Public and parental perceptions of and concerns with advertising to preschool children

Abstract

Despite the increasing attention paid by advertisers to preschool children as consumers, little academic attention has been paid to its implications or its consequences. To address this, the following article reports on two independent New Zealand studies of public and parental concerns about the nature and extent of television advertising to preschool children. Results show high levels of concern with the effects of advertising on preschool children and considerable support for its regulation. Importantly, the findings also reveal a fundamental concern with the normalisation of consumption values and promotion of material culture as consequences of advertising exposure not previously identified in the literature. The findings provide useful evidence to inform public policy recommendations and suggestions for future research.

Parenting style and family type, but not child temperament, are associated with television viewing time in children at two years of age

“…This may be because very young children in New Zealand watch less television. Certainly one study has suggested that New Zealand toddlers may be watching as little as 1–3 hours per week [ 11 ], although other New Zealand data suggest children this age could be watching 90 minutes of television a day [ 12 ]. Thus is more likely to be a reflection of differences in the way viewing time is assessed.…”

“…Despite clear recommendations that parents should discourage media use, including television viewing, in children less than two years of age [ 7 , 8 ], it is clear that many infants and toddlers [ 9 ], perhaps as many as 90% [ 10 ], are exposed to television and other electronic media. Limited evidence suggests New Zealand toddlers may be watching as little as 1–3 hours per week [ 11 ] or as much as 90 minutes per day [ 12 ].…”

The impact of advertising on children’s psychological wellbeing and life satisfaction

“…5.3 Implications The findings of this study provide new insights for the ethical debate on the unintended effects of child-directed advertising. This debate traditionally revolves around potential negative consequences, such as materialism and dissatisfaction (Pollay, 1986;Pollay and Gallagher, 1990;Watkins et al, 2016). As a consequence, both topics have been widely studied and are associated with a seminal literature stream (Buckingham, 2011;Dittmar, 2008;Kasser, 2002;Nairn and Mayo, 2009;Schor, 2005;and Tatzel, 2014).…”

Preschoolers' request behaviour and family conflict: The role of family communication and advertising mediation styles

“…Results show that children of concept‐oriented parents perceive they have more influence on purchase decisions, this may be because concept‐oriented parents encourage children to develop their own skills and competence as consumers, resulting in higher yielding to requests by children (Carlson et al, 1990). Watkins et al (2016) found that concept‐oriented communication can also be utilised effectively with children under school age. Families that involved their pre‐school children in family consumption decisions and allowed them to make independent choices encouraged a more critical engagement with messages linking brands to happiness, popularity and quality even at this early age.…”

“…In children's early years of development (pre‐school), a key focus is acknowledging the child's increasing consumption preferences and desires, and managing request behaviour to encourage decisions that align with family values and financial and social realities. Managing children's request behaviour or 'pester power', and, in particular, managing the conflict that can arise when these requests are denied, is a key parental concern within this age‐group (Watkins et al, 2016) and an important element of children's early socialisation as consumers. However, in relation to pre‐school children, little is known about the relationship between parental styles of socialisation, and the important early goal of managing request behaviour (Henry & Borzekowski, 2011; Nash & Basini, 2012).…”