Campaigns to persuade young men against carrying knives should concentrate on the dangers of serious and permanent injury rather than the risk of death or prison. So suggests a researcher in a presentation to the annual conference of the British Psychological Society’s Division of Forensic Psychology.
In his research, Dr Marek Palasinski from Liverpool John Moores University carried out four studies. ‘Study one’, with a sample of 155 men, identified the beliefs and attitudes that are associated with the tolerance of knife-carrying.
Its results showed the correlations between physical defence ability, limited trust in authority, limited control over one’s status and the need for respect, and how they predict aggressive masculinity that in turn is associated with the tolerance of knife carrying. In ‘study two’, a sample of 200 men examined the persuasiveness of various existing anti-knife slogan, showing that a slogan about injury was seen as more persuasive than those related to death and control.
In ‘study three’, a sample 169 men rated the persuasiveness, and believability of eight popular anti-knife posters, showing that the image of a fresh injury was seen as most persuasive, emotional and believable. In ‘study four’, a sample of 151 men rated five computer-generated images of various types of injury, showing that it was the eye injury that was seen as most persuasive, emotional and believable.
Dr Palasinski says: “Current anti-knife campaigns often associate knife carrying with immaturity, deviance or pathology. They also threaten young men with the risk of death or imprisonment. Our results suggest that to make them more effective they should be re-evaluated and focused more on the possibility of a graphic and permanent injury.
