| Course | PHE 330 Public Health Education and Communication |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | undergraduate short paper analyzing and segmenting a communication audience |
| Length | About 1,000 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | BS Public Health |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PHE 330 Module 2
Three Audiences on One Beach: Segmenting Visitors and Locals for a Lake Michigan Pier Safety Message
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
PHE 330: Public Health Education and Communication
Module Two Short Paper
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
Three Audiences on One Beach: Segmenting Visitors and Locals for a Lake Michigan Pier Safety Message
A message for everyone is a message for no one. Before the health department writes a word about pier currents, it needs to know who is at risk, what they already believe, where they get information and whom they trust. This paper analyzes the audience for a drowning prevention message in a composite harbor town on Michigan's Lake Michigan coast. It draws on ten years of local drowning and rescue records, two weekends of beach observation and a short intercept survey, and divides the audience into segments that will need different messages and channels. Each source has gaps, which the paper notes as it goes.
Who Is at Risk
County records show nine drownings and twenty-two water rescues near the two piers over ten years. Seven of the nine people who drowned were men between 16 and 30, and six lived more than a hundred miles inland. Most incidents happened on windy afternoons in July and August, with waves of three feet or more. Liu and Wu (2022) describe how currents beside piers and breakwaters on Lake Michigan strengthen under certain wave and wind conditions, which matches the timing of local incidents. Rescues also involved children, mostly from families on day trips, and several local teenagers jumping from the pier ends.
What They Believe
Over two weekends, the student and a lifeguard asked 112 beachgoers five questions about the flags, currents and what they would do if pulled away from shore. Among visitors from inland cities, only one in four correctly said a red flag meant dangerous water, and most said they would swim straight back toward the beach if caught, the response most likely to exhaust a swimmer. Fallon et al. (2017) found similar gaps in rip current knowledge among ocean beachgoers in Miami, so this is not unique to inland visitors. Local teenagers knew the flags well but said currents were a problem for tourists, not for strong swimmers like themselves. Parents on day trips were most worried about their children and least about themselves.
Segment One: Visiting Young Men
Young men visiting from inland cities are the highest-risk segment. They come in groups, often plan the trip the day before, look up the beach on their phones and spend most of their time near the piers. They do not read signs at the beach entrance, which most enter from a parking lot behind the dunes. They trust friends and online reviews more than official sources. Messages must reach them before they arrive, on the platforms they use to plan trips, and must speak to their confidence rather than lecture them. In the survey, eight of the eleven young male visitors who answered said they were strong swimmers, and none had heard of currents forming beside piers. Three said they had jumped from the pier end on an earlier trip. Their confidence is not a flaw to be shamed; it is a fact the message must work with, perhaps by presenting the right response as what strong swimmers do rather than as a rule for the weak.
Segment Two: Day-Trip Families
Families on day trips are more cautious and more likely to read signs, but parents often enter the water to retrieve a child and become victims themselves. They trust lifeguards, park staff and pediatric advice. Messages for this segment should focus on keeping children close, knowing the flags and not going in after someone, instead calling for help and throwing something that floats. Families also arrive with more time to read and listen. Half of the parents surveyed had stopped at the visitor center or a hotel desk on the way, which means printed material and a brief word from staff can reach them before they reach the sand. Their main misunderstanding was that a child in shallow water near the pier was safe, when the currents run along the structure even close to shore.
Segment Three: Local Teenagers
Local teenagers jumping from the pier ends know the water well but underestimate risk on rough days and see warnings as meant for others. They respond to peers, coaches and lifeguards their own age. The most promising messenger for them may be the high school swim team, several of whom work as summer lifeguards. Teenagers are also the group most likely to witness an emergency, since they spend whole days near the piers. That makes them potential rescuers and alarm raisers as well as swimmers at risk, and a message that asks them to watch out for visitors may land better than one that warns them about themselves.
Channels and Reach
Snyder (2007) reviewed health communication campaigns and found that their average effects on behavior are modest, which makes reaching the right people efficiently all the more important. For visiting young men, the most promising channels are online maps and review sites, social media advertising aimed by location and age during summer weekends and signs at the parking lot pay stations. For families, the visitor center, campground check-ins and printed materials at hotels work better. For teenagers, the school, swim team and lifeguard program are the channels. The survey also asked where people would look for beach conditions on the day of a visit. Visitors named weather apps and map listings far more often than official websites, which no visitor under thirty had used. That finding argues for placing condition alerts and the escape message where visitors already look rather than building a new page they will never open.
Priority
Because visiting young men account for most deaths, the campaign should reach them first, with family and teen messages as secondary strands. The next paper will design messages for the priority segment.
Conclusion
The beach has one hazard but at least three audiences, each with different beliefs, channels and trusted voices. Knowing them is what turns a generic warning into messages people will see and act on. The rest of the course builds on these three portraits.
References
Fallon, K. M., Lai, Q., & Leatherman, S. P. (2017). Rip current literacy of beachgoers at Miami Beach, Florida. Natural Hazards, 90(2), 601-621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-3060-7
Liu, Y., & Wu, C. H. (2022). Rip currents near coastal structures in Lake Michigan: Characterization and assessment for warnings. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 48(3), 645-658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2022.03.001
Snyder, L. B. (2007). Health communication campaigns and their impact on behavior. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 39(2, Suppl.), S32-S40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2006.09.004
What the PHE 330 Module 2 instructions ask for
The second PHE 330 module calls for a short paper, usually three to four APA 7 pages, analyzing the audience for a health message. Use whatever data you can gather, such as local records, observation or a small survey, to show who is at risk. Describe what the audience already knows and believes, and look for differences among subgroups. Divide the audience into segments and describe each one's beliefs, information sources, trusted messengers and the action you want from them. Explain which channels reach each segment, using research on campaign reach or effects. Finish by choosing a priority segment and explaining why, since the next step, message design, depends on knowing exactly who you are writing for.
How this PHE 330 Module 2 audience short paper example is built
Lake Michigan's harbor town records show nine pier drownings in ten years, seven of them men aged 16 to 30 and six from far inland, mostly on windy summer afternoons, consistent with Liu and Wu's description of currents beside piers. A 112-person intercept survey finds only a quarter of inland visitors know the red flag and most would swim straight back, echoing Fallon and colleagues' Miami findings. Three segments emerge: visiting young men who plan online and trust friends, day-trip parents who become victims while rescuing children and local teens who think warnings are for tourists. Snyder's modest campaign effects make precise channels essential, and the PHE 330 paper puts visiting young men first.
Where the PHE 330 Module 2 rubric puts the points
PHE 330 audience papers are generally graded on use of data to identify who is at risk, attention to the audience's existing beliefs and knowledge, meaningful segmentation with distinct descriptions, matching channels and messengers to each segment, use of communication research and a reasoned choice of priority segment. Papers that score highest collect even a small amount of their own audience data and describe segments specifically enough to guide message writing. Graders value recognition of different actions for different segments. Clear structure, respectful language about the audience and correct APA 7 citations complete stronger submissions. Segments specific enough to write for score best.
PHE 330 Module 2 help: the mistakes that cost points
Audience papers in this course lose credit by defining the audience as the general public, relying only on national statistics, describing segments with demographics but no beliefs or channels or skipping the choice of a priority segment. Some also assume the audience uses the same media as the writer. If your health issue is different, such as vaccination, sun safety or vaping, share the directions plus any numbers or notes you have, and the paper will divide your own audience. A short informal survey or interviews with a few people from the audience greatly improve the analysis. Our PHE 330 audience papers describe what each segment believes and where to reach it.
Get PHE 330 Module 2 written to your instructions
Send the PHE 330 Module 2 prompt, your health issue and any local data or observations. The paper will identify who is at risk, describe beliefs and information habits, divide the audience into segments with channels and messengers and choose a priority segment, delivered in one to two days, with the first paper free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More PHE 330 papers and related BS Public Health samples
- PHE 330 Module 1 Discussion: Why the Warning Flags Are Ignored
- PHE 101 Module 4 Discussion: Rules, Liberty and the Family Farm
- PHE 321 Module 4 Discussion: Kissing Bugs, Kennels and the Places Disease Lives
- PHE 327 Module 6 Analysis Short Paper: Reading the Survey Results
PHE 330 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free PHE 330 Module 2 Audience Short Paper sample?
The complete PHE 330 Module 2 paper is on this page, segmenting the audience for a Lake Michigan pier drowning prevention message by beliefs and channels.
What is audience segmentation in health communication?
Dividing an audience into groups with similar beliefs, information habits and risks so that each can receive messages and channels suited to it.
How can a student gather audience data?
Through local records, observation, short intercept surveys or interviews with members of the audience, even on a small scale.
Why choose a priority segment?
Because resources are limited and campaign effects are modest, so focusing first on the group at greatest risk makes the most difference.
What should be known about each audience segment?
Their risk, what they believe, where they get information, whom they trust and the specific action you want from them.