European Journal of MarketingExploring children's understanding of television advertising beyond the advertiser'sperspectiveMargaret-Anne Lawlor Andrea Prothero

Article information:To cite this document:Margaret-Anne Lawlor Andrea Prothero, (2008),"Exploring children's understanding of television advertising beyond the advertiser's perspective", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Iss 11/12 pp. 1203 - 1223Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560810903646

Downloaded on: 15 January 2015, At: 23:31 (PT)References: this document contains references to 40 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 7103 times since 2008*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Kathleen Mortimer, (2008),"Identifying the components of effective service advertisements", Journal ofServices Marketing, Vol. 22 Iss 2 pp. 104-113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08876040810862859Winston Fletcher, (2004),"The challenge of advertising to children", Young Consumers, Vol. 5 Iss 2 pp.11-15 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17473610410814102Pankaj Priya, Rajat Kanti Baisya, Seema Sharma, (2010),"Television advertisements and children'sbuying behaviour", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 28 Iss 2 pp. 151-169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02634501011029664

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 543700 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Exploring childrensunderstanding of televisionadvertising beyond theadvertisers perspective

Margaret-Anne LawlorDublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland, and

Andrea ProtheroUniversity College Dublin, Co. Dublin, Ireland

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this article is to explore childrens understanding of television advertisingintent.

Design/methodology/approach A different perspective on advertising intent is offered in thispaper, as evidenced in an interpretive study of Irish children, aged between seven and nine years. Aqualitative approach was employed, involving a series of focus group discussions and in-depthinterviews with 52 children.

Findings The findings indicate that the participating children view advertising as serving interestsincluding, but not limited to, the advertiser. The existence of other interested parties is suggested bythe children, namely the agendas of viewers and television channels. The authors assert that thesechildren view advertising as being larger and more complex than the advertisers perspective, whichhas been the traditional focus in the extant research.

Originality/value Adopting an advertising literacy perspective, the authors seek to explorechildrens reading and understanding of advertising. Advertising literacy is an approach tounderstanding advertising that has not received substantial attention in the child-advertisingliterature. The literature to date has tended to focus on the following question do childrenunderstand the persuasive intent of advertising? This question is suggestive of a yes/no answer. Incontrast, the authors view the concept of understanding as being more complex and multi-faceted, andaccordingly, seek to develop this concept by way of a classification that suggests four different levelsof understanding that children may exhibit towards advertising

Keywords Children (age groups), Television commercials, Advertising effectiveness, Ireland

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionThe extent to which children aged under 12 years understand the purpose of televisionadvertising has generated much debate in academic circles and also at a wider societallevel (Banks, 1975; Burr and Burr, 1976; Ellis, 2000; Drumwright and Murphy, 2004;Eagle et al., 2004). Critics of television advertising would argue that childrens relativeyouth and cognitive immaturity militates against their ability to discern thecommercial remit of a television advertisement. On the other hand, an emerging schoolof thought argues that child viewers might be more sophisticated and shrewd in theirunderstanding of advertising, than previously assumed (Bartholomew and ODonohoe,2003). This paper presents research findings from an Irish study of seven- to

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1203

Received September 2006Revised March 2007Accepted May 2007

European Journal of MarketingVol. 42 No. 11/12, 2008

pp. 1203-1223q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0309-0566DOI 10.1108/03090560810903646

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

nine-year-old children. The aim of the research was to explore the childrensunderstanding of television advertising intent. The perspective taken by previousresearchers in this area has been to emphasise childrens understanding of theadvertisers commercial remit. This paper presents findings which highlight twoadditional perspectives on intent that of the viewer and the television channel. Assuch, the findings within this paper add to the body of knowledge by suggesting thatthe purpose of television advertising, according to these children, is larger and more allencompassing, than the commercial remit of the advertiser. The paper also offers acontemporary perspective in an area where the vast majority of previous researchstudies have been conducted in the 1970s and 1980s, and which have focused on NorthAmerican childrens relationship with advertising (Friestad and Wright, 2005).

Advertising intentYoung (1990) has suggested that childrens understanding of advertising is contingenton their realisation that there is a source deliberately creating television advertisements,and they must also be aware that this source seeks to persuade its audience to purchase.The merit of exploring childrens understanding of advertising intent lies in thecontention that if children cannot discern that advertising has a commercial merit, thenadvertising which targets such children may be unethical, on the basis that it exploitstheir credulity and innocence (Martin, 1997; Gunter and Furnham, 1998). This in turn hasimplications for the regulation of advertising to children.

Most of the studies addressing childrens understanding of advertising intent haveoverwhelmingly focused on intent in terms of advertisings commercial purpose,namely its informative and persuasive aspects (Ward et al., 1977; Donohue et al., 1980;Gaines and Esserman, 1981; Preston, 2000; Oates et al., 2002). Martin (1997) sounds awarning note in her observation that most of the extant studies group togetherpersuasion and selling, without empirically exploring the differences between the two.Furthermore, it is evident that fewer studies have moved beyond the popular conceptof advertising intent as being commercial in nature. An example of one such study isthat of Blosser and Roberts (1985) who identified five categories of intent:

(1) information;

(2) teaching;

(3) entertainment;

(4) selling; and

(5) persuasion.

Table I outlines the key studies examining childrens understanding of advertising intent.While the informative/commercial purpose of advertising constitutes a relevant

focus for research, it is in itself only one perspective on advertising intent. The authorsargue that a fuller and richer picture of childrens understanding of advertising can beaccessed, by placing to one side, the traditional perspective that advertising serves toinform, persuade and sell to children. An accompanying consideration is the extent towhich children perceive advertising as existing to serve other interests and purposes,and it is these other interests and purposes that are explored in this paper.

The authors contend that there is a lack of research attention being accorded to therecipients perspective, namely how a child decodes advertising and the possible

EJM42,11/12

1204

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

meanings, beyond selling, information and persuasion, that it may hold for therecipient. Therefore, in terms of framing the research question within a theoreticalcontext, the authors were mindful that in seeking to explore the advertising recipientsunderstanding of advertising, they were essentially seeking to address how childrenread advertising, namely the meanings that they appropriate from advertising. Theresearch focus within this study is therefore arguably best captured under the lens ofthe advertising literacy approach.

Advertising literacyAdvertising literacy is an approach to understanding advertising that has not receivedsubstantial attention in the child-advertising literature (Bartholomew and ODonohoe,2003). Essentially, advertising literacy refers to ones ability to read advertising, thelatter constituting a text whose meaning can be read and interpreted (Domzal andKernan, 1992). Similarly, Young (2000, p. 191) refers to literacy as what it means tounderstand advertising. The importance of developing such abilities is highlighted byODonohoe and Tynan (1998) who contend that literacy may empower consumers byalerting them to the persuasive power of advertising, and subsequently facilitatingthem in resisting advertising. A further perspective is offered by Ritson and Elliott(1995) who deem advertising-literate consumers to be those who can read, co-create andact upon the many possible meanings of a given advertisement.

A key issue in advertising literacy is that there is no consensus in the literature withregard to either a definition or the constituent components of literacy. This may be dueto the expansive nature of what it means to understand advertising. Indeed, it has beensuggested that where definitions have been offered, they have been over-simplified innature (Ritson and Elliott, 1995). Some writers have tended to define literacy quitenarrowly or vaguely. In this respect, Bartholomew and ODonohoe (2003) observe thatthe term literacy has often been used in the literature to describe a consumerssophistication in understanding advertisements. But what does it mean to have asophisticated understanding of advertising?

Authors Childrens age Measure used Perceived intent

Ward (1972) 5-12 years Verbal Persuasive/sellingRobertson and Rossiter (1974) First grade pupils Verbal Informational/assistiveWard et al. (1977) Kindergarten Verbal Persuasive/sellingDonohue et al. (1980) 2-6 years Non-verbal Persuasive/sellingButter et al. (1981) 4-5 years Verbal Persuasive/sellingGaines and Esserman (1981) 4 years Verbal Persuasive/sellingBlosser and Roberts (1985) 4-11 years Verbal Inform/teach/sell

entertain/persuadeMacklin (1985) 3-5 years Non-verbal Persuasive/sellingMacklin (1987) Pre-school Non-verbal Informational/assistiveChan (2000) 5-12 years Verbal SellingOates et al. (2002) 6-10 years Experimental/verbal

PersuasiveOates et al. (2003) 6-10 years Verbal Persuasive/assistive

Sources: Adapted from Lawlor and Prothero (2002); Martin (1997)

Table I.Studies of childrens

understanding ofadvertising intent

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1205

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

With regard to the facets of literacy, Young (1990) deemed the eight-year-olds in hisstudy to be advertising literate because they were aware of the commercial rationalefor using advertising, and the imagery employed by advertisers. On the other hand,Buckingham (1993) proposed that the seven to 12-year-olds in his study were largelyadvertising literate on the basis of their ability to discern the advertisers objectivesand target audiences, as well as their facility for critically evaluating the nature andcontent of given advertisements.

A more detailed description of literacy is offered in ODonohoe and Tynans (1998)study of 18 to 24-year-old adults. These authors identified the presence of advertisingliteracy in terms of their samples ability to read and deconstruct an advertisement; todecipher an advertisers strategy in terms of advertising goals, brand positioning andtarget markets, and finally to appreciate advertising techniques and production values.

In a study of 10 to 12-year-old children, Bartholomew and ODonohoe (2003) positedthat the childrens literacy was suggested in three roles they assumed ad masters, adcontrollers and ad critics. The children were felt to be ad masters in terms of theirunderstanding of the advertisers objectives and the ads meanings and styles. Adcontrollers were those children who liked to exhibit an element of control overadvertising, for example by contending that they were immune to advertisingsinfluence or that they avoided certain ads. Ad critics were those children who criticallyevaluated advertisements according to their ability to appeal to different audiences aswell as the technical aspects of ads.

It is observed that the above studies have largely focused on literacy in terms ofabilities and skills pertaining to advertising. In this respect, Ritson and Elliott (1995)sound a note of caution that advertising literacy does not solely equate with a set ofskills that the user employs to read advertising. They describe such a skill set as beingonly one of many aspects of literacy. Instead, the authors expand the meaning ofliteracy to include not only how an ad is read, but also what use is made of that reading.They propose a model of advertising literacy involving practices and events.Literacy practices constitute the skills and uses relating to the reading of the ads. Forexample, Ritson and Elliott draw attention to Buckinghams (1993) observation ofchildren who may actively seek out pre-Christmas advertising with a view to sourcingideas for Christmas gifts, which they then communicate to their parents. Literacyevents essentially refer to individuals who may find themselves drawing upon theirliteracy so as to participate in a social situation. An example would be the everydaysituation in which we may find ourselves discussing advertisements with others.Those who recognise a given ad can participate in the discourse whereas those who donot recognise the ad may be excluded from such social interaction. The combination ofliteracy practices and events therefore serve to facilitate the co-creation of advertisingmeanings (Ritson and Elliott, 1995).

What one can conclude from the literature is that there are different dimensions toadvertising literacy. At one level, literacy can be seen to prevail where a child canunderstand the commercial intent of advertising, the vested interests of an advertiser,and that it is different to a programme (e.g. Young, 2000). At another level, literacy canbe said to occur where children appreciate the use of advertising techniques, strategiesand production values (e.g. ODonohoe, 1994). A further level of literacy is where onesunderstanding of advertising may be used in a wider context, for example, as part ofones social interaction. In Ritson and Elliotts (1999) study of adolescents, young

EJM42,11/12

1206

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

people were found to watch ads and to use them as a ticket of entry into ad-relateddiscussions. Furthermore, they used advertising situations, catchphrases andcharacters as metaphors and rituals in their interaction with each other.

Notwithstanding the various levels of advertising literacy that are seen to exist, itsrelevance to this research lies in the fact that it requires the researcher to put to one sidethe stimulus-organism-response (SOR) approach which arguably has informed manyof the extant studies on children and advertising. The latter have tended to ask whatdoes advertising do to children? or more specifically do children understand theadvertisers perspective? (see Table I). This research takes a different approach byasking how do children read advertising?

Research methodologyThe aim of this interpretive study was to explore childrens understanding of televisionadvertising intent. The authors had observed that the academic research on the effectsof advertising on children has been mostly driven by positivistic, quantitativeperspectives. An interpretive approach was deemed appropriate in this study in viewof the authors desire to make sense of, and understand the childrens experiences ofadvertising. In essence, the authors were interested in understanding a group ofchildrens interaction with advertising from their point-of-view, and not necessarily theadvertisers perspective, which has overwhelmingly been the subject of scrutiny in thekey studies to date. This approach mirrors that favoured by Banister and Booth (2005)who have called for a more child-centric approach to marketing and consumerresearch that encourages researchers to listen to children, their thoughts andexperiences, rather than regarding the children as interviewees.

A total of 52 boys and girls participated in a series of focus group discussions andindividual interviews. The children were aged between seven and nine years-of-ageand were drawn from two Irish primary schools. Specifically, seven focus groups wereconducted in the first school while 26 individual interviews were conducted in thesecond school. The children in both schools were at the same level second class which is approximately the middle class in primary school. It was observed, during thestudy, that there were no discernable differences between the different age groups interms of their articulation of their understanding of advertising.

The research was conducted in the two schools during school hours. Considerationhad been given to the use of in-home observation with a view to observing childrenstelevision viewing patterns. However, in consenting to grant access to the children,many parents expressed a preference that the research be conducted in the neutral andnon-personal setting of the school. Two qualitative methods were employed with aview to exploring childrens interaction with advertising, specifically the social milieuof a focus group situation and the more personal context of an individual interview.Again, there were no discernible differences between the opinions expressed by thechildren in the focus groups and interviews.

In keeping with the interpretive nature of this study, and so as not to direct thechildrens attention to any specific area, a number of broad areas were offered fordiscussion. Specifically, the children were invited to comment on the possible purposesof advertising in general, and they were then asked to volunteer specificadvertisements that they liked and disliked. The children were shown a number ofpre-recorded television advertisements at the end of the individual interviews and

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1207

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

asked to give their opinion on each. The objective of this exercise was to encourage thechildren to articulate what they liked and did not like regarding specificadvertisements. These advertisements were shown to the children at the end of thediscussions so as not to lead or direct the children in their earlier choices of, anddiscussions pertaining to, advertising.

The discussions were tape-recorded except in the case of three children whodeclined to be recorded. The interviews were transcribed and each transcript was thencoded to guide the emergent themes. This analysis yielded a large number of categoriesand themes and the presentation of findings below draws upon quotes and excerptsfrom the discussions with a view to illustrating the childrens perspectives onadvertising. A number of ethical standards were applied to this research, including theconduct of the research in a safe setting (i.e. the school setting) and also the securing ofparental consent (Denzin and Lincoln, 1998; European Society for Opinion andMarketing Research, 1999).

The emergence of three perspectives advertising that facilitates theadvertiser, the viewer, and the television channelA major research objective guiding this study was to explore the childrensunderstanding of advertisings raison detre. As such, the following broad questionwas posed to the children why are there ads on television? Of the 52 children, twochildren were unsure about the rationale for advertising. It is clear from the researchfindings that the remaining 50 participants were extremely verbal in terms ofidentifying and discussing their perceptions as to the raison detre of televisionadvertising. The children gave a variety of explanations regarding the possible reasonsfor advertising and three major perspectives on advertising emerged, namely those ofthe viewer, the advertiser and the television channel, as outlined as follows:

(1) The advertisers perspective:. persuasion purchase;. persuasion increase store visits and customer numbers; and. purchase requests to parents.

(2) The viewers perspective:. informational commercial and educational;. advisory non-commercial/safety;. entertainment; and. viewer convenience.

(3) The television channels perspective:. advertising as a source of programme funding; and. facilitating programme schedules/television channels.

While this research highlighted three user perspectives on advertising intent, thepurpose of this paper is to focus on two of these perspectives that of viewers andtelevision channels.

EJM42,11/12

1208

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Advertising intent the viewers perspectiveWhen probed about advertisings raison detre, the children introduced a number ofpossible advertising objectives, which the authors subsequently categorised as theviewers perspective. In other words, the childrens discussion of advertising intent, interms of information, personal safety, entertainment and convenience, carried animplicit assumption of such advertising existing to help the viewer in some way. It wasobserved that they placed much emphasis on the informational nature of anadvertisement. The information that advertising was seen to offer, fell into twocategories commercial information and educational information both aboutproducts and services. With regard to commercial information, the children referred tothe requirement for advertisers to offer information about products and productavailability. One child defined an advert as being something that would tell you aboutthings that might be in the shops (Susan, 8). Another child referred to the informativenature of advertising with regard to his favourite advertisement: the Lego ad, becausethey show you what the Lego will look like when theyre made (Frank, 8). A furtherchild addressed the informative nature of advertising thus when asked to consider theprospect of advertising-free television: that wouldnt be so good because then Iwouldnt get that much info [about] new toys, new sweets, new games and all thatstuff (Mark, 8).

The category of educational information emerged from the childrens perceptionthat advertising often serves to educate or teach the viewer in some manner. Forexample, one child spoke of being able to learn from an ad: say its a science fictionone, theyll show something about science and youll learn something from it (Judy, 8).Another example was given by Barry (aged 7) in his discussion of an advertisement formilk featuring a singing skeleton: theyre just telling you to drink milk and your bonesget strong and all that stuff. In this manner, Barry was aware that the advertiser waspromoting a health benefit concerning the consumption of milk. Another example of aneducational advertisement that could benefit the viewer was given by Karl (aged 8);information like if you need a new house and thered be this ad for builders. It wouldtherefore appear that Karl views a property advertisement as offering a solution to aprospective home purchasers need-state. Likewise, another child referred to anadvertisement for a horse show. His reasoning was that advertising had a role to playin informing viewers of such events:

[. . .] say ads were cancelled, you wouldnt know what else was going on in the country. Sayyou want to go to the Horse Show, you wouldnt know where it is until the actualprogrammes on, and then you say oh it was cancelled in Limerick I should have known(Keith, 8).

This informational aspect to advertising whereby advertisements serve to assist theviewer, reflects previous studies by Blosser and Roberts (1985) and Oates et al. (2002).However, a new angle to the informative function of advertising was evident in arelated perspective amongst the children, namely that advertising exerts an advisory,non-commercial remit. For example, a number of children asserted that someadvertisements give information to viewers regarding health and safety. In all cases, itshould be noted that the children referred more so to personal wellbeing, the inferencebeing that these advertisements did not appear to have an overtly sales-orientedmessage. As such, the children appeared to discern between the persuasive intent ofsome advertisements, and the personal health and safety content of other messages.

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1209

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

One of the pre-recorded advertisements shown to the children at the end ofindividual interviews was for McDonalds, in which the clown, Ronald McDonald, isseen warning children against dangerous behaviour in the home, such as playing withmatches and interfering with medicines. When the children were shown thisadvertisement, they were probed as to its rationale: they want us to leave matchesalone and bottles that we dont know whats in them. . .to keep us safe (Sarah, 7).

Indeed, this understanding of the McDonalds safety message was widespread: it istelling children to keep away from dangerous things in the house (Richard, 8). Otherchildren spoke of ads in terms of warning against dangerous behaviour:

Like this ad I saw and it was about these two kidnappers. I remember last year there were twokidnappers and they kidnapped a child and they showed on an ad that you should never gowith other people (spoken very earnestly) (Judy, 8).

In another case, a child drew attention to an anti-smoking advertisement. Deirdre (aged8) appeared to be both drawn to, and repelled by the somewhat graphic nature of theadvertisement that depicted the lungs of a heavy smoker:

I like the no smoking ads because, em, you know at the end where they squeeze out the ickybrown stuff; that will make people think ugh, I might not want a cigarette.

Deirdre is therefore referring to the purpose of this advertisement as being to informand persuade smokers about the health consequences of smoking. In doing so, shesuggests that this ad also seeks to instil in smokers a propensity to re-evaluate theirsmoking habits.

In the case of such advertisements, it was evident that some of the children perceivedthat the purpose was to promote their own personal safety and to indicate the dangersand risks involved in actions such as interfering with household medicines and matches,and talking with strangers on the street. It must be emphasised that a very small numberof children not only discerned an advisory or safety element to advertising, but they alsoassessed the relevance of the message for themselves. This arose in the discussions of theMcDonalds advertisement concerning childrens safety in the home. The implicationwas that previous McDonalds advertising had tended to focus on the food experience atMcDonalds and that the safety warnings constituted a new departure for the fast foodcompany. Sheila (aged 8) questioned the ad thus:

Sheila: I dont see why theyre talking about safety, because theyre normally talking aboutMcDonalds in the ad.

Interviewer: So why are they putting that in the ad, do you think?

Sheila: To help the children.

It would appear that Sheila is not only questioning the consistency of the companysadvertising messages, but she is also distancing herself from the message by referringimpersonally to a category of children requiring assistance.

In a second case, Mark (aged 8) was seen to distance himself from the content of anadvertisement but not necessarily from the product being advertised. Again, he wasaddressing the McDonalds advertisement: that ad. . .tells you not to touch things, butI already know that. . .Well, Im old for the ad but Im not too old for the food!

EJM42,11/12

1210

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

This finding whereby many of the children perceived advertising to exert anadvisory, non-commercial remit, offers a new dimension to the well-establishedinformative function of advertising. The literature to date has tended to viewadvertisings informative role in terms of offering information about product features,availability and price (Blosser and Roberts, 1985; Oates et al., 2002). Such aninformative function is therefore seen to be closely interwoven with thepersuasive/commercial intent of advertising, which has been so widely noted inprevious studies (Gaines and Esserman, 1981; Macklin, 1987; Chan, 2000). However, thechildren in this study broadened this concept of information to encompass itsnon-commercial dimensions. This finding was particularly evident in the childrensunsolicited discussions on public service announcements relating to road safety andanti-smoking messages. It was also reinforced at the end of the interviews where thechildren were shown a number of advertisements, one of which included a McDonaldsadvertisement for safety in the home. This concept of advertising assisting the viewerby offering non-commercial information in terms of personal health and safetytherefore offers a new dimension to the commercially informative function which hasbeen noted previously by authors such as Oates et al. (2002).

Furthermore, childrens advertising literacy is deemed to prevail where children areable to discern the advertisers intent and objectives (Young, 1990; Buckingham, 1993).The findings above extend this view of literacy because they present the children asnot only discerning intent, but also appropriating advertising messages about personalhealth and safety for ones own information or benefit.

Another aspect to advertising intent which was offered by the children, was that ofentertainment. The entertainment element to advertising was introduced by nearly allof the children in terms of ads that made them laugh. All of the children spoke ofhaving favourite advertisements that they enjoyed while some children talked aboutdiscussing favourite ads with their friends:

Eric: Today I was talking to my friend when we were going to school.

Interviewer: What were you talking about?

Eric: You know the Nike ad about the footballers the one where theyre hitting each otherwith the ball on the head.

Interviewer: Why do you like that one, Eric?

Eric: I like watching it because I think what they do is really skilful (aged 8).

It transpired that the children were widely attracted to humour appeals and specialeffects such as talking animals. The brand of slapstick humour was especiallyentertaining as is illustrated in the following discussion of a Mr Kipling advertisementfor cakes:

Gary: I like you know the one for Mr Kipling when he is playing golf and he keeps onhitting all the balls, and he hits somebody on the trolley and he falls off! (All boys in grouplaugh uproariously.)

Interviewer: Why do you like that ad?

Gary: Because its sort of a funny ad hes hitting the ball and he misses all the time! (Aged 8.)

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1211

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

The children were also familiar with catchphrases of brands that targeted them, orindeed adults. In many cases, the catchphrases appeared to lend themselves to memoryon the basis of their rhyming and the entertaining way in which they were articulatedin a given ad. Examples of this included:

Carlsberg dont do dreams but, if they did, theyd probably be the best dreams in the world(Louise, 8).

The Budweiser one. . .he goes like whassup sitting having a Bud (John, 8, imitating thedeep, raspy voice of the actor in the ad).

Th-e-y-r-e greaaat! (Karl, 8, imitating the exaggerated tone of Tony the Tiger, KelloggsFrosties).

Lower prices at Tesco, lower prices at Tesco! (Sheila, 8).

Other authors have recognised that children are attracted to entertaining advertisementsincorporating humour, cartoon characters, famous people, child models, animals andswift action (Ross et al., 1984; Blosser and Roberts, 1985; Rolandelli, 1989; Collins, 1990;Maher et al., 2006). However, the entertainment finding in this study offers a new angle inthat the children were not only attracted to certain advertisements but that they wereusing this advertising in a non-commercial manner. As such, the children wereappropriating advertising as a means of self-expression or, for social networkingpurposes, i.e. for their own entertainment or else to regale other people. In this study, itwas interesting to observe the large number of children who were able to re-enactadvertisements and/or to recite advertising catchphrases and slogans, including thosefor products not aimed at children. In Bartholomew and ODonohoes (2003, p. 445) studyof 10 to 12-year-olds, they used the phrase performance masters to describe childrensfacility for imitating advertisements. So too, it would appear that the children in thisstudy were masters in terms of advertising imitation.

At a time in Western Europe, where regulators such as the UKs Ofcom are seekingto protect children from the perceived commercial tentacles of television advertising,this finding is salutary because it draws attention to a social function that advertisingcan perform. It can facilitate a childs self-expression (Preston, 2005) or, as in the case ofRitson and Elliotts (1999) adolescent sample, and which was also witnessed in thisstudy, advertising can serve as an individuals ticket of entry to a conversation. Thisfinding also poses ethical questions about ads, such as for alcohol products, whosehumour, catchy tunes and catchphrases are ingrained in the minds of children, andwhich form part of their social interaction with peers.

A further, universal theme arising in the discussions was that of viewerconvenience, whereby the commercial was perceived as offering the viewer anopportunity to undertake other activities. Most of the children agreed that theadvertising break was a good opportunity to visit the bathroom or consume a snack:

If there was no such thing as ads and youre on your favourite programme, and, say, yourethirsty or you have to go to the toilet, then youd go out and youd miss the really good part ofthe show (Samantha, 8).

Indeed, children felt that the ads were there for their own convenience: if you have anydinner, coming up next, there would be the ads (Laura, 7). For such children, theabsence of advertisements was seen as a very off-putting scenario, as it could militate

EJM42,11/12

1212

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

against watching ones favourite programme: if theres this real good programme andyou have to go and have your lunch, there would be no ads so youd miss yourfavourite programme (Barbara, 9).

Similarly, it emerged that, for some children, mealtimes could be negotiated with aparent around the timing of a favourite programme:

If there were no ads, you wouldnt be able to go for your dinner, because youd have to say toyour mam I dont want to go because I want to watch this programme. When the ads comeon, that gives you time to go and have your dinner (Annette, 8).

You say to your mum, dont put my dinner on the plate Ill be in, in five minutes (James, 8).

This notion that advertising may be perceived to serve the viewers convenience hasbeen noted previously in a very small number of studies, e.g. Oates et al. (2003).However, the latters research sought to examine childrens understanding ofadvertisings persuasive intent. Where children in their study referred to advertising asa means to do other things such as obtaining a snack, Oates et al. interpreted suchresponses as indicating that the children viewed advertisements solely in terms of abreak in a programme. Returning to the present study, the authors suggest thatchildren, just like adults, can appropriate the commercial break for their ownconvenience and to allow them plan other activities around a desired programme.Obviously, advertisers do not view a commercial break in programming in thismanner. Nevertheless, the authors argue that this use of the commercial break, closelymirrors the convenience use, as found by ODonohoe (1994) in her study of 18 to24-year-olds advertising uses and gratifications.

In all, when one considers the various functions that advertising is seen to performfor viewers, as identified by the children in this study informative, advisory,entertainment and viewer convenience it strengthens the authors argument thatchildren view advertising as being larger and more complex than the advertiserspersuasive intent, which has been the traditional focus of much of the research to date.It also points towards these children as actively engaging with, and using advertisingfor a number of purposes. This use of advertising has been considered elsewhere usingsamples of young adults and adolescents respectively (ODonohoe, 1994; Ritson andElliott, 1999). The notion that children may perceive advertising to exist to offerfunctions other than commercial information/persuasion has not been adequatelyexplored in the literature to date. Therefore, the uses and gratifications that childrenmay draw from advertising remains a major direction for further research.

Advertising intent the television channels perspectiveAn additional perspective or vested interest regarding the use of advertising wasdeemed by approximately one-third of the children to be the television channelcarrying the advertising. This was an area of the discussion, which these childrenspoke about in some detail. Furthermore, this theme emerged unprompted amongstthese children, in response to the interviewers question why are there ads ontelevision? Specifically, the children alluded to television schedulers relying onadvertising as a source of programme funding and also to promote televisionprogrammes as opposed to advertisers product offerings. The first theme within thisperspective was that of advertising as a source of programme funding.

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1213

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

With regard to the literature, the emphasis on childrens understanding ofadvertising intent has been placed on the childs ability to recognise the role of theadvertiser and his/her purposes in using advertising. For example, Young (2000, p. 191)contends that, if we are to assess whether a child fully understands advertising, oneyardstick is his/her recognition of the advertiser as a communicative sourcedeliberately creating television commercials. This reinforces the authors earlierargument that the literature has repeatedly placed an emphasis on the childsawareness of the advertisers perspective. In contrast, the authors of this study contendthat, from the childs perspective, the advertiser is only one interest and that there maybe other reasons or agendas involved in advertising to children. In this study, some ofthe children expressed an awareness of another vested interest the televisionchannel. More specifically, the children expressed an understanding as to whytelevision channels sold advertising space to advertisers.

In this respect, the children were discerning a perspective other than that of theadvertiser:

Interviewer: What if we watched TV and there were no ads at all?

James: It would be very boring.

Group in unison: Yeah.

Interviewer: Would it?

Ross: Yeah, because if youre getting a bit tired of the programme.

Robert: If there were no ads, there would be no programmes.

Interviewer: Why is that?

Robert: Well ads make the programmes, like, for you to watch (all aged 8).

It was also suggested that television channels sell advertising space as a means ofgenerating finances for the production of television programmes: to make money forthe programmes (Patricia, 8). This sentiment was echoed elsewhere:

Id like it [if there were no ads on television] because there would be no breaks and bits cut outof the programme. But the channel needs to make money and they have to have ads (Eric, 8).

Therefore, these children are exhibiting an awareness of the television channelsrequirement to generate revenue from advertising. Young (2000) has suggested thatchildren can be deemed to have a sophisticated understanding of advertising whenthey start to appreciate the vested interests which fund and place advertisements ontelevision. The fact that some of the children in this study are able to voice such anunderstanding of advertising as a revenue generator for television channels, asopposed to solely discerning the advertisers perspective, therefore implies a morehighly developed understanding of advertising intent, than the literature hasaccredited children with to date.

Another related theme in the childrens understanding of advertising intent wasalso linked to the television channels, or more specifically the programme schedulers.Advertising was seen to facilitate the programme schedulers/television channels whowere obliged to highlight their impending schedules. A large number of the children

EJM42,11/12

1214

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

referred to advertisings informative and persuasive functions as well as its use by TVchannels to promote their own programme offerings:

Interviewer: What are the ads on television for?

Annette: To tell you about something you can buy.

Diana: To show you new things.

Interviewer: Lucy, would you agree with that that ads are there to make you buy?

Lucy: Yes and also to tell you what programmes are on (all aged 8).

In the same manner, other children spoke of the informational nature of programmetrailers: Id watch them because they tell you whats coming on after the programmethat youre watching (Barbara, 9). When asked to give examples of such programmesthat a television channel might wish to promote:

Ads for new programmes. Like this new programme on the Cartoon Network on Sky calledBeyBlades they show that on other channels to make you say oh that looks good, I thinkIll go and see it (Deirdre, 8).

Thus, it is apparent that the children are able to discern two types of televisionadvertising, namely commercial advertising promoting the products and services ofthird parties, and programme trailers promoting the television channels forthcomingprogrammes. It should be noted that the childrens empathy for the television channelsremit towards advertising has not been widely reflected elsewhere in the literature. Forexample, in Oates et al. (2003) study of six- to ten-year-olds, even when they asked thechildren who makes and pays for advertisements, the eight year olds responses weredeemed to be uncertain but some responses alluded towards the productmanufacturers. This factor, amongst others, led Oates et al. to conclude that theirsamples understanding of advertising was less developed than anticipated.

Returning to this study, the findings indicate the childrens empathy for the televisionchannels requirement to generate money with a view to financing programmes and alsoto highlight their programme schedules. Such findings are noteworthy, because theyillustrate that the children are aware of another perspective on television advertisingbeyond that of the advertiser. It was contended above that the vast majority of studies onadvertising intent have focused on the childrens understanding of the advertisersperspective. Where the children in this study refer to the television channels perspective,they are indicating an enhanced understanding of advertising intent by way of theirappreciation for other purposes of television advertising.

DiscussionThe aim of this research was to explore childrens understanding of televisionadvertising intent. It was argued above that advertising intent has largely beenaddressed in the literature under the headings of information (predominantlycommercial in nature) and persuasion. While the persuasive/selling aspect toadvertising is a relevant and well-mined seam for research, it is in itself only oneperspective. The crux of this paper is therefore concerned with focusing on otherperspectives or stakeholders regarding the practice of television advertising. This lineof thought reflects Youngs (1990) contention that the literature views advertising as

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1215

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

having one type of intent. This study has therefore, addressed a gap in the literature byexploring childrens perspectives on advertising over and beyond that of theadvertisers agenda.

This research was framed within the advertising literacy approach whichessentially focuses on how consumers read advertising. It was noted from the outsetthat a major flaw in the literature on advertising literacy is the lack of consensusregarding the facets or components that characterise literacy. Similarly, there is adearth of literature regarding childrens advertising literacy. To that end, the authorswere interested in focusing on the meaning(s) that children take from advertising.

The first major finding from this study was that the children perceived advertisingas being larger and more complex than just the advertisers perspective. In thismanner, they demonstrated empathy not only for the advertisers perspective, but alsofor two other perspectives or stakeholders, relating to viewers and television channels.As is suggested in the literature, the children were fully aware of the informational andpersuasive/commercial nature of advertising, from the advertisers perspective. Thispaper focused on two other stakeholders the viewer and television channel.

From the viewers perspective, the informational remit of advertising whereby it canassist the recipient has been identified in previous studies (Blosser and Roberts, 1985;Oates et al., 2002). However, the informational function has previously been viewed inlargely commercial terms, relating to product or store information. This study adds anew dimension to the informative function, by illustrating that from the childrenspoint-of-view, advertising can exert an advisory, non-commercial remit, e.g. personalhealth and safety. The children therefore broadened the notion of information toencompass a non-commercial dimension. This finding is also noteworthy because itindicates that these children can differentiate between an advertisement that seeks tosell, and that which seeks to provide information.

Remaining with the viewers perspective, the children also identified anentertainment aspect to advertising. Specifically, they were attracted toadvertisements that entertained or made them laugh, such ads tending toincorporate cartoon characters, humour, animals and swift action. This reflectsprevious studies by authors such as Collins (1990) and Maher et al. (2006). However, anotable finding relating to entertainment was the observation that the childrenappeared to be appropriating such advertisements as a means of self-expression and/orsocial networking. Examples were given where one child might discuss a favourite adwith a friend outside of the research setting. This concept of advertising as a resourcewas also supported by the large number of children who were able to re-enactadvertisements, and recite slogans and catchphrases. These practices and ritualsreflect Ritson and Elliotts (1995) view that advertising lends itself to such socialinteraction because of its ubiquity, and that such interaction also occurs amongstchildren, as well as adolescents.

Advertisings use in a social context has been researched elsewhere amongst anadolescent sample (Ritson and Elliott, 1999) and a sample of 18 to 24-year-olds(ODonohoe, 1994). However, its social uses amongst children has been largely ignoredin the child-advertising literature and therefore remains an interesting avenue forfuture research.

It is appropriate at this point to highlight another perceived intent of advertising,namely to suit the convenience of the viewer. The children referred to the commercial

EJM42,11/12

1216

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

break as a vehicle to do other things such as eating a meal or visiting the bathroom.The convenience aspect to advertising has been identified in a very small number ofprevious studies, e.g. Oates et al. (2003). However, such authors have tended not to viewthis as an indicator of advertising understanding. Even so, the authors of the presentstudy would argue that the fact that many children are happy to forgo the commercialbreak so as to do other things should be of interest to parents and advertisingregulators because it is a clear indicator that the children are aware of the differencebetween an advertisement and a programme, and indeed the differing value of both.

Leaving the viewers perspective aside, another major finding in this study wassome childrens awareness of another perspective over and beyond that of theadvertiser, namely that of the television channel. This finding is useful in the debate onchildrens understanding of, and relative vulnerability to advertising, because itindicates that these children were aware of vested interests, other than the advertiser.They were also, in this respect, equipped to discuss the relationship that prevailsbetween advertiser and television channel.

Arising from this study, the authors would contend that the concept of what itmeans to understand advertising is very broad, and merits more specific examinationin terms of identifying potential boundaries or levels of understanding. Since the 1970sto the present day, one of the major research avenues in the child-advertising literaturehas been the following question can children understand advertising intent? Thevery nature of this question suggests a yes/no answer. Furthermore, it is observedthat the term literacy has often been used in the literature to describe a consumerssophistication in understanding advertisements (Bartholomew and ODonohoe, 2003).A sophisticated level of understanding is seen to exist where a child can discernadvertisings persuasive intent (Young, 2000). But what if a child can decode more fromadvertising than solely the advertisers perspective?

Literacy has been referred to as ones ability to read and understand a text such asadvertising (ODonohoe and Tynan, 1998; Oates et al., 2002). This paper expands uponthis concept by contending that different levels of ability or competence inunderstanding advertising may be exhibited by a child. Therefore, the authors proposethat advertising understanding can be expanded to include four levels ofunderstanding of advertising as seen in Table II. The purpose of this classificationis to highlight the expansive, multi-faceted nature of the concept of literacy, specificallywith regard to what it means to understand advertising intent. As argued above, the

Level Understanding Basis for level of understanding

First level Unsophisticated Inability to recognise advertisings persuasiveintent/decipher the advertisers intended message

Second level Basic/rudimentary Ability to discern between advertising andprogramming through use of cues such as length ofad, programme credits

Third level Semi-sophisticated Ability to recognise advertisings persuasive intent

Fourth level Highly sophisticated Recognition that advertising facilitates theadvertiser in addition to other interests such as theviewer and host television station

Table II.Childrens understanding

of advertising intent the different levels that

can exist

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1217

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

authors adopt a different approach to the literatures focus on whether childrenunderstand advertising intent, to alternatively consider the extent and degrees of thisunderstanding.

The first level of understanding referred to in Table II constitutes anunsophisticated understanding. This exists where a child cannot recogniseadvertisings persuasive intent. It can also prevail where a child incorrectlydeciphers the advertisers intended message. The second level of understanding isbasic or rudimentary. This prevails where a child can differentiate between anadvertisement and a programme. However, the fact that the child can make thisdistinction does not necessarily mean that he/she can explain that difference.Nevertheless, if a child can recognise fundamental differences between the two genres(e.g. shorter duration of an ad), then this points towards a basic comprehension thatone form of communication is different to another.

The third level of understanding is an intermediate level whereby the child canrecognise that advertising has an informative and/or persuasive intent. This level isreferred to as a semi-sophisticated understanding. The literature has tended to deemthis to be a sophisticated level of understanding (e.g. Young, 2000). However, theauthors would argue that this is limited in that it only considers intent in terms of theadvertisers agenda. The fourth level of understanding exists at the highlysophisticated level and prevails where a child recognises that advertising exists tofacilitate the advertisers commercial agenda, but also serves the interest of otherparties such as the host television station and the viewer. Thus, the child is able toidentify and appreciate the perspective of the different parties who are exposed toand/or using advertising

There are other dimensions of advertising literacy such as consumers appreciationof the use of advertising techniques, strategies and production values (e.g. ODonohoe,1994) that the authors did not address in this paper. Therefore, we are mindful that ourclassification of advertising understanding constitutes only one dimension of a childsadvertising literacy. Nevertheless, the value of this classification is that it expands theconcept of childrens understanding of advertising, which traditionally has posed thequestion do children understand persuasive intent? In contrast, the authorsclassification recognises that such understanding can occupy varying levels or degreesof understanding along a continuum from unsophisticated to highly sophisticated.

Social policy issues and implicationsGovernments, regulatory bodies, parents, and childrens groups in the European Unionand the USA have long displayed some unease regarding the practice of advertising tochildren. A key concern is the extent to which children can understand the advertiserscommercial intent and their ensuing ability to respond to the persuasive nature ofadvertising. This has resulted in some regulators taking the stringent steps ofprohibiting or restricting advertising to children. For example prime-time advertisingto children is not allowed in Sweden and Norway whilst toy advertising is prohibited inGreece (Mallalieu et al., 2005). In 2005, a Childrens Advertising Code was alsointroduced in Ireland. Therefore, the overall tenet underpinning social policy has beenthe perceived need to protect children who could be vulnerable to the powerful andpersuasive overtures of advertisers.

EJM42,11/12

1218

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

The research findings in this study depict children as being highly sophisticated intheir understanding of television advertising intent. They understood the advertisersperspective and, even more tellingly, could discern between advertisements that seekto sell, and those that are informational in nature. Their enjoyment of advertising andits resulting use in a social context, resonate with Ritson and Elliotts (1995) view ofadvertising as being a liberating and empowering force. Furthermore, some childrenexhibited an awareness of vested interests, other than those of the advertiser. Overall,advertising was seen to perform a number of functions for viewers informative,advisory, entertainment and convenience.

In all, these findings should be of interest to policymakers, concerned consumersand researchers because they reflect an emerging school of thought in the literaturewhich views children as being relatively knowledgeable about advertising (e.g.Preston, 2005). Friestad and Wright (2005, p. 183) contend that the spectre of thepolicy debates has loomed over and distorted research. Arguing that this is arather extreme perspective, we would offer a more tempered view by suggestingthat advertising regulators and policymakers take a contrasting approach to thedebate. Rather than solely viewing advertising as something negative or harmfulthat might affect children in one way, in the manner of the traditionalstimulus-response-organism (SOR) mindset, an alternative position is to start byviewing children, namely from the approximate age of seven years on, as beingpossibly more knowing and evaluative towards advertising than they are oftengiven credit for, and future policy decisions should reflect childrens relativeadvertising literacy.

To that end, we would argue that the debate over child-targeted advertising shouldcontinue to be aired, albeit driven by contemporary research that reflects the changingsocial and technological landscape in which we find ourselves.

ConclusionOverall, in answer to the question, Why are ads on television? the children offeredmany reasons or purposes. As such, they demonstrated an element of advertisingliteracy by virtue of their ability to read advertising and to appreciate how it canfacilitate interests such as the advertiser, viewer and host television. But equally, thechildren tended to then turn the conversation to how they used such advertising, e.g.using commercial breaks for their own convenience. As such, these children presentedthemselves as active and goal-directed audiences for advertising. This contrasts animage of children as passive, sponge-like viewers, which tends to prevail in the debateover advertising regulation in countries such as Ireland and the UK. Therefore, furtherresearch might seek to develop the authors research agenda, namely to explorechildrens understanding of advertising, over and beyond the marketing focus of theadvertiser, and specifically to further explore the various degrees of understanding orliteracy that prevail. At the moment, many consumer groups, and regulators such asthe UKs Ofcom, are seeking to regulate the practice of television advertising targetedat children on the basis of its commercial effects. But by adopting the agenda withinthis paper, other researchers can present such interested parties with a larger and moreholistic picture of how children view advertising. For example, some children in thisstudy referred to anti-smoking advertisements. They would not constitute the targetmarket for such messages but it is interesting to observe how from the age of seven

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1219

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

years, these children were able to understand the message being conveyed and also toindicate that it would dissuade them from smoking. Similarly, the children were able tore-enact ads for alcohol products in an amusing way and the societal implications ofthis may be of interest to parents, advertising regulators and the schedulers oftelevision advertising.

Methodologically, a note is required regarding the choice of school-based groupdiscussions and individual interviews for this study. Banister and Booth (2005)promote school-based research on the basis that it facilitates a researcher inestablishing rapport with children in the school environment in the absence of theirparents. The authors of the present study would offer an additional perspective onthe conduct of research in a school context. In this study, the research waspresented to the children as adult homework that had to be completed and thattheir assistance was therefore invaluable. Given the typical classroom situationwhereby an adult (teacher) seeks to impart information to the class, the authors ofthe present study observed that the children relished the role reversal in thiscontext, whereby they were imparting information and articulating their views andattitudes to an adult.

To conclude, the value of this study has been to adopt a different research directionto the traditional approach in the literature, by exploring what advertising means tochildren, as opposed to the long-established tradition of asking what does advertisingdo to children? The children in this study very much enjoy advertising, theyfrequently find it entertaining and they may use it for their convenience andnon-commercial information. But they also appreciate that it can serve many masters the advertiser, viewer and channel and in many ways. This concept of children asactively engaging with advertising and appropriating it for their own uses offers aworthy line of inquiry for other academic researchers and parties with a concern in thisarea.

From a theoretical perspective, the contribution of this study has been to place toone side the stimulus-organism-response (SOR) approach which arguably hasinformed many of the extant studies on children and advertising. The latter havetended to ask what does advertising do to children? or more specifically do childrenunderstand the advertisers perspective? This research has adopted the less employed,advertising literacy approach, seeking to explore how children read and decodeadvertising.

The authors contend that a childs understanding of advertising is larger, morecomplex and multi-faceted than has been considered by many researchers to date.Accordingly, we have sought to develop this concept by way of a classification thatsuggests four different levels of understanding that children may exhibit towardsadvertising. In all, this study and its subsequent classification of literacy withregard to advertising intent, seeks to address a void pertaining to the lack ofresearch concerning childrens advertising literacy and is an area that merits furtherexploration.

References

Banister, E.N. and Booth, G.J. (2005), Exploring innovative methodologies for child-centricconsumer research, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2,pp. 157-75.

EJM42,11/12

1220

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Banks, S. (1975), Public policy on ads to children, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 15 No. 4,pp. 7-12.

Bartholomew, A. and ODonohoe, S. (2003), Everything under control: a childs eye view ofadvertising, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 19 Nos 3-4, pp. 433-57.

Blosser, B.J. and Roberts, D.F. (1985), Age differences in childrens perceptions of messageintent, Communication Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 455-84.

Buckingham, D. (1993), Children Talking Television: The Making of Television Literacy, TheFalmer Press, London.

Burr, P.L. and Burr, R.M. (1976), Television advertising to children: what parents are sayingabout government control, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 37-41.

Butter, E.J., Popovich, P.M., Stackhouse, R.H. and Garner, R.K. (1981), Discrimination oftelevision programs and commercials by preschool children, Journal of AdvertisingResearch, Vol. 21, April, pp. 53-6.

Chan, K. (2000), Hong Kong childrens understanding of television advertising, Journal ofMarketing Communications, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 37-52.

Collins, J. (1990), Television and primary schoolchildren in Northern Ireland: the impact ofadvertising, Journal of Educational Television, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 31-9.

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) (1998), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials,Sage, Newbury Park, CA.

Domzal, T.J. and Kernan, J.B. (1992), Reading advertising: the what and how of productmeaning, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 48-64.

Donohue, T.R., Henke, L.H. and Donohue, W.A. (1980), Do kids know what TV commercialsintend?, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 51-7.

Drumwright, M.E. and Murphy, P.E. (2004), How advertising practitioners view ethics, Journalof Advertising, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 7-24.

Eagle, L., Bulmer, S. and De Bruin, A. (2004), Exploring the link between obesity andadvertising in New Zealand, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 10, March,pp. 49-67.

Ellis, B. (2000), Advertising to children in Europe, paper presented at the National MarketingConference, Dublin, October.

European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR) (1999), Guidelines oninterviewing children and young people, available at www.esomar.org

Friestad, M. and Wright, P. (2005), The next generation: research for twenty-first century publicpolicy on children and advertising, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 2,pp. 183-5.

Gaines, L. and Esserman, J. (1981), A quantitative study of young childrens comprehension oftelevision programs and commercials, in Esserman, J.F. (Ed.), Television Advertising andChildren Issues, Research and Findings, Child Research Service, New York, NY,pp. 95-106.

Gunter, B. and Furnham, A. (1998), Children as Consumers A Psychological Analysis of theYoung Peoples Market, Routledge, London.

Lawlor, M-A. and Prothero, A. (2002), The established and potential mediating variables in thechilds understanding of advertising intent: towards a research agenda, Journal ofMarketing Management, Vol. 18 Nos 5-6, pp. 481-99.

Macklin, M.C. (1985), Do young children understand the selling intent of commercials?,The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 293-304.

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1221

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Macklin, M.C. (1987), Preschoolers understanding of the information function of advertising,Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, September, pp. 229-39.

Maher, J.K., Hu, M.Y. and Kolbe, R.H. (2006), Childrens recall of television ad elements, Journalof Advertising, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 23-33.

Mallalieu, L., Palan, K.M. and Laczniak, R.N. (2005), Understanding childrens knowledge andbeliefs about advertising: a global issue that spans generations, Journal of Current Issuesand Research in Advertising, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 53-64.

Martin, M.C. (1997), Childrens understanding of the intent of advertising: a meta-analysis,Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 205-16.

Oates, C., Blades, M. and Gunter, B. (2002), Children and television advertising: when do theyunderstand persuasive intent?, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 238-45.

Oates, C., Blades, M., Gunter, B. and Don, J. (2003), Childrens understanding of televisionadvertising: a qualitative approach, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 9 No. 2,pp. 59-71.

ODonohoe, S. (1994), Advertising uses and gratifications, European Journal of Marketing,Vol. 28 Nos 8-9, pp. 52-75.

ODonohoe, S. and Tynan, C. (1998), Beyond sophistication: dimensions of advertising literacy,International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 467-82.

Preston, C. (2000), Are children seeing through ITC advertising regulations?, InternationalJournal of Advertising, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 117-36.

Preston, C. (2005), Advertising to children and social responsibility, Young Consumers: Insightand Ideas for Responsible Marketers, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 61-7.

Ritson, M. and Elliott, R. (1995) in Bergadaa, M. (Ed.), A model of advertising literacy: thepraxiology and co-creation of advertising meaning, paper presented at the EuropeanMarketing Academy Conference, ESSEC, Paris.

Ritson, M. and Elliott, R. (1999), The social uses of advertising: an ethnographic study ofadolescent advertising audiences, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 26, December,pp. 260-77.

Robertson, T.S. and Rossiter, J.R. (1974), Children and commercial persuasion: an attributiontheory analysis, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 1, June, pp. 13-20.

Rolandelli, D.R. (1989), Children and television: the visual superiority effect reconsidered,Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, Vol. 33, Winter, pp. 69-81.

Ross, R.P., Campbell, T., Wright, J.C., Huston, A.C., Rice, M.L. and Turk, P. (1984), Whencelebrities talk, children listen: an experimental analysis of childrens responses to TV adswith celebrity endorsement, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, Vol. 5,July-September, pp. 185-202.

Ward, S. (1972), Childrens reactions to commercials, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 12,April, pp. 37-45.

Ward, S., Wackman, D.B. and Wartella, E. (1977), How Children Learn to Buy, Sage, NewburyPark, CA.

Young, B. (1990), Television Advertising and Children, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Young, B. (2000), The childs understanding of promotional communication, InternationalJournal of Advertising and Marketing to Children, September/October, pp. 191-203.

EJM42,11/12

1222

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

About the authorsMargaret-Anne Lawlor is a Lecturer in Marketing Communications at the Faculty of Business,Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland. Her research focuses on childrens understanding ofadvertising and she has previously published in the Journal of Marketing Management and theService Industries Journal.

Andrea Prothero is a Senior Lecturer at University College Dublin. Her research focuses uponmarketings impact on society and she has widely published in this area including work in theJournal of Macromarketing, Journal of Business Research, and Consumption, Markets andCulture. Currently, Dr Prothero is a member of an international research team exploringmotherhood, identity and consumption.

Childrensunderstanding of

advertising

1223

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

This article has been cited by:

1. Laknath Jayasinghe, Mark Ritson. 2013. Everyday Advertising Context: An Ethnography of AdvertisingResponse in the Family Living Room. Journal of Consumer Research 40:1, 104-121. [CrossRef]

2. Valrie HemarNicolas, Pascale Ezan, Mathilde Gollety, Nathalie Guichard, Julie Leroy. 2013. How dochildren learn eating practices? Beyond the nutritional information, the importance of social eating. YoungConsumers 14:1, 5-18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

3. Karolina Tutaj, Eva A. van Reijmersdal. 2012. Effects of online advertising format and persuasionknowledge on audience reactions. Journal of Marketing Communications 18:1, 5-18. [CrossRef]

4. Margaret-Anne Lawlor, Andrea Prothero. 2011. Pester power A battle of wills between children andtheir parents. Journal of Marketing Management 27:5-6, 561-581. [CrossRef]

5. Andreas I. Andronikidis, Maria Lambrianidou. 2010. Children's understanding of television advertising:A grounded theory approach. Psychology and Marketing 27:4, 299-322. [CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

IR U

NIV

ERSI

TY P

AK

ISTA

N A

t 23:

31 1

5 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)