Quantifying Child-Appeal: The Development and Mixed-Methods Validation of a Methodology for Evaluating Child-Appealing Marketing on Product Packaging
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Development of the Child-Appealing Packaging (CAP) Coding Tool
2.2. Study Design
2.3. Participants and Recruitment
2.4. Design of Mock Cereal Packages
2.5. Study Protocol
2.6. Analyses
2.6.1. Quantitative Analyses
2.6.2. Qualitative Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Child-Appealing Packaging (CAP) Coding Tool
3.2. CAP Tool Validation Study
3.2.1. Criterion Validity (i.e., Quantitative Results)
3.2.2. Content Validity (i.e., Qualitative Results)
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Child-Appealing Packaging (CAP) Coding Tool
- Development and purpose
- CAP coding tool outcome variables
Outcome Variable | Explanation | Details and Derivation |
---|---|---|
Presence of child-appealing marketing | Determines whether the product packaging is child-appealing, based on the display of core marketing techniques. | Binary Variable (i.e., Yes (child-appealing packaging): ≥1 core marketing technique displayed; No (not child-appealing): 0 core techniques displayed) |
Type of child-appealing marketing | Determines which specific type(s) of core or broad marketing technique(s) are being displayed. | Presence (binary) or frequency (count) of individual core or broad marketing techniques displayed within a sample |
Power of child-appealing marketing | Determines the power (persuasiveness) of the marketing message based on the number of unique core and broad marketing techniques displayed. | Marketing power score (count variable): sum of all unique core and broad techniques displayed on the package (e.g., 1, 2, 3, … etc.) |
- Core marketing techniques
# | Technique | Definition | Examples |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Child-appealing visual/graphical design of package | Intense colors, patterns or visual designs on the packaging or design themes related to fantasy, adventure, magic, sports, etc. that are clearly appealing to children. Note: this can include child-appealing lettering, if it is enough on its own for the product to be considered “child-appealing”, otherwise code lettering under broad techniques. | Space-themed visual design Rainbow packaging Chalkboard-style lettering |
2 | Unconventional shape of the product, featured on the package | The product featured on the packaging has a shape that is unconventional or unusual for that type of product. E.g. if crackers have a shape other than their usual square or round shape. Note: In the case of clear plastic containers where the product is visible through the package, this counts as the shape being visible. | Animal shaped crackers Alphabet shaped pasta Character, fruit or animal shaped gummies |
3 | Unconventional flavour of the product, featured on the package | The product featured on the package has a flavour that is unconventional or unusual for that type of product, or a flavour that is not a ‘real’ or ‘discernable’ flavour. Note: this could include the presentation of the flavour in a ‘negative’ way that may appeal to children; e.g., tastes crazy, weird, sour, whacky | Tropical Storm Flavour Cheddarific Secret Flavour Chocolate Mud flavour Cool Cucumber flavour |
4 | Unconventional colour of the product, featured on the package | The product featured on the package has a colour that is unconventional or unusual for that type of product. E.g. if crackers are coloured rather than their usual plain/brown colour. Note: In the case of clear plastic containers where the product is visible through the package, this counts as the color being visible. | Rainbow crackers Purple Ketchup Colour changing drink powder Rainbow fruit roll ups (instead of just red, for example) Note: multi-colored candies would NOT be unusual, unless they are described in a more ‘fun’ or child-appealing way. |
5 | Games or activities on package | Presence of games or activities on the package. | Connect the dots Mazes “Count how many snowmen” |
6 | Presence of branded characters or spokespersons | Presence of company- or brand-owned characters. | Tony the Tiger Toucan Sam Cap’n Crunch Kraft Bears Pillsbury Doughboy |
7 | Presence of Licensed Characters | Presence of characters from TV shows, movies, books, etc., that may appeal to children. Note: human actors, if presented as the character are included here (e.g., Miley Cyrus as Hannah Montana), if portrayed as themselves, include under “Presence of Celebrities” (e.g., Miley Cyrus advertised as Miley Cyrus). | Dora the Explorer Batman Hannah Montana Star Wars characters |
8 | Presence of celebrities | Presence of actors, athletes, musicians, other public figures that may appeal to children | Derek Jeter Miley Cyrus |
9 | Other characters or cartoons | Presence of cartoon characters, animals, etc. that are not branded, licensed, celebrities or tie-ins to child-appealing media (i.e., that do not fit into any of the above techniques) | Cartoon pictures of fictional sports players Animal cartoons on animal crackers |
10 | Other child-appealing tie-ins | Other movie/sports/TV show etc. tie-ins that are appealing to children are advertised on the package aside from one of the types of characters or celebrities described above. Note: these may appear in addition to the presence of any characters described above | Hockey tie-ins that feature an ice-rink or hockey equipment with/without a specific player. Harry Potter tie-in where Hogwarts is presented with/without a character. |
11 | Presence of children/parents/families | Presence of children or children with their families on the package, either real people or cartoon. | Children shown eating the product Pictures of children eating with their parents |
12 | Toys or prizes | Toys or prizes included with or inside the package or to be redeemed later. | Figurine inside package Stickers inside package |
13 | Coupons, contests, or giveaways, specifically appealing to children | Coupons, contests or giveaways to be entered or redeemed later. Note: contests or giveaways must be for child-appealing prizes (unlike, for e.g., a Patio Furniture set) | Enter to win tickets to a child-appealing movie Coupon for free yogurt tubes |
14 | Children’s product lines, featured on the package | A product line that is designed/branded for children is featured/named on the package, either for that product, or a different product. | “mini-” or “junior” product lines (e.g., Minigo yogurt) Lunchables “Small cookies for small hands” |
15 | Appeals to fun | Product packaging makes appeals to the product being fun or funny, having fun while eating the product, being happy, enjoyment, humour etc. Note: this includes “fun” packaging (i.e., Packaging that is designed in a way to promote “fun” during eating, or makes eating an “activity”) Note: this could be as part of the product name (e.g., “Fun Dip”), if it is clearly “fun” and appealing to children | “Have more fun with” “Feel the bubbles melt” “Try our crazy new flavors” “Smiles included” Display of children having fun, being happy, enjoying the product Yogurt Tubes Dunkaroos Processed cheese with dipping breadsticks (if “dipping” is promoted as an activity) |
16 | Appeals to coolness or novelty | Product packaging makes appeals to the product being cool/hip or new, being cool, while eating the product, etc. Note: this could be as part of the product name; e.g., “Kool Kreatures” | “Try our crazy new flavors” Kool-Aid “Try me!” On-pack claim that the product is “new” |
17 | Recipes, specifically appealing to children | Product packaging displays recipes that can be made using the product and may appeal to children or are promoted as appropriate for children or families to make together. | Rice Krispy squares Party Snack Mix |
18 | Promotion of websites, social media, rewards programs, specifically appealing to children | Product packaging promotes product/brand/company website, child-specific or games-based brand website, social media, or opportunities to “join”, “become a member”, redeem points, and collect rewards or to connect or share with others in a manner that is evidently child-appealing | “Find more games on [website]” References to “kids club” or similar |
- Broad marketing techniques
# | Technique | Definition | Example |
---|---|---|---|
19 | Interesting font or lettering | Presence of product name or description (e.g., product flavour) written or designed in a colorful, creative, or interesting font that is not on its own enough to make the package “child-appealing”, but may contribute to the overall power of the marketing Note: this broad technique exists due to the difficult nature of identifying child-appealing lettering, and since often products will use bubbly or colorful fonts, but this alone is not always enough to consider a product child-directed. | Aero bar bubble lettering Corn Pops lettering Cheetos lettering |
20 | Interesting or unconventional product name | Unconventional product name (e.g., strange spelling, rhyming, and alliteration) that may be interesting to children and build marketing power, Note: if not counted as part of a core technique (e.g., appeals to fun or appeals to coolness/novelty) and not enough to make the product child-appealing on its own. | Frooty Hoops Juicy Jels Wagon Wheels “Eat the middle first” |
21 | Presence of a logo not specifically appealing to children | Presence of a product/brand logo that is not specifically appealing to children. This includes when branded characters or spokespersons are used as part of the logo. Note: presence of branded characters NOT within the product logo are included in the core technique: “presence of branded characters” | The man with a moustache in the Pringles logo Quaker Oats man in the logo |
22 | Convenient packaging | Package is designed in a way to promote for easy or convenient packing, on-the-go snacking, or individually packaged servings. Note: if the packaging is promoted as “fun” or as an activity, count under “appeals to fun” | Processed cheese with dipping breadsticks Tuna and crackers kit Processed cheese with dipping breadsticks (if “dipping” is NOT promoted as an activity) Small yogurt containers “Great for packing in lunches” |
23 | Appeals to taste or texture | Product packaging makes appeals to the flavour taste, or texture, of the product, in a way that is not specifically appealing to children. | “New look, same great taste” “You’ll love it” “Delicious!” “Tastes like mama made it” Promotion of textures (e.g., crunchy, smooth…) |
24 | Appeals to health or nutrition | Product packaging makes appeals to the healthfulness or nutritional quality of the product, its ability to promote growth, strength, or physical activity. Product packaging displays “healthy foods” alongside the product. Note: includes health and nutrition claims/symbols, as well as organic or natural claims/symbols | “Helps them grow strong” “Part of a healthy breakfast” Fruit featured beside the product on pack (e.g. bowl of strawberries beside cereal) Source of 5 whole grains Made with 100%... Promotion of ‘real’, ‘pure’, ‘natural’ etc. |
25 | Appeals to other product benefits | Product packaging makes appeals to other product benefits aside from health/taste/fun. For example, value, quickness, easy preparation, sustainability, philanthropy, enjoyment while eating, etc. Note: this does not include small statements (often on the bottom of the package) that the package was made from recycled materials or is recyclable. | “Quick and easy” “Ready in 5 minutes” “Ready to bake” Proceeds go to X organization “Enjoy it, you deserve it!” |
26 | Recipes, not specifically appealing to children | Product packaging displays recipes that can be made using the product and do not specifically appeal to children/families | Bran muffins Low calorie smoothies |
27 | Promotion of websites, social media, rewards programs, not specifically appealing to children | Product packaging promotes product/brand/company website, social media, or opportunities to “join”, “become a member”, redeem points, and collect rewards or to connect or share with others, in a way that is not specifically child-appealing Note: does not include link to company/manufacturer website included as part of contact information on package | Social Media links Links to recipe websites Links to “create the next flavour of chips” QR codes |
28 | Coupons, contests, or giveaways, not specifically appealing to children | Coupons, contests or giveaways to be entered or redeemed later that are not specifically appealing to children. | Tote bags Access to a free weight loss plan Patio furniture set |
References
- World Cancer Research Fund International. Building Momentum: Lessons on Implementing Robust Restrictions of Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverage Marketing to Children. Available online: www.wcrf.org/buildingmomentum (accessed on 28 January 2020).
- Sadeghirad, B.; Duhaney, T.; Motaghipisheh, S.; Campbell, N.R.; Johnston, B.C. Influence of unhealthy food and beverage marketing on children’s dietary intake and preference: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Obes. Rev. Off. J. Int. Assoc. Study Obes. 2016, 17, 945–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jenkin, G.; Madhvani, N.; Signal, L.; Bowers, S. A systematic review of persuasive marketing techniques to promote food to children on television. Obes. Rev. Off. J. Int. Assoc. Study Obes. 2014, 15, 281–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyland, E.J.; Nolan, S.; Kelly, B.; Tudur-Smith, C.; Jones, A.; Halford, J.C.; Robinson, E. Advertising as a cue to consume: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of acute exposure to unhealthy food and nonalcoholic beverage advertising on intake in children and adults. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2016, 103, 519–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kelly, B.; Vandevijvere, S.; Ng, S.; Adams, J.; Allemandi, L.; Bahena-Espina, L.; Barquera, S.; Boyland, E.; Calleja, P.; Carmona-Garces, I.C.; et al. Global benchmarking of children’s exposure to television advertising of unhealthy foods and beverages across 22 countries. Obes. Rev. 2019, 11, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cairns, G.; Angus, K.; Hastings, G.; Caraher, M. Systematic reviews of the evidence on the nature, extent and effects of food marketing to children. A retrospective summary. Appetite 2013, 62, 209–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Boyland, E.J.; Whalen, R. Food advertising to children and its effects on diet: Review of recent prevalence and impact data. Pediatric Diabetes 2015, 16, 331–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Health Organization. Set of Recommendations on the Marketing of Foods and Non-Alcoholic Beverages to Children. Available online: https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/publications/recsmarketing/en/ (accessed on 28 January 2020).
- World Health Organization. Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity. Available online: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204176/1/9789241510066_eng.pdf?ua=1 (accessed on 3 March 2020).
- Obesity Policy Coalition. Policy Brief: Restrictions on Marketing Unhealthy Food to Children—International Comparison. Available online: https://www.opc.org.au/downloads/policy-briefs/restrictions-on-marketing-unhealthy-food-to-children-international-comparison.pdf (accessed on 28 January 2020).
- Taillie, L.S.; Busey, E.; Stoltze, F.M.; Dillman Carpentier, F.R. Governmental policies to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children. Nutr. Rev. 2019, 77, 787–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mediano Stoltze, F.; Reyes, M.; Smith, T.L.; Correa, T.; Corvalán, C.; Carpentier, F.R.D. Prevalence of Child-Directed Marketing on Breakfast Cereal Packages before and after Chile’s Food Marketing Law: A Pre- and Post-Quantitative Content Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Taillie, L.S.; Reyes, M.; Colchero, M.A.; Popkin, B.; Corvalán, C. An evaluation of Chile’s Law of Food Labeling and Advertising on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases from 2015 to 2017: A before-and-after study. PLoS Med. 2020, 17, e1003015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reyes, M.; Smith Taillie, L.; Popkin, B.; Kanter, R.; Vandevijvere, S.; Corvalán, C. Changes in the amount of nutrient of packaged foods and beverages after the initial implementation of the Chilean Law of Food Labelling and Advertising: A nonexperimental prospective study. PLoS Med. 2020, 17, e1003220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mytton, O.T.; Boyland, E.; Adams, J.; Collins, B.; O’Connell, M.; Russell, S.J.; Smith, K.; Stroud, R.; Viner, R.M.; Cobiac, L.J. The potential health impact of restricting less-healthy food and beverage advertising on UK television between 05.30 and 21.00 hours: A modelling study. PLoS Med. 2020, 17, e1003212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mulligan, C.; Kent, M.P.; Christoforou, A.K.; L’Abbé, M.R. Inventory of marketing techniques used in child-appealing food and beverage research: A rapid review. Int. J. Public Health 2020, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, C.; Truman, E. Measuring the Power of Food Marketing to Children: A Review of Recent Literature. Curr. Nutr. Rep. 2019, 8, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehta, K.; Phillips, C.; Ward, P.; Coveney, J.; Handsley, E.; Carter, P. Marketing foods to children through product packaging: Prolific, unhealthy and misleading. Public Health Nutr. 2012, 15, 1763–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cao, Z.; Yan, R. Health Creates Wealth? The use of Nutrition Claims and Firm Financial Performance. J. Public Policy Mark. 2016, 35, 58–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisend, M.; Tarrahi, F. The Effectiveness of Advertising: A Meta-Meta-Analysis of Advertising Inputs and Outcomes. J. Advert. 2016, 45, 519–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowman, D.D.; Minaker, L.M.; Simpson, B.J.; Gilliland, J.A. Development of a Teen-Informed Coding Tool to Measure the Power of Food Advertisements. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Turner, L.; Kelly, B.; Boyland, E.; Bauman, A.E. Measuring Food Brand Awareness in Australian Children: Development and Validation of a New Instrument. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0133972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Signal, L.; Stanley, J.; Smith, M.; Barr, M.; Chambers, T.; Zhou, J.; Duane, A.; Gurrin, C.; Smeaton, A.; McKerchar, C. Children’s everyday exposure to food marketing: An objective analysis using wearable cameras. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nevo, B. Face validity revisited. J. Educ. Meas. 1985, 22, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onwuegbuzie, A.J.; Dickinson, W.B. Mixed methods analysis and information visualization: Graphical display for effective communication of research results. Qual. Rep. 2008, 13, 204–225. [Google Scholar]
- Townsend, M.S. Where is the science? What will it take to show that nutrient profiling systems work? Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 91, 1109S–1115S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- McDonald, M.P. Validity, Data Sources. In Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, Kempf-Leonard, K., Ed.; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 939–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salkind, N.J. Encyclopedia of Research Design; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Social Development Finance and Administration—City of Toronto. City of Toronto: The Changing Landscape of Toronto’s Population. Available online: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/94fc-Toronto_Geographic-Trends_Web-Version.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2020).
- Potvin Kent, M.; Cameron, C.; Philippe, S. The healthfulness and prominence of sugar in child-targeted breakfast cereals in Canada. Health Promot. Chronic Dis. Prev. Can. 2017, 37, 266–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Labonté, M.-È.; Poon, T.; Mulligan, C.; Bernstein, J.T.; Franco-Arellano, B.; L’Abbé, M.R. Comparison of global nutrient profiling systems for restricting the commercial marketing of foods and beverages of low nutritional quality to children in Canada. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2017, 106, 1471–1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mulligan, C.; Labonté, M.-È.; Vergeer, L.; L’Abbé, M.R. Assessment of the Canadian Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative’s Uniform Nutrition Criteria for Restricting Children’s Food and Beverage Marketing in Canada. Nutrients 2018, 10, 803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Elliott, C.; Scime, N.V. Nutrient Profiling and Child-Targeted Supermarket Foods: Assessing a “Made in Canada” Policy Approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cheyne, A.D.; Dorfman, L.; Bukofzer, E.; Harris, J.L. Marketing Sugary Cereals to Children in the Digital Age: A Content Analysis of 17 Child-Targeted Websites. J. Health Commun. 2013, 18, 563–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Subar, A.F.; Krebs-Smith, S.M.; Cook, A.; Kahle, L.L. Dietary Sources of Nutrients among US Children, 1989–1991. Pediatrics 1998, 102, 913–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, M.K.; Condon, E.; Briefel, R.R.; Reidy, K.C.; Deming, D.M. Food Consumption Patterns of Young Preschoolers: Are They Starting Off on the Right Path? J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2010, 110, S52–S59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Morgan, M.; Gibbs, S.; Maxwell, K.; Britten, N. Hearing children’s voices: Methodological issues in conducting focus groups with children aged 7-11 years. Qual. Res. 2002, 2, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ronen, G.M.; Rosenbaum, P.; Law, M.; Streiner, D.L. Health-related quality of life in childhood disorders: A modified focus group technique to involve children. Qual. Life Res. 2001, 10, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, L. Focus Group Research with Children and Youth. J. Spéc. Pediatric Nurs. 2009, 14, 152–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McHugh, M.L. Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochem. Med. 2012, 22, 276–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akoglu, H. User’s guide to correlation coefficients. Turk. J. Emerg. Med. 2018, 18, 91–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Columbia University Public Health. Population Health Methods: Content Analysis. Available online: https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/population-health-methods/content-analysis#:~:text=There%20are%20two%20general%20types,among%20concepts%20in%20a%20text (accessed on 23 December 2020).
- Baumeister, R.F.; Vohs, K.D. Encyclopedia of Social Psychology; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2007; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
- Cho, J.Y.; Lee, E.-H. Reducing Confusion about Grounded Theory and Qualitative Content Analysis: Similarities and Differences. Qual. Rep. 2014, 19, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cavanagh, S. Content analysis: Concepts, methods and applications. Nurse Res. 1997, 4, 5–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kondracki, N.L.; Wellman, N.S.; Amundson, D.R. Content Analysis: Review of Methods and Their Applications in Nutrition Education. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2002, 34, 224–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hebden, L.; King, L.; Kelly, B.; Chapman, K.; Innes-Hughes, C. A Menagerie of Promotional Characters: Promoting Food to Children through Food Packaging. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2011, 43, 349–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ogba, I.E.; Johnson, R. How packaging affects the product preferences of children and the buyer behaviour of their parents in the food industry. Young Consum. 2010, 11, 77–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkes, C. Food packaging: The medium is the message. Public Health Nutr. 2010, 13, 297–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Letona, P.; Chacon, V.; Roberto, C.; Barnoya, J. A qualitative study of children’s snack food packaging perceptions and preferences. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, C.D.; Carruthers Den Hoed, R.; Conlon, M.J. Food Branding and Young Children’s Taste Preferences: A Reassessment. Can. J. Public Health 2013, 104, e364–e368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lapierre, M.A.; Vaala, S.E.; Linebarger, D.L. Influence of licensed spokescharacters and health cues on children’s ratings of cereal taste. Arch. Pediatrics Adolesc. Med. 2011, 165, 229–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Roberto, C.A.; Baik, J.; Harris, J.L.; Brownell, K.D. Influence of licensed characters on children’s taste and snack preferences. Pediatrics 2010, 126, 88–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Letona, P.; Chacon, V.; Roberto, C.; Barnoya, J. Effects of licensed characters on children’s taste and snack preferences in Guatemala, a low/middle income country. Int. J. Obes. 2014, 38, 1466–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Robinson, T.N.; Borzekowski, D.L.; Matheson, D.M.; Kraemer, H.C. Effects of Fast Food Branding on Young Children’s Taste Preferences. Arch. Pediatrics Adolesc. Med. 2007, 161, 792–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Dixon, H.; Scully, M.; Niven, P.; Kelly, B.; Chapman, K.; Donovan, R.; Martin, J.; Baur, L.A.; Crawford, D.; Wakefield, M. Effects of nutrient content claims, sports celebrity endorsements and premium offers on pre-adolescent children’s food preferences: Experimental research. Pediatric Obes. 2014, 9, e47–e57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Soldavini, J.; Crawford, P.; Ritchie, L.D. Nutrition Claims Influence Health Perceptions and Taste Preferences in Fourth- and Fifth-Grade Children. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2012, 44, 624–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brierley, M.; Elliott, C. Nutritional components and children’s interpretations of packaged food. Int. J. f Health Promot. Educ. 2015, 53, 230–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, C.; Den Hoed, R.C. Do apples need an Elmo sticker? Children’s classification of unprocessed edibles. Crit. Public Health 2017, 27, 617–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wardle, J.; Huon, G. An experimental investigation of the influence of health information on children’s taste preferences. Health Educ. Res. 2000, 15, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ares, G.; Arrúa, A.; Antúnez, L.; Vidal, L.; Machín, L.; Martínez, J.; Curutchet, M.R.; Giménez, A. Influence of label design on children’s perception of two snack foods: Comparison of rating and choice-based conjoint analysis. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 53, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, C. Healthy Food Looks Serious: How Children Interpret Packaged Food Products. Can. J. Commun. 2009, 34, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Elliott, C.; Brierley, M. Healthy Choice?: Exploring How Children Evaluate the Healthfulness of Packaged Foods. Can. J. Public Health 2012, 103, e453–e458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Leonard, B.; Campbell, M.C.; Manning, K.C. Kids, Caregivers, and Cartoons: The Impact of Licensed Characters on Food Choices and Consumption. J. Public Policy Mark. 2019, 38, 214–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogle, A.D.; Graham, D.J.; Lucas-Thompson, R.G.; Roberto, C.A. Influence of Cartoon Media Characters on Children’s Attention to and Preference for Food and Beverage Products. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2017, 117, 265–270.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Outcome Variable | Explanation | Details and Derivation |
---|---|---|
Presence of child-appealing marketing | Determines whether the product packaging is child-appealing, based on the display of core marketing techniques. | Binary Variable (i.e., Yes (child-appealing packaging): ≥1 core marketing technique displayed; No (not child-appealing): 0 core techniques displayed). |
Type of child-appealing marketing | Determines which specific type(s) of core or broad marketing technique(s) is being displayed. | Presence (binary) or frequency (count) of individual core or broad marketing techniques displayed within a sample. |
Power of child-appealing marketing | Determines the power (persuasiveness) of the marketing message based on the number of unique core and broad marketing techniques displayed. | Marketing power score (count variable): Sum of all the unique core and broad techniques displayed on the package (e.g., 1, 2, 3, etc.). |
Gender | n (%) |
Female | 3 (20%) |
Male | 12 (80%) |
Socioeconomic status (SES) group 1 | n (%) |
Lower | 3 (20%) |
Middle | 7 (47%) |
Higher | 5 (33%) |
Age Group 2 | n (%) |
Younger | 7 (47%) |
Older | 8 (53%) |
Mean age | 8.7 years |
Age range | 5–13 years |
Percent Agreement % (n Pairings) 1 | Pairwise Agreement κ (95% CI) 2 | κ Interpretation 3 | |
---|---|---|---|
Overall (n = 15) | |||
80% (n = 72/90) | 0.54 (0.35, 0.73) | “Moderate agreement” | |
Socioeconomic status (SES) group 4 | |||
Lower (n = 3) | 50% (n = 9/18) | −0.08 (−0.58, 0.42) | “No agreement” |
Middle (n = 7) | 83.3% (n = 35/42) | 0.62 (0.36, 0.88) | “Substantial agreement” |
Higher (n = 5) | 93.3% (n = 28/30) | 0.84 (0.63, 1.05) | “Almost perfect agreement” |
Age group 5 | |||
Younger (n = 7) | 76.4% (n = 32/42) | 0.44 (0.14, 0.75) | “Moderate agreement” |
Older (n = 8) | 83.3% (n = 40/48) | 0.63 (0.39, 0.86) | “Substantial agreement” |
rs (95% CI) 1 | p-Value 2 | rs Interpretation 3 | |
---|---|---|---|
Overall (n = 15) | |||
0.78 (0.63, 0.89) | <0.001 | “Strong correlation” | |
Socioeconomic status (SES) group 4 | |||
Lower (n = 3) | 0.62 (0.19, 0.94) | 0.006 | “Strong correlation” |
Middle (n = 7) | 0.79 (0.53, 0.97) | <0.001 | “Strong correlation” |
Higher (n = 5) | 0.86 (0.70, 0.96) | <0.001 | “Strong correlation” |
Age group 5 | |||
Younger (n = 7) | 0.78 (0.51, 0.96) | <0.001 | “Strong correlation” |
Older (n = 8) | 0.78, (0.56, 0.92) | <0.001 | “Strong correlation” |
Examples of Quotes Discussing Core Marketing Techniques, Explaining Why Children Liked Some Cereal Boxes More Than Others: |
“It looked like they have little sugar-coated colorful thingies that kids love, you know, like those fruit loops and stuff that have all those colorful rings” |
“And there’s like a zombie kind of...and it says like ‘Sooo much fun!’” |
“Because there’s a lot of colors” |
“I like the tic tac toe” |
“Usually a lot of people’s eyes go to the more colorful things and there’s the one that said uhm, ‘free toy inside’ which would be more kids oriented and ‘cause adults don’t really like toys” |
“Uh because it looks cool...so kids would probably get tricked into eating it cause its like ‘Yeah, I wanna be a cool kid I’m gunna pick this cereal!’” |
“If it has like lots of pictures or like the colors of the pictures or the colors of the food and its not just like regular food or just plain” |
“[Kids like cereals that] make them have fun because they’re so colorful and it makes them excited” |
“Its quite interesting to see they’re both from the same brand and one has more like kiddie atmosphere and all these colors and this one is like for parents and adults and older people and stuff [indicating less powerfully marketed cereals]” |
“Yeah, it says like you get a free toy and “cool new colours” like that...and uhm on this one [indicating a more powerfully marketed box] it there it says: “guaranteed great taste” but this one [indicating a less powerfully marketed box] says nothing in large and there’s no detail so its just less interesting… and look it says: “kids club” there!” |
“Interestingness! [When probed to explain what they meant by “interestingness”:] “Like lots of different things on it, like games.” |
“I’m looking at what pops out on the shelf, like what doesn’t fall back in all the brands” [When probed on what makes something ‘pop out’:] “More color!” “Uhm interesting names” “Free toys!” “Any catchy names of the brands” |
Examples of quotes discussing the lack of core marketing techniques, explaining why children disliked some cereal boxes more than others: |
“If its boring and plain…usually like, kids like something that’s more like hilarious n stuff” |
“They were just normal cereals with fruits in them” |
“Cause there’s not as much color as the kids ones cause they usually put A LOT of color” |
“This one doesn’t have a like kids picture [referring to cartoon characters] or looks like more for adults…They look boring” |
Examples of Quotes Discussing Broad Marketing Techniques, Explaining Why Children Liked Some Cereal Boxes More Than Others: |
“Oh the prepaid 5$ gas card, the parents are gunna want their kids to get that so that they can get free stuff” |
“They had a lot of like uhm like facts like “high cholesterol is a risk” but the adult ones just had nothing on it” [When probed on if they think nutrition marketing is interesting:] “Yeah, like fun facts.” |
“Maybe buy one get one free?” |
“The size. Like how big it is or how small it is” [When probed on what size packages children prefer:] “Bigger” “Big!” “This one is small so adults would like it better…this one’s even smaller!” |
“Yeah, cause over there [pointing at a plain box] it doesn’t say “value” or anything” [When probed on whether ‘good value’ makes them like the cereal more:] “Yeah definitely.” |
“When you feel like you get something back like a 5$ prepaid gas card and if you feel like you get something for buying it” |
Examples of quotes discussing broad marketing techniques, explaining why children disliked some cereal boxes more than others: |
“If they’re expensive and lame” |
“It can’t just say like 5000 calories” “That would be a lot” |
“Some kids like are smart they look over here [pointing at Nutrition Facts Table]” [When probed on what type of ‘nutrition’ children look for:] “Unhealthy!” “Super unhealthy!” |
“If one costs a hundred dollars!” |
“Looks like something you would take for a diet or something” |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mulligan, C.; Potvin Kent, M.; Vergeer, L.; Christoforou, A.K.; L’Abbé, M.R. Quantifying Child-Appeal: The Development and Mixed-Methods Validation of a Methodology for Evaluating Child-Appealing Marketing on Product Packaging. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094769
Mulligan C, Potvin Kent M, Vergeer L, Christoforou AK, L’Abbé MR. Quantifying Child-Appeal: The Development and Mixed-Methods Validation of a Methodology for Evaluating Child-Appealing Marketing on Product Packaging. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(9):4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094769
Chicago/Turabian StyleMulligan, Christine, Monique Potvin Kent, Laura Vergeer, Anthea K. Christoforou, and Mary R. L’Abbé. 2021. "Quantifying Child-Appeal: The Development and Mixed-Methods Validation of a Methodology for Evaluating Child-Appealing Marketing on Product Packaging" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 9: 4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094769