Across the United States, pollution in waterways is a major environmental issue. Rivers and streams often become polluted from storm-water runoff in cities, where the water may pick up and carry bacteria and other harmful pollutants. A significant source of pollution is dog waste, which has caused nearly 7,000 cities to develop educational campaigns encouraging people to pick up after their pets. Previous research has shown that the majority of dog owners self-reported picking up after their pets during walks, but more information is needed regarding the relationship between perceptions of picking up waste and decision-making. In this study, the researchers applied the Health Benefit Model (HBM)—a model that correlates beliefs and behaviors—to understand people's perceptions and behaviors regarding dog waste. This study sought to develop an educational campaign by demonstrating how perceptions of an issue affect people's behaviors.
The Health Benefit Model was conceived in the late 1950s to relate people's beliefs of certain health issues to their behaviors. For instance, the model reasons that a person who believes they will get sick from germs is likely to wash their hands frequently to prevent germs from spreading. HBM states that when someone perceives a threat then he/she is more likely to take steps to mitigate that threat. Similarly, when someone anticipates a beneficial outcome from an action, they will act in a manner to achieve that outcome. Previous research has indicated that HBM is most applicable in situations involving low-risk behaviors that have harmful ramifications. The researchers linked HBM to this study because preventing water pollution by picking up after a dog is a low-risk action, but leaving it may have considerable environmental consequences—particularly if many dog-owners do not clean up after their pets.
The authors conducted an educational campaign in 2012 in Pullman, Washington, by displaying posters in pet stores, newspapers, and mailing information to residents. The advertisements included a QR code or a web link, which led participants to a survey. The respondents ranged in age from 17 years to 56 years and older. The survey contained 18 questions and garnered 455 responses from dog owners who use both city streets and trails. The questionnaire addressed four predictors of behaviors: 1) perceived threat, 2) perceived benefits, 3) perceived barriers, and 4) cues to action. The researchers used statistics to measure the correlation between the predictors and the respondents' decision to pick up or leave their pet's waste.
Overall, the authors concluded that the findings with this study correlate with the HBM theory. Respondents stated primary benefits and threats associated with picking up dog waste, indicating that the HBM model correlates with pet waste management. This study demonstrated that humans will alter their behaviors based on perceived health benefits or threats associated with pet waste.
The findings indicated that 95% of respondents pick up after their pet, which is significantly higher than previous research. The authors believe that people may have over-reported how frequently they pick up after their pet(s) because they perceive it as the right thing to do. Researchers also found that the most commonly selected consequence of not picking up dog waste was failure to be courteous to others. Among respondents, this perceived threat was more common to dog walkers on city streets than on trails. In terms of barriers, respondents indicated that lack of resources or bags prevented them from picking up pet waste.
The study applied four messaging and reminder strategies that included a police officer, bag dispensers and availability, and signs. While survey responses indicated that an officer would be the most effective messenger, open-ended responses suggested resource availability would be best. For instance, respondents recommended placing bag dispensers and trash cans throughout trails and streets.
A major limitation with this study is that respondents self-reported their behavior. This may have caused an inaccurate estimation of pet owners that pick up after their pets. In addition, the researchers only analyzed responses from pet owners, failing to include paid dog walkers. Understanding how all dog walkers perceive health benefits and threats of dog waste may be important to establish a successful educational campaign. Lastly, the authors highlighted that the study did not test behavioral outcomes associated with their recommendations.
The authors recommend that pet waste campaigns should be adjusted to the audience and location. For example, campaigns on the street should have available resources and signs reminding dog walkers to be courteous to others by picking up pet waste. On trails, the campaign should highlight the benefit of not stepping in fecal matter and provide garbage cans. The authors suggested that these campaigns may be effective in other cities because the respondents' perceptions of dog waste align with previous research. This study demonstrated how practitioners can apply the HBM model to improve environmental education campaigns by studying how participants' perceptions of a health risk influence their behavior. Once practitioners understand the perceptions that drive certain actions, they can tailor educational campaigns to be most effective.
The Bottom Line
<p>Numerous U.S. cities have established educational campaigns to encourage residents to pick up after their pets to reduce pollution in waterways. The Health Benefit Model (HBM) suggests people's perception of health benefits and threats will affect their behavior. This study applied HBM to determine how dog walkers within Pullman, Washington, perceived the threats and benefits associated with picking up dog waste. In 2012, the authors conducted an educational campaign and surveyed dog-owners about perceived benefits and threats in addition to effective messaging strategies. The results showed that in urban areas, the biggest threat to not picking up dog waste was failure to be courteous to others; on trails, the most commonly identified threat was stepping in the animal excretion. For both locations, the most common barrier was lack of available resources (bags and trash bins). As a result, the authors recommended altering the educational campaign to appeal to the specific audience. The study demonstrated how practitioners can apply the HBM model to understand associated perceptions of an issue and resulting behaviors to improve environmental education campaigns.</p>
Research Partner