-Analysis of Obesity Interventions Among U.S. Minority Children
Journal of Adolescent Health, Volume 46, Issue 4, 309-323
Readings as assigned on Blackboard
March 14, 2016 Spring Break
March 21, 2016 Enhancing Personalization Using Technologies:
Theory/research and Meta-analysis examples
Campbell, M. K., & Quintiliani, L. M.
(2006). Tailored Interventions in Public Health: Where Does Tailoring Fit in Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities? American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 775-793.
Kreuter, M. , Farrell, D., Olevitch, I., & Brennan, L. (2000). Tailoring health messages: customizing communication with computer technology. Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chapters 1-3..
Noar, S. M., Benac, C. N., & Harris, M. S. (2007). Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 673-693. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673
Krebs, P., Prochaska, J. O., & Rossi, J.S. (2010). A meta-analysis of computer-tailored interventions for health behavior change. Preventive Medicine. 51, 214-221. Doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.06.004
Interactive Mobile, Game, and Intelligent Communication Health Interventions
March 28, 2016 –April 4, 2012 E-health: Preventions and meta-analyses
Selected chapters from:
Noar, S. M., & Harrington, N. G. (Eds., 2012). eHealth applications: Promising strategies for behavior change. New York: Routledge.
April 4, 2016 Meta-analyses
Additional Readings as Assigned
April 11, 2016 Serious Games for Health Communication
Baranowski, T., Buday, R., Thomson, D., Baranowski, J. (2008). Playing for real video games and stories for health-related behavior change. American Journal of Prevention Medicine, 34, 74-82. (review article)
Baranowski, T, et al. (2003). Squire’s quest! Dietary outcome ealuation of a multimedia game. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 24, 52-61.
Huss, K., Winkelstein, M., Nanda, J., Naumann, PI, Sloan, ED, Huss, R.W. (2003). Computer game for inner-city children does not improve asthma outcomes. Journal of Pediatric Health Care. 17, 72-78.
Kato, P. M., Cole, S.W., Bradlyn, A.S., & Pollock, B. H (2008). A video game improves behavioral outcomes in adolescents and young adults with cancer: A randomized trial. Pediatrics, 122, e305-317. Learn more about this online (and see video) at
Lieberman, D. A. (2001). Management of chronic pediatric diseases with interactive health games: Theory and research findings. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 24, 26-38.
Miller, C.K. (2007). Evaluation of a computer-based game about the glycemic index among college age students. Topics in Clinical Nutrition, 22, 299-306.
April 18, 2016 SOLVE (Socially Optimized Learning in Virtual Environments):
Interactive videos/on-line usage/intelligent agents in animated games
Miller, L.C., Christensen, J. L., Godoy, C.G., Appleby, P. R., Corsbie-Massay, C., & Read, S. J. (2008). Reducing risky sexual decision-making in the virtual and in the real-world: Serious games, intelligent agents, and a SOLVE approach. In U. Ritterfeld, M. Cody, P. Vorderer (Eds.) Serious Games: Mechanisms and effects. London: Routledge/LEA Press.
Read, S. J., Miller, L. C., Appleby, P. R., Nwosu, M. E., Reynaldo, S., Lauren, A. & Putcha, A. (2006). Socially optimized learning in a virtual environment: Reducing risky sexual behavior among men who have sex with men. Human Communication Research, 32, 1-34.
Woodiel,D. K., Cowdery, J.E. (2014). Culture and Sexual Orientation. Zografos, K.N. & Perez, M. A. (2014). Health Disparities and Social Determinants of Health: Implications for Health Education. In Pérez, M. A., & Luquis (Eds). (2014) (PL). Cultural Competence in Health Education and Health Promotion (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Order at
Christensen, J. L., Miller, L.C., Applebu, P R., Corsbie-Massay, C., Godoy, C. G., Marsella, S.C., & Read, S. J. (2013). Reducing shame in a game that predicts HIV risk reduction for young adult MSM: A randomized trial delivered nationally over the web. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 16, S2, pp.1-8.
April 25, 2016 Oral Reports
April 29. 2016 Final Paper Due
Academic Integrity Policy:
The Annenberg School for Communication is committed to upholding the University’s Academic Integrity code as detailed in the SCampus Guide. It is the policy of the School of Communication to report all violations of the code. Any serious violation or pattern of violations of the Academic Integrity Code will result in the student’s expulsion from the Communication degree program.
It is particularly important that you are aware of and avoid plagiarism, cheating on exams, fabricating data for a project, submitting a paper to more than one professor, or submitting a paper authored by anyone other than yourself. If you have doubts about any of these practices, confer with a faculty member.
Resources on academic dishonesty can be found on the Student Judicial Affairs Web site (.)
“Guide to Avoiding Plagiarism” addresses issues of paraphrasing, quotations, and citation in written assignments, drawing heavily upon materials used in the university’s writing program; “Understanding and avoiding academic dishonesty” addresses more general issues of academic integrity, including guidelines for adhering to standards concerning examinations and unauthorized collaboration.
The “2005-2006 SCampus” () contains the university’s student conduct code and other student-related policies.
Disabilities Policy:
Students requesting academic accommodations based on a disability are required to register with Disability Services and Programs (DSP) each semester. A letter of verification for approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP when adequate documentation is filed. Please be sure the letter is delivered to me as early in the semester as possible. DSP is open Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00. The office is in Student Union 301 and their phone number is (213) 740-0776.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.