Skip to main content
×
Home

Parent's responses to nutrient claims and sports celebrity endorsements on energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods: an experimental study

  • Helen Dixon (a1), Maree Scully (a1), Melanie Wakefield (a1), Bridget Kelly (a2), Kathy Chapman (a3) and Robert Donovan (a4)...
Abstract
AbstractObjective

To assess parents’ responses to common, potentially misleading strategies for marketing energy-dense and nutrient-poor (EDNP) child-oriented foods.

Design

Between-subjects online experiment to test whether nutrient claims and sports celebrity endorsements on the front of packs of EDNP products lead parents to prefer and rate these foods more favourably.

Setting

Australia.

Subjects

A total of 1551 parents of children aged 5–12 years, who were the main household grocery buyers.

Results

Inclusion of nutrient claims or sports celebrity endorsements on EDNP products led parents to perceive these products to be more nutritious than if they did not include such promotions. When asked to choose between a pair of different products (EDNP v. healthier), 56 % of parents did not read a nutrition information panel (NIP) before making their choice and this did not differ by promotion condition. These parents were more likely to choose an EDNP product if it included a nutrient claim (OR = 1·83, 95 % CI 1·31, 2·56; P < 0·001) or sports celebrity endorsement (OR = 2·37, 95 % CI 1·70, 3·32; P < 0·001). Sports celebrity endorsements also enhanced parent's perceptions of typical consumers of the product, perceptions of product healthiness and quality, as well as purchase intentions.

Conclusions

Nutrient claims and sports celebrity endorsements tip consumer preferences towards EDNP products bearing such promotions, especially among the majority who do not read the NIP. As parents largely determine what foods are available to children at home, it is critical that initiatives aimed at reducing the persuasive impact of food marketing include this target group.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Parent's responses to nutrient claims and sports celebrity endorsements on energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods: an experimental study
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Parent's responses to nutrient claims and sports celebrity endorsements on energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods: an experimental study
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Parent's responses to nutrient claims and sports celebrity endorsements on energy-dense and nutrient-poor foods: an experimental study
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email Melanie.Wakefield@cancervic.org.au
References
Hide All
1. World Health Organization (2003) Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. WHO Technical Report Series no. 916. Geneva: WHO.
2. World Health Organization (2007) Marketing Food to Children: Changes in the Global Regulatory Environment 2004–2006. Geneva: WHO.
3. Cairns G, Angus K & Hastings G (2009) The Extent, Nature and Effects of Food Promotion to Children: A Review of the Evidence to December 2008. Geneva: WHO.
4. Brown R & Ogden J (2004) Children's eating attitudes and behaviour: a study of the modelling and control theories of parental influence. Health Educ Res 19, 261271.
5. Campbell KJ, Crawford DA, Salmon J et al. (2007) Associations between the home food environment and obesity-promoting eating behaviours in adolescence. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15, 719730.
6. Story M, Neumark-Sztainer D & French S (2002) Individual and environmental influences on adolescent eating behaviours. J Am Diet Assoc 102, Suppl. 3, S40S51.
7. Morley B, Chapman K, Mehta K et al. (2008) Parental awareness and attitudes about food advertising to children on Australian television. Aust N Z J Public Health 32, 341347.
8. Kelly B, Chapman K, Hardy LL et al. (2009) Parental awareness and attitudes of food marketing to children: a community attitudes survey of parents in New South Wales, Australia. J Paediatr Child Health 45, 493497.
9. Lee J (2008) Food advertising shifts focus from kids to parents. Marketing, 8 July.
10. British Heart Foundation, The Food Commission, UK (2008) How parents are being misled: a campaign report on children's food marketing. http://www.childrensfoodcampaign.net/Reports%202008/HowParentsarebeingMisled.pdf (accessed November 2009).
11. Byrd-Bredbenner C, Wong C & Cottee P (2000) Consumer understanding of US and EU nutrition labels. Br Food J 102, 615629.
12. Cowburn G & Stockley L (2005) Consumer understanding and use of nutrition labelling: a systematic review. Public Health Nutr 8, 2128.
13. Feunekes GI, Gortemaker IA, Willems AA et al. (2008) Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: testing effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries. Appetite 50, 5770.
14. Jones G & Richardson M (2007) An objective examination of consumer perception of nutrition information based on healthiness ratings and eye movements. Public Health Nutr 10, 238244.
15. Food Standards Australia New Zealand (2008) Final assessment report. Proposal P293 – Nutrition, health and related claims. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/standardsdevelopment/proposals/proposalp293nutritionhealthandrelatedclaims/index.cfm (accessed August 2009).
16. European Food Safety Authority (2008) The setting of nutrient profiles for foods bearing nutrition and health claims pursuant to Article 4 of the Regulation (EC) no. 1924/2006 – Scientific opinion of the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/cs/BlobServer/Scientific_Opinion/nda_op_ej644_nutrient%20profiles_en,2.pdf (accessed November 2009).
17. Kelly B, Hattersley L, King L et al. (2009) Smoke and mirrors: nutrition content claims used to market unhealthy food. Nutr Diet 66, 6264.
18. Williams P, Yeatman H, Zakrzewski S et al. (2003) Nutrition and related claims used on packaged Australian foods – implications for regulation. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 12, 138150.
19. Roe B, Levy A & Derby B (1999) The impact of health claims on consumer search and product evaluation outcomes: results from FDA experimental data. J Public Pol Marketing 18, 89105.
20. Kamins M (1989) Celebrity and non-celebrity advertising in a two-sided context. J Advert Res 29, 3442.
21. Ohanian R (1990) Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. J Advert 19, 3952.
22. Charbonneau J & Garland R (2005) Talent, Looks or Brains? New Zealand advertising practitioners’ views on celebrity and athlete endorsers. Marketing Bulletin 16, article 3.
23. Which? (2006) Food Fables: Exploring Industry Myths on Responsible Food Marketing to Kids. Campaign Report. London: Which?.
24. Centre for Health Initiatives (2007) Food Marketing to Children in Australia. Wollongong: The Cancer Council Australia's Nutrition and Physical Activity Committee.
25. Phillipson L & Jones SC (2008) ‘I eat Milo to make me run faster’: how the use of sport in food marketing may influence the food beliefs of young Australians. http://www.anzmac2008.org/_Proceedings/PDF/S05//Phillipson%20&%20Jones_S1%20PS%20P1.pdf (accessed March 2010).
26. Food Standards Australia New Zealand (2009) Proposal P293 – Nutrition, health and related claims consultation paper for first review. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/P293%20Health%20Claims%20Cons%20Paper%20FINAL.pdf (accessed August 2009).
27. Wakefield MA, Germain D & Durkin SJ (2008) How does increasingly plainer cigarette packaging influence adult smokers’ perceptions about brand image? An experimental study. Tob Control 17, 416421.
28. d'Astous A & Jacob I (2002) Understanding consumer reactions to premium-based promotional offers. Eur J Mark 36, 12701286.
29. Andrews JC, Burton S & Netemeyer RG (2000) Are some comparative nutrition claims misleading? The role of nutrition knowledge, ad claim type and disclosure conditions. J Advert 29, 2942.
30. Pechmann C & Shih C-F (1999) Smoking scenes in movies and antismoking advertisements before movies: effects on youth. J Mark 63, 113.
31. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2008) Information Paper: An Introduction to Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) 2006. Catalogue no. 2039.0. Canberra: ABS.
32. FOODcents (2010) Reading food labels. http://www.foodcentsprogram.com.au/about-foodcents/shop-smart/labels/ (accessed March 2010).
33. Kelly B, Hughes C, Chapman K et al. (2009) Consumer testing of the acceptability and effectiveness of front-of-pack food labelling systems for the Australian grocery market. Health Promot Int 24, 120129.
34. Malam S, Clegg S, Kirwan S et al. (2009) Comprehension and Use of UK Nutrition Signpost Labelling Schemes. London: UK Food Standards Agency.
35. Food Standards Agency (2005) Qualitative Signpost Labelling Refinement Research. London: Synovate.
36. Food Standards Agency (2005) Quantitative Evaluation of Alternative Food Signposting Concepts. London: Synovate.
37. Food Standards Agency (2004) Concept Testing of Alternative Labelling of Healthy/Less Healthy Foods. Gerrards Cross: Navigator.
38. Ofcom (2008) Changes in the nature and balance of television food advertising to children. A review of HFSS advertising restrictions. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/hfssdec08.pdf (accessed January 2011).
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 56
Total number of PDF views: 400 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 900 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.