Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods
Objective: Assess the effect of counter-advertisements on parents' appraisals of unhealthy foods featuring front-of-package promotions (FOPPs). Design: A 2 × 2 × 5 between-subjects Web-based experiment. Parents were randomly shown an advertisement (counter-advertisement challenging FOPP/control...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Elsevier Inc
2014
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/32456 |
| _version_ | 1848753668605607936 |
|---|---|
| author | Dixon, H. Scully, M. Kelly, B. Donovan, Robert Chapman, K. Wakefield, M. |
| author_facet | Dixon, H. Scully, M. Kelly, B. Donovan, Robert Chapman, K. Wakefield, M. |
| author_sort | Dixon, H. |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Objective: Assess the effect of counter-advertisements on parents' appraisals of unhealthy foods featuring front-of-package promotions (FOPPs). Design: A 2 × 2 × 5 between-subjects Web-based experiment. Parents were randomly shown an advertisement (counter-advertisement challenging FOPP/control advertisement) and then a pair of food products from the same category: an unhealthy product featuring an FOPP (nutrient content claim/sports celebrity endorsement) and a healthier control product with no FOPP. Setting: Australia. Participants: A total of 1,269 Australian-based parents of children aged 5–12 years recruited from an online panel. Main Outcome Measures: Parents nominated which product they would prefer to buy and which they thought was healthier, then rated the unhealthy product and FOPP on various characteristics. Analysis: Differences between advertisement conditions were assessed using logistic regression (product choice tasks) and analysis of variance tests (ratings of unhealthy product and FOPP). Results: Compared with parents who saw a control advertisement, parents who saw a counter-advertisement perceived unhealthy products featuring FOPPs as less healthy, expressed weaker intentions for buying such products, and were more likely to read the nutrition facts panel before nominating choices (all P < .001). Conclusions and Implications: Counter-advertising may help reduce the misleading influence of unhealthy food marketing and improve the accuracy of parents' evaluations of how nutritious promoted food products are. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:28:11Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-32456 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:28:11Z |
| publishDate | 2014 |
| publisher | Elsevier Inc |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-324562017-09-13T15:24:20Z Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods Dixon, H. Scully, M. Kelly, B. Donovan, Robert Chapman, K. Wakefield, M. Objective: Assess the effect of counter-advertisements on parents' appraisals of unhealthy foods featuring front-of-package promotions (FOPPs). Design: A 2 × 2 × 5 between-subjects Web-based experiment. Parents were randomly shown an advertisement (counter-advertisement challenging FOPP/control advertisement) and then a pair of food products from the same category: an unhealthy product featuring an FOPP (nutrient content claim/sports celebrity endorsement) and a healthier control product with no FOPP. Setting: Australia. Participants: A total of 1,269 Australian-based parents of children aged 5–12 years recruited from an online panel. Main Outcome Measures: Parents nominated which product they would prefer to buy and which they thought was healthier, then rated the unhealthy product and FOPP on various characteristics. Analysis: Differences between advertisement conditions were assessed using logistic regression (product choice tasks) and analysis of variance tests (ratings of unhealthy product and FOPP). Results: Compared with parents who saw a control advertisement, parents who saw a counter-advertisement perceived unhealthy products featuring FOPPs as less healthy, expressed weaker intentions for buying such products, and were more likely to read the nutrition facts panel before nominating choices (all P < .001). Conclusions and Implications: Counter-advertising may help reduce the misleading influence of unhealthy food marketing and improve the accuracy of parents' evaluations of how nutritious promoted food products are. 2014 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/32456 10.1016/j.jneb.2014.05.008 Elsevier Inc restricted |
| spellingShingle | Dixon, H. Scully, M. Kelly, B. Donovan, Robert Chapman, K. Wakefield, M. Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods |
| title | Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods |
| title_full | Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods |
| title_fullStr | Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods |
| title_full_unstemmed | Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods |
| title_short | Counter-Advertising May Reduce Parent's Susceptibility to Front-of-Package Promotions on Unhealthy Foods |
| title_sort | counter-advertising may reduce parent's susceptibility to front-of-package promotions on unhealthy foods |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/32456 |