Go 
|
New 
|
Find 
|
Notify 
|
|
Reply 
|
|
Admin 
|
New PM! 
|

Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1396
|
quote: CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) -- Anything made by McDonald's tastes better, preschoolers said in a study that powerfully demonstrates how advertising can trick the taste buds of young children.
In comparing identical McDonald's foods in name-brand and plain wrappers, the unmarked foods always lost.
Even carrots, milk and apple juice tasted better to the kids when they were wrapped in the familiar packaging of the Golden Arches.
The study had youngsters sample identical McDonald's foods in name-brand and unmarked wrappers. The unmarked foods always lost the taste test.
"You see a McDonald's label and kids start salivating," said Diane Levin, a childhood development specialist who campaigns against advertising to kids. She had no role in the research.
Levin said it was "the first study I know of that has shown so simply and clearly what's going on with (marketing to) young children."
Study author Dr. Tom Robinson said the kids' perception of taste was "physically altered by the branding." The Stanford University researcher said it was remarkable how children so young were already so influenced by advertising.
The study involved 63 low-income children ages 3 to 5 from Head Start centers in San Mateo County, Calif. Robinson believes the results would be similar for children from wealthier families.
The research, appearing in August's Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, was funded by Stanford and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The study is likely to stir more debate over the movement to restrict ads to kids. It comes less than a month after 11 major food and drink companies, including McDonald's, announced new curbs on marketing to children under 12.
McDonald's says the only Happy Meals it will promote to young children will contain fruit and have fewer calories and less fat.
"This is an important subject and McDonald's has been actively addressing it for quite some time," said company spokesman Walt Riker. "We've always wanted to be part of the solution and we are providing solutions."
But Dr. Victor Strasburger, an author of an American Academy of Pediatrics policy urging limits on marketing to children, said the study shows too little is being done.
"It's an amazing study and it's very sad," Strasburger said.
"Advertisers have tried to do exactly what this study is talking about -- to brand younger and younger children, to instill in them an almost obsessional desire for a particular brand-name product," he said.
Just two of the 63 children studied said they'd never eaten at McDonald's, and about one-third ate there at least weekly. Most recognized the McDonald's logo but it was mentioned to those who didn't.
The study included three McDonald's menu items -- hamburgers, chicken nuggets and french fries -- and store-bought milk or juice and carrots. Children got two identical samples of each food on a tray, one in McDonald's wrappers or cups and the other in plain, unmarked packaging. The kids were asked whether they tasted the same or whether one was better. (Some children didn't taste all the foods.)
McDonald's-labeled samples were the clear favorites. French fries were the biggest winner; almost 77 percent said the labeled fries tasted best while only 13 percent preferred the others.
Fifty-four percent preferred McDonald's-wrapped carrots versus 23 percent who liked the plain-wrapped sample.
The only results not statistically clear-cut involved the hamburgers, with 29 kids choosing McDonald's-wrapped burgers and 22 choosing the unmarked ones.
Fewer than one-fourth of the children said both samples of all foods tasted the same.
Pradeep Chintagunta, a University of Chicago marketing professor, said a fairer comparison might have gauged kids' preferences for the McDonald's label versus another familiar brand, such as Mickey Mouse.
"I don't think you can necessarily hold this against" McDonald's, he said, since the goal of marketing is to build familiarity and sell products.
He noted that parents play a strong role in controlling food choices for children so young.
But Robinson argued that because young children are unaware of the persuasive intent of marketing, "it is an unfair playing field."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. CNN.comThis study raises two main questions--to what extent does our exposure to marketing subconsciously influence our sensory perceptions, and what are the marketers' obligations with regards to mitigating the influence of this effect? The study doesn't irrefutable prove that marketers influence how we perceive products, but it does present fairly compelling evidence that they can, at least to a certain extent. It's really kind of a troubling idea--are your beliefs about the products you buy really your own, or did their marketers just win out? If you believe that product X is superior to product Y, is that really the case? I don't necessarily believe that an inferior product will gain popularity solely by virtue of its marketing, but it doesn't seem too terribly implausible that of two items identical in value to the consumer, the good that's been portrayed as superior more frequently will assume that role in consumers' minds. Though I generally hate any sort of restriction on speech, even for advertisers, it does seem like some mild intervention is in order here. If the study's indicative of a broader trend, the ads do artificially predispose children to engage in unhealthy behavior. Children aren't capable, generally speaking, of making responsible choices. Thus, advertisements that predispose them to make unhealthy decisions for the sake of selling more cheeseburgers almost seem to be made in bad faith. Products, in an ideal world, would be marketed only to individuals capable of responsibly consuming them. That's not the case here. This may need to be fixed. On the bright side, it stands to reason that the reverse may be true--if fruit and vegetable producers had some kickass marketing, children just might start to like them.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
You should test it and then get back to us. 
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1686
|
Okay, better way of putting it: this is exactly why not everyone buys the bargain cereal. In my case, I know I could get the same exact thing for cheaper, but I don't. I've always just chalked it up to habit, but now I'm starting to wonder if the flakes with Cornelius on the box wouldn't "taste better" to me.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|

Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1396
|
Ditto.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
quote: This is exactly why nobody buys the bargain brand cereal.
I do...
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1686
|
Ah, gotcha. I think that's been going for some time now, but it is interesting to see the effectiveness of it spelled out so dramatically. This is exactly why nobody buys the bargain brand cereal. quote: Originally posted by testing123: Damn you edited it all away.
Sorry, I probably should have addressed Khary as an add-on instead of rewriting my post from the ground up.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|

Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1396
|
Sorry if I've been unclear. My general notion is that I don't think the net effect of fast food advertising is to promote a specific product, but to gradually make such products a fixture in everyday life. The study suggests that branding, in this case McDonald's, in conjunction with marketing to establish consumer perception of that brand, leads children to favor branded food even when it's completely identical to the other products offered. So, children don't favor specific McDonald's products, but the McDonalds brand itself. It's all about building brand loyalty in children.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|

Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1396
|
I don't normally double post, but this is a slight tangent. There's evidence to suggest that parental dietary preferences can begin to influence a child's food preferences prior to any significant development: quote: A study from Philadelphia's Monell Chemical Senses Center (MCSC) suggests that children can adopt their mothers' food preferences through the flavors in her breast milk and amniotic fluid. Study author Julie Mennella, Ph.D., a MCSC behavioral scientist, assigned 46 pregnant women to one of three groups. Women in the first group drank carrot juice during the last trimester of pregnancy and water during lactation; the second group did the opposite; and the third group drank only water throughout.
Later, Mennella observed the infants eating cereal prepared with carrot juice one day and water another. She found that those infants who were exposed to carrot flavoring ate an average of three times more carrot-flavored cereal than did infants whose mothers drank only water.
Mennella suggests that mother's milk may act as a medium for early flavor experiences, giving infants a taste of their culture even before birth. "Infants learn what foods are safe by flavor cues in the amniotic fluid and mother's milk," she said. Psychology TodayInfants are relatively immune to the effects of marketing, I'd wager, but if their parents frequently eat fast food, they may also develop a predisposition towards it. So, marketing alone may not be to blame, and legislative efforts focusing solely on marketing to children would be inadequate. As you've both said, the parents also need to play a role, both during infancy and childhood. Further complicating matters, the children in the study were all low-income, which may suggest that the parents consumed fast food more than average (one third of the children ate there daily, remember) due to time constraints or just economic necessity, so parental influences may play an equal or greater role than marketing. This study is kind of starting to seem poorly constructed. Still, interesting topic.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
Damn you edited it all away.
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1686
|
I have to admit, I don't really understand what you're getting at, Khary. It's not like this marketing aimed at children is selling an entire unhealthy lifestyle choice; each advertisement is for an individual product, and like you said, I bet it works equally well with both the healthy and the unhealthy.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|

Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1396
|
It's not the government's role to play babysitter as such, no. My primary objection doesn't rest on children's consumption of fast food, but rather on the potentially life-long predisposition towards unhealthy behavior that marketing may help to establish. The study doesn't mention if adults carry the same preconceptions that marketing established during childhood, and I really wish it had because what I'm about to argue is essentially hypothetical. If adults still prefer items marketed by McDonald's based on brand name alone, then it seems that childhood marketing set up an unhealthy precedent when they were too young to defend themselves against advertising's claims. Thus, it's nearly analogous to advertising cigarettes to children, as Meg mentioned earlier.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
quote: It's sad that children in the hands of lazy or ignorant parents will suffer as a result of this, but such is life. It's not the government's job to play babysitter,
True. All the same something needs to be done. I would normally advocate better education on the subject but even if that did happen people don't listen or care. Fast food is just so easy.
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1686
|
quote: Originally posted by testing123: That sounds good but how can you expect parents to make the best decision for their children when they can't make it for themselves? Most of the time convienence and cost makes the deciding factor. To be honest most people don't know anything about proper nutrition.
It's up to the parents to make the effort. In my view, if you're going to turn a blind eye to the fact the McDonald's is horrible for you (which is common knowledge even amongst the most ignorant of us), you deserve what you get. It's sad that children in the hands of lazy or ignorant parents will suffer as a result of this, but such is life. It's not the government's job to play babysitter, and though feeding your kids Mickey D's is bad for them, it hardly qualifies as child abuse.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
quote: My point is that even if parents can't stop their children from going to McDonald's at a certain age, they can still put healthy food on the table to balance it out and turn off their kids' TVs and make them go outside. In my view, legislating problems like this away should always be the absolute last resort.
That sounds good but how can you expect parents to make the best decision for their children when they can't make it for themselves? Most of the time convienence and cost makes the deciding factor. To be honest most people don't know anything about proper nutrition.
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: March 08, 2004
Posts: 1686
|
quote: Originally posted by testing123: I'd agree with you but only until the child reached anywhere between 3rd and 5th grades. Then they stop listening to their parents and more on the media and friends.
You have a good point; there is going to be a pretty big period in between the child's parent-worshiping days and the development of sound judgment, and that's when the advertisements and peer pressure will hit hardest. But I've seen a lot of parents very effectively instill good nutritional values in their kids that last through these turbulent times. Some almost make good nutrition a religion. Of course others, like my mom, tried this and failed miserably. But despite the loads of unhealthy crap I've shoveled down my throat over the years, I'm fine in just about every nutritionally variable facet of health that can be measured, and I attribute that to eating plenty of good food along with the bad, and my inability to sit still for more than 10 minutes. In all fairness, the genes I got from my skinny, diabetes-and-heart-disease free folks probably didn't hurt. My point is that even if parents can't stop their children from going to McDonald's at a certain age, they can still put healthy food on the table to balance it out and turn off their kids' TVs and make them go outside. In my view, legislating problems like this away should always be the absolute last resort.
And then, as the books were told, Fina replied: "A can of worms, my dear friend? What has this to do with reason?"
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
quote: It's not entirely conditioned--if I'm not mistaken
You can condition yourself to like/dislike anything. It's all a matter of convincing yourself. quote: there is an evolutionary/biological basis for favoring salty, fatty, sweet, etc. foods.
If you are lacking in something your body will crave something. quote: They may not be healthy in excess, but it's not unnatural to enjoy the taste of a bacon cheeseburger, for instance.
I for one would disagree
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: April 15, 2003
Posts: 1396
|
It's not entirely conditioned--if I'm not mistaken (tried to find research to support this, couldn't, not spending more than five minutes looking for some) there is an evolutionary/biological basis for favoring salty, fatty, sweet, etc. foods. They may not be healthy in excess, but it's not unnatural to enjoy the taste of a bacon cheeseburger, for instance.
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. Frederick Douglass
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
quote: Umm, i grew up vegetarian. and i was raised pretty healthy. So...
I forgot to mention convenience. Many people eat what is easiest and cheapest for them.
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|

Registered: December 20, 2004
Posts: 960
|
quote: If you grew up on strictly vegitarian, vegan, or even on a healthy diet that does not involve fast food you would not thinkg it tasted good. It might not taste horrible but you would most likely choose the food you are used to over it.
Umm, i grew up vegetarian. and i was raised pretty healthy. So...
*Dances* dude... listen to your own drummer... and... Dance. (or play along)
|

Registered: August 13, 2007
Posts: 216
|
quote: But it's true, McDonalds tastes good. it's just horrible for you.
It only tastes good because we are trained to think it tastes good. If you grew up on strictly vegitarian, vegan, or even on a healthy diet that does not involve fast food you would not thinkg it tasted good. It might not taste horrible but you would most likely choose the food you are used to over it.
"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|