International relations lecturer and author Jeffrey Whyte requested the use of
images from this article in publishing a book titled The Birth of
Psychological War.
The vast majority of my articles on the history of psychological operations
study wartime operations. This article is a bit different. It explores an American
peacetime operation aimed at determining the ability of the airdropped propaganda leaflet
to spread information.
I first wrote briefly about Project Revere in a November 1967 article entitled
"Leaflets over America" in The Aerial Leaflet. At that time I expected to write
a major article in the near future. I never did so. The data has been filed away in a
manila envelope for the past 38 years. Perhaps it is finally time to write that
long-awaited story. I recently started to sort out my saved references such as: The
Findings of Project Revere, Formulas for Spreading Opinions, The Momental Models for
Diffusing Attributes, Civil Defense Leaflet Test, The relationship between Numbers of
Leaflets Disseminated and Communication Achieved, and a host of other research
documents.
At the height of the Cold War, in those years just after World War II and prior
to the Korean War, the United States Air Force joined with academia to predict the
reliability of the diffusion of a test message dropped from the air. Project Revere was
established to test the distribution and effects of airborne messages and to discover
formulas that would guarantee a high probability of maximum diffusion and compliance with
leaflet instructions in future conflicts and wars. The name for the project was meant to
remind the public of Revere's historic ride and the spreading of his message in a time of
national emergency. It was selected because American citizens would recognize the
patriotic importance of the project and be more motivated to take part in the project,
which required the filling out of the leaflets, and interviews. They would be less
motivated if it was considered just a mere scientific experiment.
Because of the Korean War, it has sometimes been surmised that this experiment was to
produce better propaganda leaflets for use against North Korea. In fact, it was meant to
produce better propaganda leaflets for any friend or enemy in peace or wartime.
Stuart C. Dodd explains partially in: Can the Social Scientist Serve Two Masters?
He says in part:
The Air Force wants to know how far, fast, fully and how effectively a message
would be apt to spread through a given population. Their “Four F’s” were to
be answered with as high generality as possible. They wanted us to study the basic
principals of message diffusion.
Ron Theodore Robin mentions the project in The making of the Cold War enemy:
culture and politics in the military-Industrial Complex, Princeton University Press,
2001:
The most notable academic fine-tuning of World War Two theories for the Korean
Theater was Project Revere, a military-civilian investigation of communication processes
carried out between 1951 and 1953. Funded by the Air Force and directed by University of Washington
sociologist Stuart A. Dodd, Project Revere represented an ambition attempt to codify in
mathematical terms the “reception” of airdropped leaflets and the
“diffusion” of their content. For these purposes, the Air Force provided Dodd
and his associates at the University of Washington with a budget of $300,000, a
particularly large sum by early 1950 standards.
Dodd’s mandate was to increase the affectivity of military psychological
warfare in Korea. However, he chose to carry out his mandate in markedly different
surroundings. Sensing no contradiction in terms, Dodd targeted a variety of American towns
in Washington State and elsewhere.
Melvin Lawrence DeFleur and Otto N. Larsen say in The Flow of Information: An
Experiment in Mass Communication, Transaction Inc., New Brunswick, NJ, 1958.
They say the amount
of money made available to researchers was $320,000. The U.S.A.F wanted to
test how news is reported when the usual sources are lost. In particular, they
wanted information about the spread of information from leaflets dropped from
the sky. In 1952 the United States was fighting in Korea and the USSR had long
range missiles and atomic bombs. A way to quickly communicate with the public
when major cities were destroyed and there were no electronic means of
communication could be very important. In 1966, after the Freedom of
Information act was passed, a reporter discovered that one of the Air Force
officers who was liaison with one of the research teams was CIA. The plot
thickens. This turned out to be part of Operation MK Ultra, a mind control
study that was discredited and abandoned after there was a discovery that many
people had been given LSD without their knowledge, and at least one committed
suicide. But, after all was said and done, there was a need for this research,
and it was possible that in a major emergency, aerial leaflets would be
needed, and more research must be done on their effectiveness. Some comments
by the authors:
Approximately 20 pre-tests were invented and explored to varying degrees during
the first year; then 10 tests intended as more definitive experiments were carried out in
the second year; and finally, analysis and reporting consumed the third year.
The original plans for retesting Revere findings in other cultures under other
conditions such as Japan, Korea, North Africa, Spain, etc., were changed when there was a
reorganization of Air Force research in psychological warfare.
One of Mel DeFleur’s students at Syracuse University told me a bit about him:
In 1994, Mel held an endowed chair at Syracuse University's Newhouse School of
Public Communications. He was quite a character. He held the rank of sergeant in the USMC.
He took part in many landings and battles in the South Pacific during the Second World
War. He never talked about it much, saying he'd lost a lot of buddies. One thing I learned
that he was up at the top of Mt. Suribachi when the famous flag-raising event occurred.
He was great storyteller, like the story of how he decided to get a college
education. He said he was sitting in a foxhole full of mud on some island, eating some
slop, and it was wet and cold and raining. Over across the way he could see some officers
sitting down to eat in a nice dry tent being served on nicer tableware than a mess tin. It
was the same slop but the accommodations were certainly more inviting. He asked himself,
what's the difference between me and those officers? The answer was clear - A college
education.
Mel passed away in February 2017.
This was just one of many partnerships between the Government of the United States and
major universities to study improvements in propaganda dissemination and message
diffusion. The Central Intelligence Agency contracted with American University to prepare
a handbook on leaflet dispersion by balloons. Johns Hopkins University later prepared
studies on methods of dissemination and density of leaflet distribution. However, the Washington
University project was the first major study to scientifically observe all the phases of a
leaflet operation from start to finish.
Gold Shield Coffee Leaflet
Some of the pretesting of the project is mentioned by H. Taylor Buckner in “A
Theory of Rumor Transmission,” The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1,
spring, 1965. He says in part:
In this study, a message (Gold Shield Coffee—Good as Gold) was started
with 17 per cent of the residents of Issaquah, Washington, on Monday, July 16, 1951. On
Tuesday, July 17, an airplane passed over town and dropped 30,000 leaflets containing the
first half of the slogan and informing the residents of the 305 occupied housing units
that there was a slogan known to one person in five in the town. The leaflet also stated
that if the slogan was known when the coffee company representative called, the respondent
would receive a free pound of coffee. On Wednesday, July 18, an adult from almost every
household in town was interviewed. Among the questions asked was, "Whom did you
tell?"
A paper entitled “Project Revere
– Leaflets as a medium of Last resort” clarifies further. It states that this
was the first of the Project Revere experiments. The community was given half of the
slogan of a coffee company, and then leaflets were dropped telling them that they would be
given a prize if they knew the entire slogan. Interviewers came to each home with a pound
of coffee. To win that coffee, the interviewee needed to know the slogan and be able to
identify the pathway through which he received or passed the information.
The Bells are Going to Ring!
[Author’s note] A quick aside. One would think that this use of the postcard
as an advertisement calling for action and involving the phones would be
quite rare and invented by the Revere crew. It seems to have been around for
quite a while. The above postcard requires a 1.5-cent stamp on the address
side. There seems to be no date for the use of that fee, but we do know that
the cards were a penny to mail until 5 April 1925 when the price was raised
to 2 cents. So that tells us the campaign was earlier than 1925. We then
discover that Kellogg was introducing the cereal PEP. We know that
was done in 1923. So that indicates the cards were most likely sent out in
1923 or late 1922. One wonders of the Revere staff was aware of these
earlier campaigns.
Another rumor experiment was started at Whitman College where selected students were
told a number of rumors had been planted at the college (12 different) and a student who
could record all twelve was eligible to win $300. The twelve messages were in complete
(ten words and two images) and incomplete (eight words and one image) form.
The Project Revere Pretest Album gives the codes for the early tests:
Pretest A – Thurstone Rumor
Pretest B – University of Washington Campus – Civil Defense
Pretest C – Coffee “C-Ville” diffusion of Commercial Slogan
Pretest D – Salt Lake City Civil Defense Theme – Operation Pioneer
Pretest E – Pilot Study (Enemy Bomber) Four Towns – Leaflet Density and
Repetition
Pretest F – Kirkland School Contest
Pretest G – Boise Ground Observer Corps Theme
Pretest H – Whitman College Rumor - Recording Contest
Pretest I - Phone chains
Pretest J – Episode Jesus Christ
Pretest K – Episode Flowdrop
Pretest L – Operation Fort Lewis
Pretest M – Operation Chain tags - Four messages
Pretest O – Blood Bank
Pretest P – Role of Children in Diffusion
Pretest Q – Camp Orkila
During the three-year project, the USAF dropped [all numbers hereafter are approximate]
51 different messages on 27 different experimental leaflets over 30 communities. About
three quarters of a million leaflets were dropped on about three quarters of a million
citizens in the states of Washington, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Alabama. The numbers vary
somewhat, with DeFleur saying 51 different messages in 44 flight missions over 35 unwarned
communities. Many of the messages were very similar and it is possible that the researcher
looked at two leaflets and either called them the same or different.
Eighteen types of diffusion curves and mathematical models were devised to
verify the results of the test. The Human Resources Research Institute, Air Research
and Development Command, Maxwell Air Force Base monitored the research. The study
generated 17 technical reports to the Air Force and 54 papers in journals. In addition,
numerous studies and articles have been published since the end of the project.
Stuart Carter Dodd discussed the experiment in "Formulas for Spreading
Opinions," The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. XXII, No. 4, winter 1958. Some
selected comments are:
Why did the Air Force contract for research on leaflet operations? They
told us in effect: We need to learn principals for predicting and producing message
diffusion from airborne leaflets. We have dropped over 2 billion leaflets with very little
firm knowledge of their effect. We must be ready to drop billions more, perhaps in very
different situations.
What rules, for example, can you find for deciding how many leaflets to
print or drop? What rules may be discovered for guiding the pilots as to where to drop
most effectively? What rules for best timing? What rules may help us write the most potent
leaflets? In short, what principals may maximize the effect of the leaflet weapon?
The Washington Public Opinion Laboratory of the University of Washington in Seattle
became partners with the USAF in the project. They were paid $330,000 to do the
mathematical research and prepare the models. The Lab considered the study a "coveted
opportunity to begin testing an interactance formula or hypothesis." The formula
would predict any social action as a product of a few necessary, standardized, and
measurable factors. The testing would follow the steps of the scientific method using
current mathematical models. The leaflets were seen as an unusual research opportunity.
For the purpose of the test, the entire operations was broken down into 7 distinct
phases.
- The Policy Stage. What would the leaflets say? How to produce a wanted conclusion?
- The Planning Stage. What is the look and the language of the leaflet?
- The Printing and Packaging Stage. What color? What type? What font? Etc.
- The Delivery Stage. 50 measurable factors. Speed, altitude, release equipment, etc.
- The Diffusion Stage. What happened when the leaflet hit the ground? Did people hand
it around (physical diffusion) and tell each other the message (social diffusion).
- The Compliance Stage. Did the leaflet finder comply with the request on the leaflet?
- The Evaluation Stage. Can we predict the diffusion of a leaflet message? If so, how?
Project Revere Salt Lake City Postcard
The best way to discuss the project is to study the test in one community. For
the First experiment we have selected Salt Lake City Utah, 26 July 1951. The Air
Force dropped 55,000 leaflets in two groups from a USAF C-47 in a test called
"Operation Pioneer". The first half was disseminated over a residential area at
2:00 a.m. The second half was dropped over another residential area 12 hours later at 2:00
p.m. The leaflets bore a secret mark so that the testers could determine where the
leaflets had been distributed. The leaflets were 5 1/2 x 7 inches in size, bright yellow
in color. They were in the form of a postcard addressed to "Civil Defense, %
Postmaster, Salt Lake City, Utah." The leaflet asked the finder to fill out a number
of civil defense questions, check when, how, and where the leaflet was obtained and to
place it in a mailbox. The postage was paid.
Of the 55,000 leaflet postcards, 3,940 were returned by mail. 94% were properly
filled out. There was no appreciable difference between the returns from the day and night
drop. Newspapers and radio stations were asked not to report on the project. Pollsters
could then interview people in the community in person and by telephone to determine how
many had heard of the leaflets and were aware of the data in them. This way, the diffusion
of the data was uncontaminated by the press.
Ninety percent of those citizens who mailed in a completed leaflet stated that they had
found it on the same day that it was dropped. The people interviewed face-to-face turned
out to be more honest and more accurate than those interviewed by telephone. This seems to
verify the PSYOP belief that face-to-face communication is the most important form on
contact. One conclusion of the test was that "It appears that great caution should be
exercised in interpreting results of telephone interviews." It is a pity that the
political pollsters seem to have ignored this data over the past 50 years.
The answers to some of the questions on the leaflet are interesting. When asked what
they would do if the leaflet was a warning of an enemy attack the answers included:
Go to basement; Go to cellar; Crawl under bed; Stand under door; and my
personal favorite; Pray a lot.
Project Revere Pretest E Salt Lake City Leaflet
A second form of leaflet was prepared to test leaflet density and repetition. This
pretest E was dropped on Tenino, Castle Rock, Morton and Winlock. Four bundles were
dropped on four straight days in the first two towns and four bundles just on a single day
in the last two towns. The text is:
It is clear that this leaflet was not to be mailed back to the testers.
Instead, it was hoped that the finders would discuss the contents with their neighbors and
the numbers could be counted during personal interviews.
Newsweek Magazine of 13 August 1951 mentions the project in an article
entitled “Postcards From Heaven.” Some of the article is:
As Salt Lake City milkmen made their rounds at 1 a.m. on July 26, occasional
raindrops filtered down from cloudy skies. Suddenly the air was filled with fluttering,
oversized postcards that drifted to the streets, sidewalks, and lawns of the city’s
East Bench residential district.
Twelve hours later, housewives and husbands still chatting excitedly about the
aerial visitation again spotted boldly lettered 5 1/2 x 7-inch black-on-yellow cards
spinning earthward. This time many could glimpse a two-motored plane from which the
messages were spewing.
“Urgent,” each missive read. “If this were an enemy leaflet dropped
to warn you of an atomic attack coming today, what would you do?”
The article goes to say that curious citizens scanned newspapers, called radio
stations, civil defense authorities and the police in vain. All of them received the same
answer; “This is a test. Please follow instructions.” An Air Force C-47 had made
eleven passes over sectors of the city having population densities of from 7,700 to 16,000
persons per square mile. Aerial photographs had been taken of the postcard dispersal,
while ground crews photographed and counted coverage at specific intervals. Meanwhile 30
interviewers made a house-house canvass, and telephone crews tallied reactions. Children
had a field day. They climbed trees and drainpipes to collect the cards. One 9 year-old
collected about 50 of the postcards and opened a small business selling them for a penny
apiece.
There were numerous pretests as the social scientists prepared to test their leaflet
theories. One was called “Operation Chain Tags” or “Operation M” and
compared the results of asking leaflet finders in four matched communities to either
“earn a dollar,” “help civil defense,” “help scientific
research,” or “be a modern Paul Revere.” The last theme, one of patriotism,
was found to be the most potent.
Blood Bank Leaflet – Pretest O
Another pretest, “Operation Blood Bank,” explored the possibility of
changing attitudes toward donating blood. It also tested variant forms of a leaflet with
the same general message. 28,000 leaflets containing 28 different messages were dropped on
Monroe, Washington, a community of 1,556 people. The leaflet above is message #3 which has
a message on the back explaining that the King County Blood Bank both collects blood for
the armed forces and banks blood for civilian use. It states that the blood bank will be
open on Wednesday, 4 June 1952, and asks finders of the leaflet to donate.
Blood Bank Leaflet Poster
Although documentation says that there are 28 different Blood Bank leaflets I notice
that in this officially prepared poster they depict 30 such leaflets. Perhaps two were not
disseminated for some reason. Project Revere –
Pretest O – Final report indicates that 344 individuals responded, each seeing an
average of almost 4 leaflets, and that altruistic appeals for blood for servicemen were
more effective that requests for blood to be “banked” for future individual use.
The researchers then prepared “Operation Krishna,” which told Seattle
residents of a man claiming to be Jesus Christ and measured their reaction.
Returning to the scientific concept of the project, the mathematical formulae and
models are complicated enough to "cross a Rabbi's eyes" as Tevya might say in Fiddler
on the Roof. To simplify and summarize the concept we can say that leaflets were
dropped over different communities in different ratios (leaflets to inhabitants), at
different times, and shortly afterwards the inhabitants were questioned by phone and
personal interview in an attempt to discover how far, how quickly, and how accurately the
information on the leaflets had spread. The assumption was that the data gathered
from this peacetime drop over American towns would be accurate enough to help determine
the way that leaflets should be prepared and dropped over enemy towns in a time of war. In
the words of the report:
The mission of Project revere was to gain information about the employment
of airborne leaflets over friendly American populations. It is possible that many of the
generalizations about the use of leaflets over targets in the United States may apply to
foreign, hostile cultures; but fuller evaluations must be based on data gathered in other
research projects.
"One Raid" Leaflet
Jennifer Gabrys depicts a second Project Revere postcard in her booklet Airdrop, Book Works, London, 2004. This is a
two-part leaflet. To the left is a postage-paid perforated postcard addressed to
"PROJECT REVERE, Washington Public Opinion Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle
5, Washington." The leaflet at right depicts a silhouette of a bomb and the
text:
One raid by an ENEMY BOMBER could paralyze radios, telephones, newspapers.
IN SUCH A DISASTER leaflet like this could be dropped from airplanes to give
official instructions.
YOU are an important part of this scientific test
to find out how effective leaflets are for spreading vital information to everyone.
OVER
The Back of the “One Raid” Leaflet
The leaflet on the back depicted Paul Revere on his famous ride and a civilian
awaked by his shout looking out the window. To the left is a questionnaire on the back of
the postcard similar to the one used in the HRRI leaflet depicted at the end of this
article. The message on the back of this leaflet exists in numerous variations. I have
seen 17 different messages and there could be more. I quote four of the texts:
It isn’t just anonymous strangers who benefit from national defense. Your
friends, your own family, SOMEONE YOU FEEL VERY CLOSE TO might need the instructions
printed on leaflets. Fill out and mail the attached postcard to show you’ve seen this
test leaflet. Leaflets like this could do the job of a modern Paul Revere.
There is NO INTERRUPTION to the need for developing up-to-date national defense
weapons – such as leaflets. Don’t interrupt this program of weapons research.
Fill out and mail the attached postcard to show you’ve seen this test leaflet.
Leaflets like this could do the job of a modern Paul Revere.
EVERYONE is safer when they know just what to do when disaster strikes. You can
contribute to the safety of MILLIONS OF PEOPLE by helping to make leaflets effective for
spreading national defense instructions. Fill out and mail the attached postcard to show
you’ve seen this test leaflet. Leaflets like this could do the job of a modern Paul
Revere.
NO ONE CAN FORCE YOU to fill out and mail the attached national defense postcard.
But you can do it VOLUNTARILY. To mail or not to mail – the choice is for you to
make. You can either ignore this text or you can play a part in it of you own free will
and show that you’ve seen this test leaflet. Leaflets like this could do the job of a
modern Paul Revere.
A great deal of information was gathered from this test. Much of it was
published in The Findings of Project Revere - A Non-technical Report on Leaflet
Message Diffusion. One of the organizations submitting the report is the
Psychological Warfare Research Division, Major James L. Monroe, Chief. That name caught my
eye because Monroe is the officer credited with designing the Monroe Leaflet Bomb during
WWII. The Revere Report covers every aspect of the test, from preparation, delivery,
diffusion, evaluation, to suggestions for further research.
Washington University went to great pains to prepare an in-depth study of the
value of the printed airdropped leaflet, and one hopes that American PSYOP troops are
aware of the findings and still follow some of the policies today. There is far too much
data to mention in this short informal look at the project, but we will mention some of
the more interesting findings. The reader should understand that we have arbitrarily
selected a few items of particular interest from hundreds of statements
and conclusions.
The Leaflet as a Medium of Communication.
The long-term effect makes leaflets a more lasting media than radio or
loudspeakers. Research indicates however, that the long-term effect can easily be
exaggerated. The continued presence of leaflets has little effect after a day or two. Cut
off from newspapers, radio and television, leaflets provide a quick way of reaching such
communities with information and instructions.
Preparing the Leaflet
The major criterion in the writing of a leaflet message is simplicity. A simple
message, clearly and concisely presented, is more likely to stimulate social diffusion
(person-to-person) of the message. The level of simplicity should be such that the
material can be understood by young children. Graphic material can be diffused orally and
it is remembered better than verbal messages. Use short words and short sentences.
Differences in color and format are needed to indicate that different messages are on the
ground and encourage reading of more than one version. "Safe Conduct" and
"I Cease resistance" leaflets should be standardized and highly recognizable
partly to assure the recipients that they will be recognized by infantrymen of the issuing
forces if surrender is attempted. Safe conduct passes should be durable. Such leaflets may
be carried around for months in a shoe, helmet or coat lining. Also, a durable safe
conduct may appear more reassuring and authoritative and therefore, more likely to be
honored if used. The predominant color in a leaflet should contrast with the predominant
color of the terrain on which it is to be dropped. Colors should be selected which are
known to be the favorites of the target population. Blue is preferred by Anglo-Saxon
cultures and red is preferred in India. Yellow leaflets attract aphids and plant lice and
the leaflets will be covered by them if dropped on grass. The most satisfactory color of
the text is black regardless of the color of the paper.
Delivering the Leaflet
There is little difference in diffusion of the message whether the leaflets are
dropped during the day or during the night. If the leaflets are dropped during the day,
the best time is early in the morning. The lower the plane, the more accurate the drop. A
useful way of talking about the numbers of leaflets is to specify the number of leaflets
per person in the target population or group. This number can be designated as leaflet
ratio. One leaflet to one person is 1/1, 16 leaflets per person is 16/1, and so on. Low
leaflet ratios are likely to result in a low degree of communication while high ratios
(16/1 or greater) result in much higher degrees of communication but the relationship is a
wasteful one of diminishing returns. For instance, a 1/1 ratio of leaflets to persons
resulted in an 18% communication of the message. Raising the ratio to 4/1 did not
quadruple the diffusion. It rose to 32%. At 16/1 the communication was 55%. At 32/1
the numbers were not much better than at 16/1. It is not cost or risk effective to drop
vast amount of leaflets when fewer will do almost as well. The relative degree of
communication that is likely to be achieved and the risk that is entailed to accomplish it
will be the primary considerations that determine the number of leaflets to be dropped.
Leaflet ratios between 2/1 and 8/1 will probably achieve effective communication. In the
case of urban areas, leaflets should be dropped to cover the entire area for maximum
communications. Complete coverage of the drop area seems to be advisable in any
population, which is known or suspected of having certain restrictions on its freedom to
move about. There is reason to suspect that the same conclusion could be made with regard
to leaflet drops on troops. If an infantry squad is unable to move out of its area and no
leaflets drop within reach, it is less likely that they will be informed.
Diffusion of the Message
Contrary to expectation, learning about the message through conversation
produced better recall that actually seeing the leaflet alone. The greater interest of two
people speaking about the leaflet was more important than one person just reading a
leaflet. More people will hear about the leaflet through conversation than will actually
see the leaflet. People who actually find the leaflet are twice as likely to talk about it
than those who heard about it. In areas where severe penalties are provided for reading or
possessing a leaflet, the restraints are always less stringent for children. We can inform
adults through the children. This should be taken into consideration when designing the
leaflets. The leaflets should be children-friendly and designed to tempt them to pick it
up. They will discuss the leaflets with their friends and bring them home to the adults.
Leaflet messages are mostly passed within the first hour. The rate of growth steadily
declines after the initial hour. About half of those who will ever learn the message do so
within the first three hours, and at the end of the first day about 80% of the diffusion
is completed. If action by the population is desired at a specific time, the leaflets
should be dropped from 24 to 48 hours before the event is scheduled to take place.
Distortion of oral messages is very high, in some cases only one percent of the original
message remains after the message has been passed by five persons.
Suggestions for Further Research
A promising set of rules for writing "potent" messages was developed
but needs testing. The study determined that there were 17 main type of leaflet appeals
identified as intensity, duration, probability, permanence, continuity, and so on. The
role of the airplane should be studied. Would a noisy aircraft stimulate curiosity and
speed up the rate of diffusion? Can too many leaflets discourage the message diffusion
just as too many commercials on TV "turn off" a viewer?
The Air research and development Command Human Resources Research Institute (HRRI)
published a research digest entitled The Relationship between Numbers of Leaflets
Disseminated and Communication Achieved in January 1954. The report was written by
Otto N. Larsen under an Air Force contract with the direction of Stuart Dodd of the University
of Washington Public Opinion Laboratory. This was one of a series of twelve technical
research reports and research digests prepared by the Project Revere staff.
HRRI Standard Leaflet
The digest discusses the procedure used in testing. Eight small Washington State
communities ranging in population from 1,015 to 1,800 were selected as target sites for
the test. A leaflet was prepared that warned the reader that one raid by an enemy bomber
could paralyze all communication and thus leaflets could become an important source of
information. Citizens were asked to mail one leaflet to Project Revere and pass out extra
leaflets to others.
HRRI Standard leaflet (Back)
A postcard questionnaire was attached to the leaflet. The number of leaflets dropped
ranged from 325 to 37,600 (a ratio of from one leaflet to every four people all the way to
thirty-two leaflets per person). The leaflets were all dropped at about noon on a
Wednesday spread over the towns as evenly as possible. The response was measured both by
the mail-back postcards and field personnel who personally interviewed residents of the
towns. Charts were prepared that showed the amount of communication that took place after
the drop in each scenario. Citizens were asked if they had seen the leaflet and if they
recalled the message.
Some of the conclusions reached by the author are:
Doubling the number of leaflets will not insure doubling the amount of
communication or diffusion of a given message. Dropping from four to eight leaflets per
person achieves maximum efficiency. Regardless of how many leaflets are dropped, only
about one-half of the people will pick them up. Only about 6% of the people hear the
leaflet messages orally from others. About 33% of the people never hear the message at
all. More people saw the leaflet than knew the message, and more people knew the message
than acted upon it.
The report ends:
The findings of this report have been derived from one carefully conducted test
involving eight small target communities in western Washington in 1953. Under the
controlled testing conditions described, the findings are confidently reported. However,
the limits of their generalization are not known. Further tests under varying conditions
should be undertaken.
In other words, the author is saying that the diffusion of communication from
leaflets are one thing in a peaceful town under ideal conditions, but the numbers could be
quite different in a time of war when the leaflets are dropped between bombing from the
air and artillery bombardment, and the population is under stress from sleep and food
deprivation.
Robin takes a slightly more positive approach in his conclusion:
The significance of Project Revere was…communication techniques developed in
distinctly American surroundings were reproducible. Revere provided rules for the
diffusion of messages reduced to mathematical formulas and purged of cultural
qualifications...Elements such as ratio of leaflets per person of channels of diffusion
were not culturally specific.
In the past few years there has been a lot of research and publication of the
Project Revere data. In particular, there have been studies of the various towns targeted
for research and the pre-testing during the early preparations for the actual study. One
very interesting blog on this subject is entitled “Postcards from Heaven,” and
sponsored by Royal Holloway, University of London.
The Seattle Times of 29 November 1953 mentioned the project nearing an
end:
Project Revere, described by a researcher as an attempt to measure the
“firepower of paper bullets,” tentatively is scheduled to end 31 December after
two and a half years of study by 20 full-time investigators, aided by dozens of experts
who visited the Washington University campus from all over the country.
In a series of controlled experiments, more than 1,000,000 leaflets were dropped
on 30 cities and towns in Washington and other metropolitan centers as far away as Birmingham,
Alabama.
The first set of tests was to discover the most effective number of leaflets to
drop. Eight drops were made in Washington State and it was discovered that it is possible
to drop too many leaflets. The second set of drops was to determine the effective of
delivery patters. A third set determined the most effective appeal to action. The fourth
test was to determine the effectiveness of repeated drops.
Help Paul Revere
The Dollar Leaflet
Each of the leaflets we depict in this article has its own Report
booklet, each numbered and dated. It is possible therefore to look at any
leaflet and find out all the data on its distribution, answers, and the
possible meanings and percentages of those answers. Booklet U:52-235 titled,
Project Revere, Pretest M, Final Report, offers a summary of the
findings on the two leaflets above. I depict copies of the leaflet text as
found in the booklet. Some of the findings on the two leaflets above are:
The Paul Revere theme stands out as the most effective of the
themes. It gave the largest numbers of returns, and it had the largest
number of people involved. An outstanding finding from these analyses is the
rapidity with which these handbill messages can go through a community.
Thus, with the “Help Paul Revere” motivation, the median getting-to-giving
time intervals was ten minutes. The recipients rushed right out to pass on
their handbills. At this rate, a person with three handbills could reach
2,000 people within two hours in peacetime.
The “dollar theme” was also outstanding. It had the highest
compliance rate of all the leaflets. And the highest number of completed
leaflets. However, the administrative difficulty and expense connected with
giving away the dollar and getting a receipt for it somewhat counteracts
these advantages.
This has been a very brief look at one of the most important and least known
studies of the actual testing methods used and the results of a scientific leaflet drop.
As I stated early in this article, there are close to 100 papers on this project so the
interested reader can find much more detailed data on the subject. As always, I encourage
readers with comments (or postcards or leaflets from Project Revere) to write to
the author at sgmbert@hotmail.com.
© Copywrite, all rights reserved December 24, 2004
