Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2020 Nov 25;20(1):1781.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09881-1.

Can counter-advertising diminish persuasive effects of conventional and pseudo-healthy unhealthy food product advertising on parents?: an experimental study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Can counter-advertising diminish persuasive effects of conventional and pseudo-healthy unhealthy food product advertising on parents?: an experimental study

Helen Dixon et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: To help address rising rates of obesity in children, evidence is needed concerning impacts of common forms of marketing for unhealthy child-oriented food products and the efficacy of educational interventions in counteracting any detrimental impacts of such marketing. This study aims to explore parents' responses to advertising for unhealthy children's food products that employ different types of persuasive appeals and test whether a counter-advertising intervention exposing industry motives and marketing strategies can bolster parents' resistance to influence by unhealthy product advertising.

Methods: N = 1613 Australian parents were randomly assigned to view online either a: (A) non-food ad (control); (B) conventional confectionery ad (highlighting sensory benefits of the product); (C) pseudo-healthy confectionery ad (promoting sensory benefits and health attributes of the product); (D) conventional confectionery ad + counter-ad (employing inoculation-style messaging and narrative communication elements); (E) pseudo-healthy confectionery ad + counter-ad. Parents then viewed various snacks, including those promoted in the food ads and counter-ad. Parents nominated their preferred product, then rated the products.

Results: Exposure to the conventional confectionery ad increased parents' preference for the advertised product, enhanced perceptions of the product's healthiness and reduced sugar content and boosted brand attitude. Exposure to the pseudo-healthy confectionery ad increased parents' preference for the advertised product, and enhanced perceptions of healthiness, fibre content and lower sugar content. The counter-ad diminished, but did not eliminate, product ad effects on parents' purchasing preference, product perceptions and brand attitudes. The counter-ad also prompted parents to perceive processed foods as less healthy, higher in sugar and lower in fibre and may have increased support for advertising regulation.

Conclusions: Exposure to unhealthy product advertising promoted favourable perceptions of products and increased preferences for advertised products among parents. Counter-advertising interventions may bolster parents' resistance to persuasion by unhealthy product advertising and empower parents to more accurately evaluate advertised food products.

Keywords: Counter-advertising; Energy-dense nutrient-poor food; Experiment; Food advertising; Parents; Unhealthy food.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors are employed by a non-profit organisation that conducts research, public health interventions and advocacy aimed at reducing diet-related health harms in the community, especially those pertaining to obesity and cancer. The organisation we work for is a partner and funder of the Obesity Policy Coalition, who produced the counter-ad tested in this study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Proportion of parents indicating a preference to purchase the advertised product by advertising condition. ^ Conventional confectionery for proportion selecting ‘Conventional confectionery brand’ and Pseudo-healthy confectionery for proportion selecting ‘Pseudo-healthy confectionery brand’

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cairns G, Angus K, Hastings G. The extent, nature and effects of food promotion to children: a review of the evidence to December 2008: Geneva: World Health Organization, WHO Press; 2009.
    1. Livingstone S, Helsper EJ. Does advertising literacy mediate the effects of advertising on children? A critical examination of two linked research literatures in relation to obesity and food choice. J Commun. 2006;56:560–584. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00301.x. - DOI
    1. Kelly B, King ML, Chapman K, Boyland E, Bauman AE, Baur LA. A hierarchy of unhealthy food promotion effects: identifying methodological approaches and knowledge gaps. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(4):e86–95. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Matthews AE. Children and obesity: a pan-European project examining the role of food marketing. Eur J Pub Health. 2007;18(1):7–11. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckm015. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Linn S, Novosat CL. Calories for sale: food marketing to children in the twenty-first century. Ann Am Acad Polit SS. 2008;615(1):133–155. doi: 10.1177/0002716207308487. - DOI

Publication types