Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)

661 views

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.

CTC 2014 Conference (Children and Teen Consumption): Edinburgh

Published in: Marketing, Business, Design
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Persuasive Shelves (@ CTC 2014 conference)

  1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 6. Previous findings Van Assema et al. (2011) – The Netherlands Endorsers most popular 90% of “marketed” foods for the unhealthy category (Voedingscentrum)
  7. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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

×