Upload
july
View
45
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Persuasive shelves : The healthiness of on-package marketing communications. @ TimSmitsTim – KU Leuven. Thanks to: Tine Mathues & Silke De Win CTC 2014 – Edinburgh – April 2014 http://www.slideshare.net/timsmitstim/. Background. Focus : Child-targeted packaged foods - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Persuasive shelves:The healthiness of on-package marketing communications
@TimSmitsTim – KU Leuven
Thanks to:Tine Mathues & Silke De WinCTC 2014 – Edinburgh– April 2014
http://www.slideshare.net/timsmitstim/
BACKGROUND
Focus: Child-targeted packaged foods
Marketing often called culprit for childhood obesity epidemic
Dominant areas of effects research: Effects of TV or TV-ads exposure
Effects of endorser advertising
BACKGROUND
Limitations? Marketing exposure broader than TV Other marketing tools than endorsers
Some previous studies on actual food packagingPackaging = “last moment of truth” Aid recall of campaign cues ~ endorsers Consumption cues Branding/product cues
Previous findingsChapman et al. (2006) – Australia“food promotions were defined as marketing and sales promotions used on food labels
or as food packaging designed to entice consumers to buy a product at the point-of-sale”
Previous findingsJulian & Holdsworth (2008) – UK83% of all promotions: cartoon characters58% of all promotions for “less healthy foods” (FSA criteria; binary coding)Cereals most likely to use multiple techniques
Previous findingsVan Assema et al. (2011) – The NetherlandsEndorsers most popular90% of “marketed” foods for the unhealthy category (Voedingscentrum)
This study
Belgian supermarket offerings? In 2013? Relation between MarCom cues & Healthiness?National brands vs Private labels?
Methodology 16 food categories in a Belgian retailer Child-focused (-12 years) Coding:
Healthiness (FSA nutrient profiling model; binary – cont) Endorsers, premiums, games, promotions, claims
(health, product), consumption illustration, premium packaging, premium product design, colors, collection items
Results472 child targeted products (about 25% of all products)
90% unhealthy products (binary FSA system)
Average # marcom cues: National brands: 3.1 - vs – Private labels: 2.883% products from national brands
Results
Most heavily child-targeting:
FSA CRITERIONMEAN(FSA)
soft candy (75%) 100% unhealthy 13.71
candy & chips (67%) 96% unhealthy 15.01
cookies (34%) 100% unhealthy 19.05
cereals (30%), 100% unhealthy 10.74
Results
% use of cues Savory Dairy Chocolate Cereals Cocoa Soft candy
…
Endorser 100 64,2 50 83,9 100 57,6
Premium 0 1,9 6,3 25,8 0 3,4
Call-to-action 0 11,3 18,7 54,8 20 1,7
Games 0 0 6,3 29 60 1,7
Sweepstakes 0 3,8 34,4 12,9 0 0
Promotion 0 5,7 9,4 0 0 1,7
Claim 50 62,3 25 77,4 100 37,3
Illustration 66,7 56,6 96,2 100 80 100
Package design 0 9,4 6,2 0 0 1,7
Product design 66,7 5,7 46,9 74,2 0 79,7
Results
In regression analyses: What predicts a product’s (un)healthiness? (Model incl. product category: R² = .78; model excl. product category: R² = .60)
(Product category) More cues National brands Nutrition claims (-) Illustration or promotion (-) Characteristic color use (-) Product design (-) Package design (-)
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION
Up-to-date overview of BE supermarket offerings
Regulation & Pledges are only a manifest radar and much goes “undetected” to policy
Research agenda for children-and-persuasion