| Course | PHE 330 Public Health Education and Communication |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | undergraduate short paper designing health messages with the extended parallel process model |
| Length | About 1,020 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 3
Strong Swimmers Float: Designing Pier Current Messages With the Extended Parallel Process Model
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
PHE 330: Public Health Education and Communication
Module Three 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.
Strong Swimmers Float: Designing Pier Current Messages With the Extended Parallel Process Model
The audience analysis showed that the people most likely to drown beside the harbor piers are young men from inland cities who think of themselves as strong swimmers, do not know what the flags mean and would swim straight back toward shore if caught in a current. This paper designs messages for them. It uses the extended parallel process model to decide what each message must contain, drafts three messages, describes how they were tested with members of the audience and reports what changed. The goal is not a clever slogan but a message that leads a confident visitor to do the right thing in the few seconds when it matters. Each message also has to fit a phone screen or a small sign.
The Model
Witte (1992) proposed that people evaluate a fear message in two steps. First they judge the threat: is it serious, and could it happen to me? If the threat seems trivial or irrelevant, they ignore the message. If it seems real, they judge the response: does the recommended action work, and can I do it? If a message makes the danger real and the response believable, people turn to danger control, taking the protective action. If the danger feels real but the response seems useless or out of reach, they move toward fear control, protecting themselves emotionally by denying the danger, avoiding the message or dismissing its source. Maloney et al. (2011) reviewed two decades of research on the model and concluded that its central prediction, that strong threat messages need equally strong efficacy messages, has held up, while noting that fear without efficacy can backfire.
What the Audience Needs
For confident young men, both appraisals are difficult. On threat, they already believe drowning happens to weak swimmers or to children, not to them. A message that simply says currents are dangerous will be judged irrelevant. On efficacy, the recommended response, which is to stop fighting the current, turn onto the back, float and then move out of the current along its edge or let it carry the swimmer until it weakens, runs against instinct and against their self-image as strong swimmers. Fallon et al. (2017) found that many beachgoers lacked accurate knowledge about how to escape rip currents, so the response must be taught, not assumed. A good message must make the threat personal for strong swimmers and make floating feel like a strong swimmer's choice.
Three Draft Messages
Message A, for parking lot pay stations and a map listing photo, shows a fit young man floating on his back beside the pier with the words: Strong swimmers drown here every summer fighting the current. Strong swimmers who float, live. Flip. Float. Follow the edge out. Message B, a short phone video for social media ads aimed at visitors, follows a local lifeguard who explains in fifteen seconds why fighting a pier current exhausts even a fit swimmer, then demonstrates floating and moving sideways. Message C, a sign at the pier entrance, uses the flag colors with plain meanings, red means stay out today, yellow means currents possible, swim near a guard, and the same three-step response beneath.
Why Each Choice Was Made
Each element targets an appraisal. Using a fit young man and the phrase strong swimmers drown here addresses perceived susceptibility by putting the threat on people like the audience. Every summer and here make it local and recurrent. The three verbs, flip, float, follow, give a short, memorable response, and pairing them with an image of a confident floater addresses self-efficacy by showing the action as something a capable person does. The lifeguard video adds response efficacy, explaining why floating works, and uses a messenger close in age. The pier sign translates the flags into actions, closing the meaning gap found in the survey.
Testing Round One
Twelve young men aged 18 to 29, recruited at the beach and through a community college in an inland city, viewed the drafts and answered questions about what each meant, whether it applied to them, whether floating would work and whether they could do it. Message A drew the strongest reactions, but four men said the first line felt like being called weak. Message B was seen as credible because of the lifeguard, but the first version ran thirty seconds and most said they would scroll past. Message C was clear but dull, and two men did not connect the colors to actions.
Revisions and Round Two
Message A was rewritten to lead with respect: The lake is stronger than any swimmer. Smart swimmers float. The video was cut to fifteen seconds, opening with the lifeguard floating calmly while a voice says this is what strong looks like in a current. Message C added a simple drawing of a person floating beside each color. In a second round with eight of the same participants, all eight correctly described the response after seeing Message A or B, and seven said they could do it. None said the revised Message A felt insulting.
Limits
Twelve participants are too few to measure effects, and saying one would float on a sunny campus is not the same as doing it in cold, churning water. Testing showed that the messages are understood and accepted, not that they change behavior. That question belongs to the campaign evaluation in Project Two.
A field test is the natural next step. During two July weekends, lifeguards could ask swimmers coming out near the piers how they would escape a current, comparing answers before and after the signs and ads appear. That would not measure rescues or deaths, which are too rare to track quickly, but it would show whether the response is spreading among the people who need it.
Conclusion
Applying the extended parallel process model meant giving equal weight to threat and response and shaping both for a confident audience. Testing with young men themselves changed the lead line, the video length and the sign design. The result is a small set of messages ready for a communication plan.
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
Maloney, E. K., Lapinski, M. K., & Witte, K. (2011). Fear appeals and persuasion: A review and update of the extended parallel process model. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(4), 206-219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00341.x
Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59(4), 329-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376276
What the PHE 330 Module 3 instructions ask for
For Module Three, PHE 330 asks for a short paper of roughly three or four APA 7 pages designing messages for your priority audience. Choose a theory that fits the problem, such as the extended parallel process model, the health belief model or social norms, and explain what it says a message must contain. Analyze your audience in those terms. Draft two or three messages for different channels and explain how each element addresses the theory. Test the drafts with members of the audience, even a small group, and report what they understood, accepted or rejected. Show how the messages changed. Close with what testing can and cannot tell you about whether the messages will change behavior.
How this PHE 330 Module 3 message design short paper example is built
Lake Michigan's pier messages target visiting young men who think drowning happens to weak swimmers. Witte's model and Maloney and colleagues' review say threat and efficacy must both be strong, and Fallon and colleagues' findings show the escape response must be taught. Three drafts follow: a pay-station image of a fit floater with Flip, Float, Follow, a fifteen-second lifeguard video and a flag sign translating colors into actions. Twelve young men test them; the line about strong swimmers drowning feels insulting and the video runs too long. Revisions lead with The lake is stronger than any swimmer, and in round two all eight participants describe the response correctly, a PHE 330 result framed as understanding, not behavior.
Where the PHE 330 Module 3 rubric puts the points
Graders of the PHE 330 message design paper typically reward an accurate explanation of a relevant theory, analysis of the audience through that theory, messages whose elements clearly map to theoretical constructs, appropriate adaptation to channels, genuine testing with the audience, revisions that respond to what was learned and honesty about the limits of testing. Papers that score highest show draft and revised wording side by side. Graders value respect for the audience and attention to unintended reactions, such as feeling insulted. Clear organization and correct APA 7 citations complete stronger submissions. Respectful handling of audience objections earns credit.
PHE 330 Module 3 help: the mistakes that cost points
Message design papers in this course lose marks when they name a theory without applying it, write messages for a general audience, skip testing or claim that a handful of positive reactions proves a message works. Some also use fear without a clear response, which the research warns against. If your topic or theory is different, such as a social norms message about drinking or a health belief model message about screening, send the prompt and your audience analysis and the paper will design and test messages accordingly. Even five or six testers from the audience make a real difference. Our PHE 330 message papers show how each word serves the theory and how testing changed it.
Get PHE 330 Module 3 written to your instructions
Send the PHE 330 Module 3 prompt with your audience analysis and the theory you plan to use. We will explain the theory, draft messages for your channels, map each element to it, design a small test, report revisions and state the limits, generally back within two days, and newcomers pay nothing for the first one. 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 330 Module 2 Audience Short Paper: Who Is in the Water and How to Reach Them
- PHE 330 Module 4 Discussion: Escape Advice, Rumors and the Comment Section
- PHE 330 Module 5 Project One: A Communication Plan for Pier Currents
- PHE 330 Module 6 Media Effects Short Paper: What a Campaign Can and Cannot Change
- PHE 330 Module 7 Project Two: Campaign Materials and an Evaluation Plan
- PHE 330 Module 8 Discussion: Closing Reflection on Communicating Risk
- PHE 321 Module 5 Project One: Estimating the Burden of Chagas Disease in Three Counties
- PHE 327 Module 5 Project One: The Community Assessment Plan
- PHE 101 Module 7 Project Two: A Layered Plan to Prevent Entrapment
PHE 330 Module 3 questions, answered
Where can I find a free PHE 330 Module 3 Message Design Short Paper sample?
This page has the full PHE 330 Module 3 paper, designing pier current messages with the extended parallel process model and testing them with young men.
How does the extended parallel process model guide message design?
It says a message must make the threat feel serious and personal and must also present a response the audience believes works and can carry out.
What should someone do if caught in a current near a pier?
Water safety groups advise not fighting the current but turning onto the back to float, then moving out along its edge or calling for help.
How many people are needed to test a health message?
Even a small group of eight to twelve audience members can reveal misunderstandings and negative reactions before a campaign launches.
Can fear messages backfire?
Yes. When fear is high but people doubt they can act, they may dismiss the message or its source rather than protect themselves.