Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)

364

Published on

Analysis of marketing cues in a Belgian retailer concerning children targeted packaged foods. Relation to brand type and product's healthiness is investigated. …

Analysis of marketing cues in a Belgian retailer concerning children targeted packaged foods. Relation to brand type and product's healthiness is investigated.

CTC 2014 Conference (Children and Teen Consumption): Edinburgh

Published in: Marketing, Business, Design
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
364
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 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/
  • 2. 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
  • 3. BACKGROUND Limitations?  Marketing exposure broader than TV  Other marketing tools than endorsers Some previous studies on actual food packaging Packaging = “last moment of truth”  Aid recall of campaign cues ~ endorsers  Consumption cues  Branding/product cues
  • 4. Previous findings Chapman 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”
  • 5. Previous findings Julian & Holdsworth (2008) – UK 83% of all promotions: cartoon characters 58% of all promotions for “less healthy foods” (FSA criteria; binary coding) Cereals most likely to use multiple techniques
  • 6. Previous findings Van Assema et al. (2011) – The Netherlands Endorsers most popular 90% of “marketed” foods for the unhealthy category (Voedingscentrum)
  • 7. 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
  • 8. Results 472 child targeted products (about 25% of all products) 90% unhealthy products (binary FSA system) Average # marcom cues: National brands: 3.1 - vs – Private labels: 2.8 83% products from national brands
  • 9. Results Most heavily child-targeting: FSA CRITERION MEAN(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
  • 10. 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
  • 11. 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 (-)
  • 12. 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

×