Children's Television Advertising and Brand Choice: A Laboratory Experiment

Author(s): Alan Resik, Alan Resnik and Bruce L. Stern

Source: Journal of Advertising, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Summer, 1977), pp. 11-17
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4188119 .
Accessed: 15/12/2014 03:37
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Advertising.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Children's

Television

Advertising
Brand
A

and

Choice:
Laboratory

ALAN RESNIK

Experiment

I.

BRUCE L. STERN

Alan Resnik is currently an Assistant Professor of Marketing at

Portland State University. He received his undergraduate degree
from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, his
MBA from Tulane University and his D.B.A. from Arizona State
University. He has an article in the advertising area in press in the

Ithoughthe impactof television programmingon

childrenhas been a controversialtopic for many
years, only recently has attentionbeen focused on its
actual effects upon a child's values, beliefs and behavior (1,2,3,4,5). Criticsallege that television commercialsteach childrenvalues which are reflected in
choices of and preferences for products that cannot
meet expectations and which may be genuinely
harmful. Although adults are similarly beguiled by
product advertising, studies by Piaget reveal that
children are uniqely vulnerable to the misleading
equations and suggestions common to advertising
(6). Evidence suggests that until about age twelve,
the child, unlikethe matureadolescent or the adult, is
not able to efficiently mediate his perceptions
through thoughts and ideas-or in common language, to discriminatebetween pufferyandfact. This
inability to apply judgmental criteria to perceived
informationleads to a behaviorguided solely by the
iniformationreceived and ultimately to unquestioningly accepting the exaggeratedresults and benefits
of an advertised product.
On the other hand, supporters of children's advertising claim that there is no "hard" evidence to
support the charges that television advertising is
harmfulto children. To the contrary, many feel that

Journalof Marketing.
IBruce L. Stern is currently an Assistant Professor of Marketing at
Portland State University. His D.B.A. was received at Arizona State
University. Dr. Stern's articles have appeared in the Journal of

Marketing,Journalof MarketingResearch, Journalof Business, and

the Journalof the Academy of MarketingScience. He has also
presented papers to the American Psychological Association,
American Academy of Advertising, Southern Marketing Association,
and Western Marketing Educators.
The authors would like to acknowledge Scott Seaman and the staff of
WMNU-TV for the production of the commercial, Kenneth Bauder and
the staff of WLUC-7Vfor program and commercial integration, CBSfor
the use of "Jeannie;" Cindy Strong, Mary Martinson, and Donna Kapronfor data collection assistance; and Dean Donald Hangen, School of
Business Administration, Northern Michigan University, for the financial support for the study.

ABSTRACT
This experimentattemptsto investigatethe vulnerabilityof children
to television advertising.Subjects between six and eight years of age
were exposed to commercialstimuliundervaryingconditions. Groups
were randomlyassigned to view segments of "Jeannie," a network
commercialof a
children'sshow, eitherwith an experimenter-produced
previously-unknownbrand or a control ad inserted into the program
context. In addition,the effects of traditionalmethodologiesemployedin
relatedliteratureto one which minimizesreactanceeffects were studied.
Children'sbrandchoices werefoundto be influencedsignificantlyby the
communicationof the commercialmessagefor the previously-unknown
brand.
11

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING

such advertisingis beneficialin thatit creates awareness of products that potentially increases one's
satisfaction.This issue has largelyremainedan emotional one with industrysupporterson one side, and
organizationslike Action for Children'sTelevision
(ACT) on the other side. The FTC is now wedged in
the center of the controversy, and is underpressure
to make public policy decisions despite the dearth
and lack of clarity of available experimentaldata.

studies have focused on three areas: the effects of

commercials on child development, viewing behaviorand effect on family buyingpatternsand peer
group relationships.

Effects on Child Development

The majorstudies in this area were conducted by
Wardwho concentratedhis effortsin fourbasic areas
(7,8):

This paper has a two-fold purpose: first, to

examine the researchpresentlyavailablein the area,
and second, to discuss a study by these authorsconcerning children's vulnerabilityto television advertising which suggests a laboratorymethodfor investigation of these issues.

Cognitive affective focus, referring to the lack of

quality of physical, emotional or intellectualstimuli

which are most likely to affect children,
Mode of assiniilation, referring to the ways in

which children recall and use the informationthey

receive from television advertisements,
Differentiation, referringto the degree to which
childrencan discriminatefantasyfromfact, products
advertisedfrom advertisementsthemselves and elements of commercials,
Level of judgment, referringto the stage of cognitive or ego development at which a child judges
commercials, or is susceptible to commercial appeals.
Ward'ssampleconsisted of childrenbetween the
ages of five and twelve who were interviewed at
home for a period of one hour (8). His results can be
summarizedas follows, keeping in mind that points
1, 2, 3 and 6 parallelPiaget'sdescriptionsof cognitive
development and judgmentalfaculties (6):
1. As a child becomes older, his understanding
of what constitutes a commercialbecomes greater.
In the 5-7 age group the predominantlevel of awareness of whata commercialis is low, while childrenof
ages 8-10 and 11-12have medium levels of awareness.
2. As a child becomes older, his understanding
of the purpose of a commercialincreases. For the
youngest age group children predominantlydo not
understandthat advertisers seek profit. Childrenin
the older age categories generallyfeel that commercials are designedto inducebuying. Even in the older
age groups, relatively few children realized that
commercialspay for the programming.
3. Youngerchildrenwere generally not able to
discriminatebetween a programand a commercial
whereas the older child (9-12) was generallyable to
make this distinction.
4. Youngerchildrentendedto like a commercial
because they liked or possessed the advertisedproduct. It was also observed that the most frequent
reasons for liking or dislikingcommercialswere related to the entertainmentcontent.
5. The complexity of the images that a child
recalls from a television commercialincreases with

The vast majorityof studies attemptingto measure the effect of television advertisingon children
have employed survey or observationaltechniques.
The survey methodgenerallyinvestigatedsuch questions as: How much television does your child
watch? How often do you yield to these requests?
How do you feel television advertising influences
your child?
A second approach to assessing the impact of
television commercialson childrenis throughdirect
observation. This technique generally employs
motherstrainedto unobtrusivelyobserve one of their
children watching television commercials. Generally, observation periods are determined by the
child's normalviewing habits and usually last for a
minimumof six and a maximumof ten hours over a
seven to ten day period. Participatingmothers are
often paid for their efforts.
Laboratory experimentation is the third
technique used for assessing the effect of television
commercials on children. Within this setting, children are often asked to view a video-tapedsegment
of a television programwith commercial(s)inserted
by the experimenter.The child is then subjectedto a
post-viewinginterviewand/ora productchoice situation.
Each research technique has its own strengths
and weaknesses. The survey and observational
techniques lack scientific documentation and are
subject to experimenterbias, while the laboratory
method has been criticizedfor the artificialityof the
viewing situation.

PREVIOUS RESEARCH
It is surprisingthat more research has not been
publishedin this highly controversialarea. Existing
12

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Children's Television Advertising and Brand Choice.

age. The complexity of recall does not significantly

differ for liked or disliked commercials.
6. Withthe exception of the youngestgroup, the
majority of children believed that commercials do
not always tell the truth. Most older children questioned the motives of advertisers. Ward also observed that there was apparentlyno relationshipbetween the child's perception of the truthfulnessof a
commercialand his reasons for liking or dislikingit.
Therefore, a child may like a commercial even
though he believes it is untrue.
Breen and Powell found that children "generally
tendedto believe in those commercialsthey liked and
liked those commercials they believed." (1) Even
though children found some commercials "stupid"
they thought the product was good.
Somewhat in line with the Wardresults are the
findingsof Rossiter and Robertson(8,9). They found
that increases in developmental factors (age and
grade in school) resulted in greaterunderstandingof
commercial content, but a more defensive attitude
toward them. This mistrust of commercials which
increases with age was also reported by Blatt,
Spencer and Ward (10).
In the study by Robertson and Rossiter, the researchers found that older children(grades 3 and 5)
with more educated parents perceived advertisements as being largely persuasive (11). On the other
hand, the child who felt that advertisementshave the
purpose of assisting and informingtend to be either
the oldest or the only childin the home. Childrenwho
recognized commercialsto be persuasive also could
distinguish commercials from programming,recognize the existence of a sponsor, perceive the idea of
an intended audience, show awareness of the symbolic natureof commercialsand could cite instances
where products did not meet advertised expectations. Somewhat similarto the results of Breen and
Powell, these authors found that children who perceived advertisingas persuasiveplaced less trustin it
and tended to dislike it, while those who felt that
commercials'intentions were to assist actually liked
and trusted commercials to a greater extent (1).

commercials for products that they consumed and

enjoyed (8). In addition,they foundthatregardlessof
commerciallength, the older childpaidless attention
to commercials than did younger children.

Effects on Family and Peer Group Relations

McNeal's research shows that children are
influencedby commercials,and that they attemptto
influence parental buying (13). Additional studies
provide reinforcingand more detailed evidence.
A Study by Wardand Wackmaninvestigatedthe
relationship between television advertising and
intra-familybehavior (5). The study analyzed data
from 109 mothers in the form of self-administered
questionnaires.The mothers indicatedthat younger
children attempted to influence purchasing more
than older children.However, althoughfrequencyof
influence attempts decreased with age, acquiescing
to requests was found to increase with the child's
age. In addition, mothers who watched more television and who had a more positive attitude toward
commercials yielded more often to children's
influences.
A study by Frideresinvestigatedthe persuasiveness of television commercials and their effect on
parental buying (2). Researchers interviewed both
parentsand childrenof 82 randomlyselected households in a large Canadianurbanarea. Childrenindicated that 78 percent of the toys they would like to
have, they had first seen on television. The remainder learned about the toys from peers, which
suggests a two-step flow of communication.As expected, as the numberof hours of television viewing
increased, the probabilitythat the toy was first seen
on television also increased. A second phase of the
study involved questioningparentsconcerningtheir
rationalefor toy purchases. The child's desire was
the prevalent reason given, especially for toys costing more thanfive dollars.Thus, toy preferencesand
eventual accommodation of these preferences are
shown to be related to television advertising.
Strength of preferences reflected in a child's
motivation to obtain an advertised product was
examinedby Goldbergand Gorn(14). A child's persistence (measured by the length of time it took to
finish a puzzle-completiontask) to obtain an advertised productwas viewed as a functionof expectancy
and numbersof exposures. Expectancywas manipulated by communicatingdifferentprobabilitiesof obtainingthe desiredtoys. This study representsa rare
attempt to study phenomena related to children's
advertising in controlled laboratory conditions.
Their findings showed that seeing a single commercial for a valued toy produces more favorable reac-

Viewing Behavior
Ward, Levinson and Wackmaninvestigated the
areas of attention to, consequences of and alternatives to commercialviewing (12). Using the trained
mother observational approach, the researchers
found that approximatelyone-half of the 65 children
were paying full attention, while one-quarterwere
payingpartialattentionto a programbefore the onset
of a commercial.The child usually did not changehis
viewing pattern, but the degree of attentiondid vary
with age. Their study also supportedWard'sfindings
that children of all ages were more interested in
13

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING

tions to the toy and increases motivatedbehaviorto

obtain it. However, furtherexposure to commercials
did not increase these effects. In addition, Goldberg
and Gorn found that children who approachedthe
television viewing situation with high expectations
that they would get what they saw advertised had
more favorable attitudes toward the toy and exhibited greater efforts to obtain it (14).
Conclusions
These studies and others have confirmedthe advertisers' and public's conviction that television
commercialsdo affect children.The exact natureand
magnitudeof that effect, however, still remainsunclear. It is believed that two areas need special research attention. First, a laboratory experimental
methodology which permits cause and effect inferences to be madein an environmentwhich minimizes
reactive variables needs to be pursued. Second,
baseline data is needed to establish whether or not
advertisinga producton television gives thatproduct
an edge over similarproducts in their category. The
following study attempts to partially satisfy these
objectives.

VULNERABILITY STUDY
The specific purpose of this experimentis to determinewhethermere exposure to a non-informative
product advertisement on television is sufficient to
create a desire for that product. To this end, the
investigators will first obtain a baseline measure of
the vulnerabilityof childrento television advertising,
and second, will establish a check on the reactive
effects of the traditionallaboratorymethods used to
research this area. The null hypotheses to be tested
are as follows:
I. There is no significantrelationshipbetween a
child's selection of a particular brand and
whetheror not it was advertisedon television.
2. There is no significantdifferencebetween the
research findings obtained by utilizing quasinatural and traditionalartificialexperimental
methods.
Sample
The subjectsfor the study were chosen from children in the Marquette,Michiganpublic school system. It was impossible to obtain names and phone
numbersof childrenfrom school principalsbecause
of a policy established by the superintendent.This
problem is pervasive for studies using children as
subjects. In lieu of an idealrandomselection process,
five hundredletters were sent home with students in

the second, third and fourth grades. These grades

were selected because Ward, Levinson and
Wackman suggested that younger children tended
not to comprehendadvertisingmessages (12).
The letter to the parentswas carefullydesignedin
order not to reveal the exact nature of the experiment, thereby dampeningthe potential for specific
parental influence. Parents were given a telephone
number to call to make an appointmentfor their
child. The response rate was slightly less than 10
percent (45 parents). Since addresses and telephone
numbersof the total populationwere unknown, nonresponse bias was impossible to measure.
Procedure
Individualsubjects (Ss) were accompaniedby a
parentto the LearningResources Buildingof Northern MichiganUniversity. One subject at a time was
then escorted by an experimenter to a small,
sparsely-decoratedconference room, while parents
waitedin anotherroom. The experimentalroom containeda television set at a sufficientheightto prohibit
the child from changing channels. The set was on
when the child enteredthe room. A video-tapedsegment of "Jeannie" was obtained to show the children. The tape was activated at precisely the same
time for each S from a centralcontrolcenter. The Ss
were randomlyassigned to one of the three conditions, to be referredto as the quasi-natural,quasinaturalcontrol and traditionalgroups. In two conditions the Ss were told to wait in the conference room
and the interviewerwould be with him as soon as he
was free. These groups will subsequently be called
the quasi-naturaland quasi-naturalcontrol groups.
There were no cues present to lead the subject to
believe thatthe programwas controlledby the experimenter. In fact, in post-experiment interviews,
using probingtechniques, Ss were not aware of the
deception involved. Althoughthis quasi-naturalsetting was not precisely equivalentto the child's normal viewing situation, it did provide exposure to

advertisingstimuliwithinthe programcontext, while

minimizing the effects of the laboratory environment. Thus, demand characteristicsand evaluation
apprehension, reactive variables that have plagued
advertising researchers in this area were, theoretically, substantiallyreduced. Childrenin the quasinaturalgroup were shown "Jeannie" with a potato
chip (experimental) commercial, while the quasinatural control Ss viewed the same segment of
"Jeannie," but with the originalnetworkadvertising
intact.
A third group of Ss in the traditionalcondition
were actually requested by the experimenter to

14

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Children's Television Advertising and Brand Choice

At the completion of the interview the experimenterthankedthe subjectand offeredhim a choice

of one of two largebags of potato chips, apparentlya
rewardfor participation.One brandwas the one represented on the commercialinsertedby the authors.
The other was another potato chip brand that was
only distributedin the southwestern United States.
The order of presentation of the two brands was
randomlyvaried. After S's choice was recorded, he
was asked if he would ratherhave a toy, which all Ss
preferredto the potato chips. Ss were given an educationalgame or toy as a giftfor participatingand as a
measureto reducethe possibilityof futureSs gaining
specific knowledge of the experiment. Each S went
throughthe identicalinterviewand choices, the only
differences between groups being the commercials
viewed or the context in which they were seen.

watch television for 15 minutes, after which time

they would be questioned. Otherthan this additional
insightgiven the Ss, the traditionaland quasi-natural
conditionwere identical. The traditionalconditionas
previouslydescribedis similarto the techniquesused
by Wartellaand Ettemaand Goldbergand Gorn, also
referredto as the artificialviewing method, which is
indicative of the methods used in the limitedvolume
of experimentalresearch done in the area (15,14).
The experimental tape insert was produced by
professionals from WLUC-TV, a CBS affiliate in
Marquette, Michigan. In place of two 30-second
commercials that appeared during the first fifteen
minutes of the actual program,a commercialwhich
the authorsproducedwas substituted.The commercial was made in the studios of WNPB-TV,the local
public television station. The commercialwas for a
potato chip brand produced and distributedonly in
the Southwest which was selected in order to avoid
bias from previous exposure.* The dialogue was
carefullyconstructedto avoid any referencesto anything that could be construed as useful information.
Even marginallyinformativewordslike "delicious,"
"crispy," or "crunchy" were not used. Elaborate
cameratechniquesand highlyappealingmodels were
also avoided. The end result was a commercialthatin
essence communicatedthe existence of a heretofore
unknown brand,using a minimalamount of persua-

Results
The data collected in this study are dichotomous,
that is, a S chooses the advertised or unadvertised
brand of potato chip. Hence 2 x 2 contingency
analyses were used to test both hypotheses. Because
some of the cell sizes containedless than five observations, the Fisher Exact test was used in lieu of
chi-square analysis.
The contingencytableassociatedwith hypothesis
one, concerning the relationshipbetween seeing an
advertisementand choosing the brandpresented, is
shown in Table 1.

sion.

For all three groups the videotape was shown in

color with careful attention given to control of extraneous variables (i.e. physical environment, experimenters'dialogueand timing,lengthof the taped
segment, potential for hearing of the experiment or
products involved). After the videotaped segment
ran for exactly fifteen minutes an experimenterentered the room and 'turnedoff the television. This
procedure ensured equivalent exposures and avoided the need to arouse suspicion by terminatingthe
programfrom the central control point. The experimenter then proceeded to interview Ss by asking
them questions unrelated to the present study but
consistent with what parents were informedwas the
purpose of the study. The interview continued for
precisely five minutes regardlessof how many questions were completed. The purposeof the "dummy"
questionswas twofold;first, it provideda rationaleto
the child for his being there and for his subsequent
rewardfor participation,and second, the time span
of the interview lessened the probabilityof a child
connectingthe videotape and subsequentchoices he
would ultimately be asked to make.

Table I
AN ANALYSIS OF BRAND CHOICES
IN THE QUASI-NATURAL AND
QUASI-NATURAL CONTROL CONDITIONS

Conditions
Quasi-Natural
Quasi-Natural Control

Number of
advertised
brand choices

Number of
non-advertised
brand choices

8
1

6
13

The Fisher Exact value is 5.88, p. < .02

The contingencytableassociatedwithhypothesis
two concerning the viability of the two divergent
methodologies is presented in Table 2.

*A pretest indicateda total lack of awarenessof either brandutilized.

15

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING

of consumerbehavior, or in most areas for that matter, is the eclectic approachto its exploration.
The test of the second hypothesis demonstrated
that the reactance effects associated with the traditional condition did little to produce statisticallydifferent results compared to the quasi-naturalcondition. However, when the Ss were told to watch the
television, a higher proportionof them (73 percent)
chose the advertisedbrand, comparedto 57 percent
of the quasi-naturalSs. Although the Fisher Exact
score was not statistically significant, there was a
difference in brand choice between the two groups
which would have to be attributed to the special
instructionsgiven to the traditionalSs and/orchance.
The lack of statistical significancecould well be due
to the smallcell sizes, and therefore,deserves further
investigation. If successive samples yielded similar
results, the findingsshouldreflecta moderatecaution
to futureresearchersin the area. The implicationsare
that placing childrenin an unnatural,forced (versus
optional)viewing situationmightproducesubtle contamination toward the advertised products which
might overstate the effects of normalviewing situations on brand choice behavior.

Table 2
AN ANALYSIS OF BRAND CHOICES
IN THE QUASI-NATURAL
AND TRADITIONAL CONDITIONS

Conditions
Quasi-Natural
Traditional

Number of
advertised
brand choices

Number of
non-advertised
brand choices

8
11

6
4

The Fisher Exact value is .275, and is not statistically significant

Discussion
The small sample size and limited scope somewhat limits inferences that can be drawn from the
study. However, the experiment has dramatically
demonstrated a generalized cause and effect relationship that is rarely present in the previous research. As reflectedin Table 1, 57 percent(8 of 14)of
the Ss in the quasi-naturalconditionchose the advertised brandcomparedto 7 percent (1 of 14)of the Ss
in the quasi-naturalcontrol condition. Although the
57 percentproportionis not impressivewhen viewed
in isolation, it comparesquite favorablyto the overwhelming non-preference for the same advertised
brand offered to the control group Ss. Apparently,
the non-advertisedbrand,by virtueof its brandname
or package, was inherentlymore appealingto those
who were not exposed to the experimentalmanipulation. Because of the statistically significantresults
and the tightnessof the experimentaldesign, it can be
said (keepinglimitationsin mind)that a child is more
likely to choose a brandthat he has seen advertised
on television over another previously unknown
brandthat he has not seen advertised.
The importantquestion remainingis why the advertised product is chosen. A myriad of potential
explanationsexist. Perhapstelevision lends credibility to advertisedproducts. Equally likely is that the
advertisedbrandwas fresh in the child's mind and it
was chosen due to unconscious familarity.Possibly
the child really believed the model's use of superlatives in describingthe product. The outcome may be
a result of a conditioned response guided by the
informationreceived (6,15). The list of possible explanationscould be vastly expandedwith little effort.
Unfortunately, although previous research gives
some clues concerningthe reasons for the choice of
the advertisedproduct,it would be difficultto justify
one explanationbased solely on their findings.Even
theoretical explorations of the area do not provide
in-depth or predicative foundations for evaluating
the process involved. One majorproblemin this area

CONCLUSIONS
The issue of children's vulnerabilityto advertising messages is central to determiningthe aggregate
effect of advertising. When one thinks of a child
watchingan averageof 25,000commercialsannually,
it is understandablethat there is great concern over
their potential effects. When one further considers
that the majorityof a child's television viewing is not
done duringchildren's programming(i.e., Saturday
morning) times but during prime adult hours, the
concern increases. Does constant exposure to similar messages increase or reduce their credibility?
Does a child, because of the sheer numberof commercialmessages, develop a type of cynicism toward
them as some researchresults suggest?The answers
to these and a myriadof other questions relate to the
malleabilityof a child's mind-the degree to which it
can be manipulatedby the advertiser.
This potential for manipulationhas made children's television advertising a highly emotional
topic. The scenario of the innocent child exposed to
hundredsof drugads, as an example, and developing
the philosophythat "drugscan cure all of Man'sills"
is an outgrowth of such emotion with no empirical
support. However, it is an undeniablefact that television plays a majorrole in a child's developmentand
such a scenario cannot be dismissed as utter nonsense. Of course childrenare not passive receivers of
all commercial messages, but we know very little
16

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Children's Television Advertising and Brand Choice

about how they interact with these messages and

how the cornmercials ultimately affect their development.
Exploring this vital area is fraught with
methodological difficulties. The problems parallel
those of studyingtelevision violence, where, despite
years of research, little substantial evidence exists
that links television violence with real-world violence. Despite the difficulties, the need for a firm
empiricalbasis on which to base public policy decisions in the area of children's television advertising
necessitates a broader-basedresearcheffort. Greater
emphasis on laboratoryand field experimentationis
needed to lend convergentvalidity to the results obtained throughsurveys and observation. The establishmentof cause-and-effectrelationshipsis a requisite for decisive action by legislatorsand government
agencies, and the use of experimentationis critical
for establishing these relationships.
The need for decisive action is criticalbecause in
a very real sense the children'stelevision advertising
issue rocks the foundationof the free enterprisesystem. The system is based on the freedom of the
individualconsumerto choose a mix of productsthat
maximizes his satisfactionbased on his own evaluative criteria.The extent to which television advertising contributes to a child's development as a consumerand conditionshis futureresponses to marketing stimuli may represent an implicit reduction in
economic freedom.
The present study gives a baseline indication of
the power of children's television as an advertising
medium. To gain furtherinsights into the extent and
intensity of the effects of this mediumrequires that
new researchparadigmsbe explored.To this date the
researchefforts have been confinedto a small group
of investigators. There is a great need for increased
emphasis on children's advertising with additional
researchers providing new perspectives in a
methodologically-complexarea.

6. Piaget, J. Biology and Knowledge. Chicago:University of Chicago

Press, 1971.
7. Ward,S. "Effects of TelevisionAdvertisingon ChildrenandAdolescence: An Overview," WorkingPaper: MarketingScience Institute,
Cambridge,Mass., 1971.
8. Ward,S. "Children'sReactionsto Commercials,"Journalof Advertising Research, Vol. 12 (Apr., 1972), pp. 37-45.

9. Rossiter,J. andT. S. Robertson."Children'sTV Commercials:Test-ingand Defenses," Journal of Communication, Vol. 24 (Autumn, 1974),

pp. 137-44.
10. Blatt, J., L. Spencer and S. Ward. "A Cognitive Developmental
Study of Children'sReactions to Television Advertising," Working
Paper:MarketingScience Institute, Cambridge,Mass., 1971.
11. Robertson,T. and J. R. Rossiter. "Childrenand CommercialPersuasion: An AttributionTheory Analysis," Journal of ConsumerResearch, Vol. 1 (June, 1974),pp. 13-20.
12. Ward,S., D. Levinsonand D. B. Wackman."Children'sAttention
to Television Advertising," WorkingPaper: MarketingScience Institute, Cambridge,Mass., 1971.
13. McNeal,J. U. "An ExploratoryStudyof the ConsumerBehaviorof
Children," in James U. McNeal, Dimensions of Consumer Behavior.

1969.
New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts,
14. Goldberg,J. and G. Gorn. "Children'sReactionsto Television Advertising: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Consumer Research,

Vol. 1 (Sept., 1974),pp. 69-75.

15. Wartella,E. and J. Ettema. "A CognitiveDevelopment Study of
Children'sAttentionto TV Commercials,"CommunicationsResearch,
Vol. 1 (Jan., 1974),pp. 69-88.

REFERENCES
1. Breen, M. P. and J. T. Powell. "The RelationshipBetween Attractiveness and Credibilityof Television Commercialsas Perceived by
Children," Central States Speech Journal, Vol. 24 (Summer, 1973), pp.

97-101.
2. Frideres,J. S. "AdvertisingBuyingPatternsand Children,"Journal
of Advertising Research, Vol. 13 (Feb., 1973), pp. 34-36.

3. Ward,S. andT. S. Robertson."AdolescentAttitudesTowardTelevision Advertising:PreliminaryFindings," in E. A. Rubenstein,G. A.

Comstock and J. P. Murray, Television and Social Behavior, Vol. 4,

Washington:U.S. GovernmentPrintingOffice, 1972.

4. Ward,S., T. S. Robertsonand D. B. Wackman."Children'sAttention to Television Advertising,"Proceedings. Second AnnualConference Association for ConsumerResearch, 1971,pp. 143-56.
5. Ward,S. and D. B. Wackman."TelevisionAdvertisingandIntrafamily Influence: Children's Purchase Influence Attempts and Parental
Yielding," WorkingPaper: MarketingScience Institute, Cambridge,
Mass., 1971.

17

This content downloaded from 193.226.34.229 on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 03:37:48 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions