CITATION AND COPYRIGHT INFORMATION:
Cite as: Johnsson-Smaragdi, U. (1999, May). Students’ Sense-Making of printed information about AIDS. Paper presented at a non-divisional workshop held at the meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
© Ulla Johnsson-Smaragdi (1999).

ESSENCE OF PROJECT:
The Sense-Making theory suggests that we should not only focus on the individual’s understanding of media messages, but more especially on how this understanding is constructed within a particular context. With this paradigm in mind, an international comparative study, involving Quebec, Sweden, Mexico and Spain, whose purpose is to study the relevance of the Sense-Making approach in different cultural contexts when it comes to health campaigns, is planned. As part of the preliminary work, a pilot study was conducted on Swedish university students’ perceptions of printed information about AIDS prevention. Flyers, produced by the National Health Institute in Stockholm, illustrating three different styles of discourse (factual, experiential and humorous) were used. Students were provided with the pamphlets and asked to fill out a questionnaire that asked how they made sense of these materials in relation to their personal lives. Although the larger aim of the investigation is to test the relevance of the sense-making approach for the design and evaluation of media health campaigns, the two specific goals of this pilot study were to help us understand college students’ experiences with the issue of AIDS and also, to evaluate the usefulness and limitations of using a written, open-ended questionnaire within a Sense-Making approach.

THE REASONS I TOOK THIS ROAD:
Working with research on media and communication, I am particularly interested in the ways individuals use and understand media and in how they communicate. I am well acquainted with theories of reception and uses and gratification. When I came across Sense-Making theory I could see its potential for the areas I am researching. As the other theories, it takes the perspective of the individual and sees her as actively creating meaning and trying to cope with her everyday situation with its problems, obstacles and questions and to continually interpret information and the world around. Thus, Sense-Making Methodology appeared promising as a way of viewing how people interact with the media in general and with health materials in particular. Indeed, the design of health messages is a topic of social importance. Even though there have been success stories in this area, more often than not, there also have been “failure” stories. Even casting the problem in those terms is revealing of an underlying view of communication and possibly of significance in understanding how the concepts undergirding the initial design process and the ensuing evaluation unwittingly set limits on what is to be expected from launching a message out into the world. The success or failure of a campaign is commonly assessed from the perspective of the sender and not from the receiver’s viewpoint. It means that the campaign’s capacity to change behavior in a fairly short-term perspective is the usual criteria. However, the receiver of the message—or the user of it—may not change her behavior immediately, but may acquire new knowledge, alter her attitude or viewpoint somewhat and maybe use the information later on. The pilot study also had a methodological goal. Sense-Making Methodology suggests that the meaning-making process may be accessed through an in-depth interview. However, practical reasons make it unlikely that one could always resort to personal interviewing in the context of health promotion. Therefore, this project also served to begin thinking to what extent a different data collection technique, such as a written questionnaire, could be useful in exploring peoples’ sense-making.

THE BEST OF WHAT I HAVE ACHIEVED:
1) Suggesting that Sense-Making Methodology does provide a handle to grasp these phenomena as evidenced by some of the results obtained. For instance, in addition to Sense-Making questions, we also posed the traditional questions “What did you like/dislike about these materials?” The answers to thesequestions appear more relevant when they are “translated” into Sense-Making terminology. For example, some students said they liked the factual brochure because it was sober and discrete, thus increasing the likelihood they would be not embarrassed to pick it up in a public area. Translating this reason into a need for privacy felt by some people may highlight the fact that the designers are “addressing” individuals through these materials, in other words, setting up a dialogue zone which will speak to some needs more than to others. Other students thought the factual brochure was dry and clinical and they did not feel enticed to read it, thereby expressing the need to be “invited” into a dialogue zone with the materials. In fact, it is interesting to consider students’ answers as reflective of their movements within different time-spaces.

What is at issue here is whether designing the materials at the outset within a Sense-Making framework (i.e., thinking of addressing needs, questions,…) would avoid an “after-the-fact autopsy” of the campaign. Certainly, these needs are connected to deep ramifications about one’s sexual identity and experience (i.e., shyness vs. excitement as the predominating factor). Although we recognize that interpersonal communication is fraught with potential misunderstandings and particular readings and we expect to be continually adjusting our interactions, it appears surprisingly ‘natural’ to view media messages as bounded and finite when, in fact, they are not when viewed in a constructivist perspective.

2) Bringing out preliminary trends in preferred readings of health materials under study and seeing materials as complementary rather than in opposition. Thus, the factual flyer speaks to a need for hard facts, the cartoon speaks to a need for a refreshing approach to the topic of AIDS prevention to relieve saturation and the experiential flyer speaks to a need for sensuality and romance. The design of the factual flyer makes it appear as a brochure that one consults in case of a problem, when one feels that information is needed—often after a problem has appeared and not before it appears. No subject saw the different flyers as different facets of one person’s sexual experience (technical, emotional, humorous) nor did anyone evoke the possibility that you could have some use for any of the pamphlets at different times.

3) It was clear that the students had some difficulties grasping the sense-making concepts used in the questions and that they sometimes perceived them as asking about almost the same thing (what relates to personal experience, situation, needs, problems, questions, obstacles, gaps, resources, solutions, use). When interviewing this may be no big problem, but in a questionnaire there is no option to explain the questions and the concepts or to put them differently. Maybe a solution could be to give some kind of handle or clue in connection to each question.

WHAT HAS BEEN HELPFUL:
- A contrasting diversity of printed information on AIDS illustrating different dialogic spheres

WHAT I HAVE STRUGGLED WITH:
- conceptual slippage: i.e., fully “honoring” a dialogic view of media and not falling into talk about media ‘reception’ for instance, which even though it is associated with active audience studies, belies a more linear view of communication
- not to impose readings when pre-analyzing the materials, and not to slip from the sense-making perspective into other, more ‘conventional’ ways of analyzing texts
- not falling prey to despair of finding commonalities when considering the number and complexity of variables involved in such phenomena
- respecting the openness and richness of Sense-Making Methodology while searching for practical solutions to health communication problems.

I do not feel that I have a good grasp of the Sense-Making theory, methodology and style of analysis. In a way I started in the middle of sense-making, so to speak. I now think that I first should have got a better theoretical understanding of the theory and its concepts and thereafter thought about its methodological implications (of course this is always an interactive process, but ..), and then more practically tried it out by interviewing and/or a questionnaire. As it is, I tried to analyze how students make sense of printed material, without deciding what is most relevant—the material and its sense-making potential, the students’ reaction to it or the students’ situation. The most relevant answer probably is that it is the combination of all this, but it is very easy to slide towards one or the other when analyzing, especially as one aim is to understand how health messages may be improved using a sense-making approach.

I have also considered the implications of the sense-making approach in general and what it means for sampling in trying to understand how individuals make sense of information. I first came to know it as a theory for making sense of information you seek and want to have. I ponder as to whether or not it makes a huge difference for the reactions to information if someone actively is seeking it or just happens to stumble across it or maybe can’t avoid it. It would also seem interesting to study the more or less passive individuals, and maybe uninterested, receiver (maybe not yet user!?) of information and their reactions is also interesting, especially when comparing with the active user, but it may have other implications for how to approach and analyze. If someone is actively seeking information, one may know more about where the gaps are and may have some sort of schema as to how to interpret the information. Someone casually meeting or being presented with the information, may react with indifference, hardly noticing it in the flood of information they are overloaded with, or, if asked to, relate it in a superficial way to their experience and lives. As an example, if the interest is in health messages about AIDS prevention, maybe we should identify individuals at different stages of their ‘sexual career’:—never been sexually active—currently inactive but having had unprotected intercourse in the past—if sexually active, having a single partner or multiple partners, etc. I think that these groups would need very different kinds of information and also make sense of the same kind of information very differently. So how do we select persons to study? Maybe first identify persons at different stages in their career and then analyze their sense-making processes separately? So how then do we create messages that suits all of them in their particular situation?

I have also struggled with Sense-Making Methodology. Sometimes the concepts, and particularly questions relating to them appear a bit vague. For instance, ‘How does this relate to your personal experience, situation, problems’ is a very general and open question, and is meant to be but that makes it difficult to contextualize and relate subjects’ answers. Could the sense-making interview method be profitably combined with the ‘Contextual Mapping’ method (developed by Stefan Tax at KPN research in Holland)? In the Contextual mapping method one first identifies different contexts in life, then different situations within these contexts, thereafter needs and behavior, problems and hindrances for using something (information, media or other) within these situations. It makes the interview and the topic much more concrete and it has connections with the Sense-Making concepts. In addition, the interview proceeds more like an interactive discussion between interviewer and the person interviewed, since the structure of the interview grows before their eyes and can easily be modified en route. This is accomplished by identifying the concepts with different colors (blue for context, red for situation, brown for hindrance,…) and writing a label for the specific context, situation or hindrance on magnetic bricks that can be attached to a white board and positioned relative to each other. This kind of visual support may be appealing to some young people who are more reluctant about strictly verbal interactions.

WHAT WOULD HELP NOW:
- discussion of the points made above about information use in relation to the person’s interest for it, the sampling of subjects at different stages of their ‘health career’ and variations on Sense-Making methodology
- suggestions as to how to construct relevant written instruments for investigating Sense-Making
- ideas about the design of dialogic spheres as applied to printed information about AIDS

PROJECT ABSTRACT:
This pilot is a part of preliminary studies in view of an international comparative study of health messages aimed at young people. The purpose is to study the relevance of a meaning-making approach in different cultural contexts when it comes to health campaigns. It means that we will not only focus on how the individual understands messages, but also what in the context or situation makes the individual seek out the message. One purpose is to understand how youth use health information and what kinds of information they need at different times and for different purposes. A second purpose is to test theory and methodology. In other pilot studies, group interviews have been conducted along with open-ended written questionnaires, which have been analyzed qualitatively. The development of a questionnaire with more specific alternatives, which could be used as a complement to the more qualitative data, is also being considered.

REFERENCES:
(For references to works by Dervin and colleagues, see Dervin’s writings: Chronological listing.)

Atwood, R & al (1982) Children´s Realities in Television Viewing: Exploring Situational Information Seeking. Communication Yearbook, 6, 605-626.

Frenette, M. (1998). Une approche constructiviste pour les messages antitabagiques destinés aux jeunes. Revue Québécoise de Psychologie, 19 (1), 109-134.

Savolainen, R. (1995). Everyday Life Information Seeking: Approaching Information seeking in the Context of ‘Way of Life’. LISR (Library Information Science Research), 17, 259-294.

Tax, S. (1997). Contextual Mapping: An interview method that uses hexagons to investigate communication needs. Leidschendam, Netherlands: KPN Research (Unpublished paper ).

OTHER MATERIALS BY THIS AUTHOR ON THIS WEB SITE:
See: http://communication.sbs.ohio-state.edu/sense-making/AAauthors/authorlistjohnsson.html