Abstract This discussion examines the extent to which Pester Power exists and what influences

there are to be considered. It looks at the existing theories and research. The main

influences are parents, peers, school and television and have been taken into

consideration in order to examine this issue. These factors are placed in the context of

child developmental theories. Interviews with parents of young children have

demonstrated that Pester Power exists and that parents feel influenced by it.

INTRODUCTION Many people are likely to believe that children are our future. It is also the view of

today’s marketers, as they see children as their future customers. However, how do

marketers approach these future customers and by what means and why are children

such an attractive market? In order to understand marketing to children we also have

to define and understand child development, so we can look at the process by which

attitudes and behaviours are learned.

Nevertheless, children are not yet independent consumers and may be influenced by

external factors. McNeal (1992, p.155) states: ‘Indirect influence means that the

children’s preferences are given consideration when parents make purchases.’ There

are also other interactions than that between parents and children, such as television,

peers and schools. Pester Power also plays an important role in marketing to children.

In a recent conference a marketing practitioner said, that pester power did not exist

but a negotiation between children and parents took place. Children who are

influenced by peers, parents, school and television are faced with a wide choice of

products aiming at their needs and desires (toys) at all times. But how can children

transform their desire into a purchase? As dependants they have to ‘convince’ their

parents or carers to buy whatever they like. UK researchers call it pester power –a

child’s ability to pester their parents into buying a certain product or brand-.

This research deals with Pester Power in young children between 5 and 11 years and

will look at the interpretation of Pester Power by parents and to what extent parents

are influenced by it. Furthermore it will attempt to establish if parents agree with the

marketing practitioner. It also investigates if marketers exploit children and to what

extend they should be protected from advertising. It aims to uncover to what extent

1

Pester Power is used by marketers. Furthermore, findings of former research on Pester

Power and advertising to children are presented in this dissertation. The main focus of

this dissertation is to find out if the primary research can support former results and

theories or if it differs. There are various views of child development, which will be

discussed in the next section.

2

Child Development

In order to understand how marketers can target children as customers and consumers,

we must firstly critically evaluate the area of child development to gain a better

understanding. It is important to understand how children interact with socialising

agents such as peers, parents, school and television and how these factors may

influence their consumption patterns.

Furthermore, an understanding of child development can help us with the

interpretation of the concept of pester power as this understanding could highlight to

what extent a child learn their behaviour by certain influences.

First of all, there is the field of research where two distinct approaches can be found.

The work of Jean Piaget (1896–1980) is most often referred to for his comprehensive

theory of human development. Piaget (1971) suggests an ‘inside-out’ approach, in

which development is thought to arise from our biology and our environment. The

‘inside-out’ view says that what comes from within the child is the most important

aspect of development.

Piaget supports a cognitive development, which falls into 4 major phases:

Sensorimotor (0-2). The child’s comprehension of the world is carried out through

physical contact.

Pre-operational (2-7). When the child develops an egocentric view of the world. In

this stage they have difficulty in seeing someone else’s point of view.

Concrete Operational (7-11). They develop an ability to think logically but have a

need to manipulate real objects in order to solve problems.

Formal Operations (11 onwards). In this stage children can reason in the abstract

without the need of physical objects.

Piaget’s theory explains how children understand the world through stages in

intellectual development. One could interpret his theory, as a natural human need to

discover and to learn about the world.

Piaget’s view is that psychological development is a kind of spiral between a child’s

existing knowledge and new knowledge, which is being generated in the environment.

Piaget does not believe that new knowledge has been developed by experience. It

implies that children contribute highly to their own learning and with age pass

through certain distinct stages of understanding.

3

However, Vygotsky (1978) favours an ‘outside-in’ approach, suggesting that social

interaction is of fundamental importance to child development and that children are

functions of the people they grow up amongst. While Piaget argues that children

develop cognitively, Vygotsky argues that they develop through social interaction. He

suggests that direct instructions play an important role. He claims that at each stage of

development children acquire help and instructions in order to understand and handle

the world. Furthermore, Vygotsky sees play as the primary means of children’s

cultural development and does not make a difference in what kind of environment the

development takes place; i.e. a poor child with less expensive toys will learn as much

through playing (house for example) than a child with better and more expensive toys.

He states that there is a distance between their actual developmental level through

their own ability to solve a problem independently and their level of potential

development, which is dependant on adults or older peers guidance, in order to be

able to solve a problem.

Therefore, it would appear that the Vygotskian theory can assist marketers to better

understand the gap in knowledge which might exist in a child’s mind about an

offering and how others (parents, teachers, peer, school) could assist in overcoming

that gap.

Vygotsky would place this proposition in what he calls the Zone of Proximal

Development (ZPD). ‘The zone of proximal development defines those functions that

have not yet matured but are in the process of maturation, functions that will nature

tomorrow but are currently in an embryonic state. These functions could be termed

the ‘buds’ or ‘flowers’ of development rather than the ‘fruits’ of development.’

(Vygotsky 1978, p. 86).

Wood (1998) illustrates the two standpoints with the example of a teacher providing

the appropriate tools, time and space required for children to act on objects fostering

understanding, this understanding being induced by the child’s own internal efforts

sand not the direct efforts of the teacher, this being the Piagetian view. Wood suggests

that Piaget ‘views genuine intellectual competence as a manifestation of a child’s

largely unassisted activities. Vygotsky, on the other hand, argues that the capacity to

learn through instruction is itself a fundamental feature of human intelligence. When

adults help children to accomplish thing they are unable to achieve alone, they are

fostering the development of knowledge and ability’ (p. 26).

4

Bronfenbrenner (cited in Schaffer, 1999) takes the cultural interaction model even

further with his ecological view of child development. The key idea proposed by

Bronfenbrenner is that it is not only the immediate environment that has an impact on

child development, but also the wider environments in which the child’s personal

environment sits. He draws the analogy between his concept of the environment and

Russian dolls, nested structures sitting inside each other. Whilst Bronfenbrenner looks

in great depth at the impact of environmental influences on child development he does

not, however, provide an explanation of how children process environmental

information and learn form their interaction with the environment.

In the context of this discussion, marketers need to understand how children develop,

so they can target their products more efficiently towards them. Theories as from

Piaget and Vygotsky can be of assistance to marketers. However, the Vygotskian

view can more specifically assist us in understanding the gap in knowledge, which

might exist in a child’s mind, and it also helps to discover how parents, peer, schools

and society can help to overcome that gap.

If we follow the theory that socialising agents have a great influence in a child’s

development and behaviour, then we have to ask the question to what extent those

agents can control a child’s behaviour as a consumer and to what extent marketers can

use that knowledge. In order to understand and find the external influences in a

child’s development, consumer social agents will be looked at in the next section.

Consumer Socialisation

A general definition of ‘consumer socialisation’ is provided by Ward (1974) as ‘the

processes by which young people acquire skills, knowledge, and attitudes relevant to

their functioning as consumers in the market place.’

A search of the literature has identified that there are three main socialising agents,

which directly impact on child development and specifically their consumer

socialisation. Those are parents and schools, which especially have and impact on

their educational development, and in the context of society, peers and television

whose main impact is through social interaction. Several early studies indicate that

parents are the most influential agents in this process until children reach adolescence

(approximately 11 for girls and 13 for boys), at which time peers become the favoured

source of information peer (Ward, 1974; Mochas and Moore, 180, 1979). Television

is seen as a steady, irrational, though not as important, influence on consumer

5

socialization. Previous consumer socialisation research has also found that of the

three primary socialization agents, parents are the main source of rational influence on

children (Moschis and Churchill, 1978). The most widely used model of the consumer

socialization process is the one of Moschis and Churchill (1978) who outlines a

conceptual model of consumer socialisation.

According to this model, the learning processes through which the socialization

agents influence the learner (child) can be classified into three categories: modelling

(imitation of the agent’s behaviour), reinforcement (involving either reward or

punishment regarding specific behaviours that the child engages in) and social

interaction (Moschis and Churchill, 1978). With preadolescents in particular, parents

play the dominant influencing role. Each of these learning mechanisms assumes a

primarily one-way flow of information from parent to child with children in the

learner role.

iMoschis & Churchill (1978) outline a conceptual model of consumer socialisation: Antecedents Socialisation Processes Outcomes

Social structural variables

Learning properties

Agent-learner relationships: -Modelling -Reinforcement -Social interaction

Age or life Cycle

position

More recent studies show that very young children make requests and product

selections as well. Children as young as two years of age begin to make requests for

desired objects, and by four years of age they begin to make their own in-store

selection. By the age of eight, children are making independent purchases (Mc Neal,

6

1993). There seems to be more of a two-way flow of product information between

parents and children. Children seem to learn a significant amount of product

information from television and other marketing efforts directed at them.

There has also been a specific research focus on the effect that television advertising

has on children (e.g. Reece et al., 1999; Moschis and Moore, 1979) and the ability of

children to understand the persuasive intent of advertising (Robertson and Rossiter,

1974; Bever et al., 1975). There is also a large body of research concerning the stages

at which children develop certain consumer skills, for example, learning to purchase

something in a shop (Peracchio, 1992), or being able to identify and recall different

brands (Bahn, 1986).

However, Roedder (1999) notes that despite the abundance of research into the social

development that occurs with advancing age, significant gaps exist in our

understanding of the role of the factors, such as social environment and experience.

Some (e.g. Moschis and Moore, 1979) have examined the relative effects of different

socialisation agents. Mochas and Moore (1979) found that different variables affect

the development of various aspects of consumer decision-making cognitions to

different degrees. For instance, they found that the more frequently an adolescent

interacts with his/her peers about consumption matters, the greater the likelihood of

him/her taking peer preferences into account in evaluating products. Moschis (1985)

reveals that family communication patterns can affect adolescent preferences for

different sources of information on consumption matters.

Carlson and Grossbart (1988) take a more detailed look at the effect of parents as

socialisation agents. Their study compares the socialisation styles used by different

parent ‘types’ and draws various conclusions. Authoritative parents restrict

consumption, mediate media exposure and express concerns about advertising.

Permissive parents are far less restrictive and see themselves more as an information

source. Neglecting mothers were found to have few consumer goals, and authoritarian

mothers discourage communication and do little to teach children to adapt to outside

influences. Baumrind (1980, p.640) offers a definition of parent socialisation: ‘an

adult-initiated process by which developing children, through insight, training and

imitation acquire the habits and values congruent with adaptation to their culture.’

7

To summarise this there are four main socialisation agents that can influence a child’s

behaviour as a consumer or customer:

Parents

As an agent of socialisation, parents can have a significant influence on the child’s

acquisition of consumer skills. Early sociologists speculated that young people learn

basic ‘rational’ aspects of consumption from their parents. Recent research findings

appear to support this. For example, research by Moore and Stephens shows that overt

parent-child communication about consumption predicts fairly well the adolescent’s

knowledge of prices of selected products. Similarly, Ward and Wackman found that

parents’ ‘general consumer goals’ included teaching their children about price-quality

relationships. These findings suggest the following hypothesis:

‘There is a positive relationship between the frequency of family communication

about consumption and the degree to which the adolescent holds economic

motivations for consumption and the strength of the adolescent’s attitudes toward

prices.’

In many settings children play the dominant role in the influence relationship often

being the major source of product information (Dholakia 1984). However, when

conflict arises in the supermarket setting and children display inappropriate shopping

behaviour, it has been suggested that parents apply corrective action through feedback

and reinforcement (Barnard et al 1977). Isler et al (1987) found that children express

their desires to parents but parents see their responsibility to mediate. However, the

research also showed that children’s purchasing requests were not constant and that

television did not stimulate product requests.

However, the study by Ward (1974) and his associates suggests the ways children

learn consumer skills from their parents though observation. McNeal (1969) found

that with increasing age there is not only an increasing desire among children to

assume independent purchasing activities, but also an increasing parental

permissiveness in children’s independent consumer behaviour.

The frequency of talk within the family about consumption was positively associated

with the adolescent’s tendency to use advertising and price reduction (‘sales’) as

criteria for choosing among brands (Moschis and Moore, 1980).

8

Some earlier research findings show that parents taught their children very little about

consumer skills (e.g. Ward and Wackman, 1973), however, Moschis and Churchill

found that parents did try to teach consumer skills to their children, though this is

probably class related and differs from country to country. Thus, different consumer

skills, such as judging good value for money, spending to a budget, and comparing

prices before buying something, seem to be learned at different ages from parents and

though different learning processes.

Many studies have looked at the influence of parents (particularly mothers) on

children’s consumer decisions. Research in this area dates back nearly 30 years and

most researchers have attempted to identify key characteristics or variables. Thus,

Ward and Wackman (1972) examined three variables thought to effect children’s

purchases; the demographic characteristics of the mother, the usual parent-child

interaction style and the mothers’ mass communication behaviour.

The more television the mother watched the more her child attempted to influence

consumer decisions and the more likely it was that the mother yielded to influence.

However, as Caron and Ward (1975) have shown, social class is a determinant of

television watching which also relates to consumer behaviour.

McNeal (1999) found that the term ‘pester power’ is misleading and negative and that

in reality children are taught to request certain items to satisfy their needs and that

changing family structures which evolved in the late 1980’s has led to children

actively participating in the family decision making process. They now have so much

power in the family that their families are now becoming child-led rather than in the

more traditional societies where they were either ‘matriarchal’ or ‘patriarchal’ as

determined by cultural differences.

‘The important point is that the children are strongly motivated to learn the art of

asking, this is how they get virtually everything they need or want. Both mothers and

marketers know this, but Mum usually takes the credit and marketers get the blame-

credit for having taught the children how to properly ask for things, blame because the

children ask so often and for so many things’ (McNeal 1999 p.77)

Peers

Peers are also a significant source of influence upon children’s consumer behaviour

especially among adolescents (Campbell, 1969). Even younger (5-10 years old)

9

children’s consumer-related attitudes and values can be shaped by peer group

influence. Such influence includes comments, which peers might make about products

or brands themselves, and about the way they are advertised. There is evidence that

children frequently talk with their friends about advertisements (Greenberg et al,

1986). Such conversations may increase or decrease the effectiveness of

advertisements to some extent.

According to Moschis et al (1978) children place a great deal of importance on the

social aspects of consumption that they use as the basis of interactive communication

with their peer. Effectively this represents their desire to be accepted as a member of

their subculture.

Peer influence may actually start operation during fairly early childhood. McNeal

(1992) reported significant peer influence on the child by age seven. Another study by

Shaak, Annes and Rossiter (1975) found stronger peer influence operating among ten-

year-olds than among six-year-olds, however.

There are many ways in which peers can influence children. Gunter et al (1997)

identify that children’s television viewing is influenced by two mechanisms, these

being parents and peers. They suggest that material that parents might consider to be

unsuitable may still be viewed under the condition of peer pressure, whereby the

majority of school friends consume it. Another example that Levitt et al (1970) found

is that ‘Attitudes toward television advertising for cigarettes, however, has been found

to be less influential than whether best friends and peer groups favour smoking.’

Moschis and Churchill (1978) found that peers appear to be an important socialisation

agent in contributing to the learning of materialistic values and related consumer

motives.

Both Piaget and Vygotsky, whose theories were, mentioned earlier, place major

emphasis on interaction with peers as an important facilitator of learning and

socialisation. In the consumer context, one can imagine that many aspects of

socialisation, including an understanding of consumption symbolism and materialism,

arise from peer interaction. For example, in one of the few studies of peer group

influence, Bachmann and her colleagues (Bachmann, Hohn, and Rao 1993) found that

such influence affects some types of products (public luxuries) but not others (private

necessities), implicating a peer driven influence on children’s understanding of

consumption symbolism. In further research, Achenreiner (1997) found that

susceptibility to peer group influence was positively related to materialistic attitudes.

10

Television

Television is understood to be an important socialisation agent and tool in Marketing

in children. The debate about children and television is focused around their ability to

understand television programmes and the effect they have on their social

development. Another important issue in the discussion about television advertising’s

influence on children is children’s awareness of television advertising and whether or

not children are able to distinguish advertisements from programmes.

In the United States, children are said to spend about three hours per day watching

television (Sylvester et al, 1995), and children rate watching TV as the number one

after-school activity (Schulman and Clancy, 1992). Children see about 20,000

commercial messages per year (Leonhardt and Kerwin, 1997). ‘Children spend more

time watching television than in any other activity except sleep, ‘ (Huston and Wright,

1994, p. 1). Children’s visual attention to TV levels off at age 10 and declines during

adulthood, and younger children have a higher level of trust in message arguments

and images seen on TV (Berry and Asamen, 1993). By age 9 children are capable of

understanding the superficial meaning of most mainstream television (Hodge and

Tripp, 1986). Age differences in learning information have been found; specifically,

children ages 10 and older spontaneously use information storage and retrieval

strategies that younger children (ages 6-9) do not use, and that very young children

(ages 5 and younger) cannot use (Roedder, 1981).

Due to the increasing presence of children’s television viewing, ‘it is important

therefore that we understand the different ways in which it might affect them’

(Clifford et al 1995, p.1). Unnikrishnan et al (1996) suggests that television viewing

has an adverse affect on the reading, writing and concentration skills of children.

The degree of attention can influence the child’s interpretation of advertising

messages and also how much they are remembered. There is evidence too of a

relationship between degree of attention to advertising and children’s beliefs in the

truthfulness of an advertisement (Greenberg et al, 1986). Children who are more

attentive to advertising have been found to consider advertisements more truthful.

Attention to advertising is also an important factor in connection with the effects

advertisements might have on young consumers. Low levels of attention generally

lead to low levels of effects (Young).

From infancy to adolescence, understanding of television advertising follows a tree-

stage patter. Recognition; understanding; scepticism (Gunter and Furnham 1998, p

11

114). The young child learns to recognize advertisements, gradually comes to

understand their purposes and uses, and with experience grows increasingly sceptical

of advertising claims.

‘Children have their own lives to lead and their own perspectives. Above all they are

not stupid. The greatest mistake adults make is to underestimate the child viewer’

(Home 1993, p.156). Singleton-Turner (1994, p. 22) reveals that ‘thee is no difference

in making programmes for children and in making them for adults.’ The only

difference lies between the different age groups and their ability to understand.

Television producers must realise that children must be treated equally to adults

understanding their differences. ‘As their understanding of the world in general

develops, so too does their understanding of television.’ (Gunter and McAleer 1990,

p. 55). This supports the Vygotskyian view of child development, which underlines

the importance of social interaction for their development, therefore it could be

argued that television as a medium can have a positive impact on their learning,

assisting them in gaining an understanding of the society in which they live.

Van Erva (1998) supports that advertising impacts on parent-child interaction,

advertisers attempting to win every consumer ‘dollar’ by directing their appeal at

children so that they pressurise their parents.

Research carried out by Moschis et al (1978) identified that children’s interaction with

television advertisements aids the development of their consumer skills. Furthermore

they identify that it is the combination of their learning form advertisements and

social interaction with peers that contributes to their consumer development.

Schools

Marketers can reach large numbers of children as current, influence, and future

consumers through school relations programs. Schools need funds, teacher

development, and teaching equipment and aids, and particularly in the area of

consumer education. A firm can provide these things as part of its marketing

communications efforts. According to McNeal (1992) ‘…kid-targeted promotion

could do more than just clinch the sale. Promotion also could be used for developing

brand and seller identity among children and for building preferences and loyalty

toward firm and its products’ (p.177).

12

Ward (1974) and McNeal (1992) who asked if parental consumer education is

purposive and systematic or trial and error. McNeal (1977) also advised that

businesses should involve themselves in consumer education, which could assist

schools to educate children as consumers.

Reinke (1992) suggests that knowledge about the economic system is a prerequisite

for knowledge about the benefits of the system itself; therefore it would appear that

children’s consumer knowledge is dependant on economics education. Schug and

Walstead (1991, p. 411) would support this view, ‘economic decisions are made on a

daily basis. In our society, the ability to apply economic perspectives to public and

private concerns is an essential skill for citizens’.

Pester Power in Children

Definition

Pestering means causing irritation or annoyance. The teasing and persistent thoughts

in children due the influence of TV commercials or any other forms make them

vexatious. When it is vexing for them to have to admit that they are wrong they harass

their parents with their petty annoyances. This type of behaviour in them is being

termed as Pester Power, which is best displayed in children when it comes to toys and

games. (www.bctfnews.com)

Overview

A research by Abbey National (1997) shows that the section of society with the

shortest tempers is parents of school-age children, a quarter of whom admit to losing

their cool at least once a day. Parents find themselves under pressure from “pester

power” as they face growing demands from their children, who are subjected from the

age of two to aggressive marketing, advertising and the urgings of peer pressure

In recent years, 'Pester Power' has been one of the buzzwords of the marketing

industry. Harnessing its power has become a holy grail for those who believe it to be

the key to parents' purse strings. However, pester power is not a lifelong or even

childhood-long phenomenon. Pestering children grow quickly into purchasing adults.

This change does not happen overnight, nor does it happen in a vacuum. But poor

information on just how and when this transformation takes place, combined with

13

limited targeting options, has made developing age-appropriate marketing strategies

notoriously difficult.

According to the research done by Abbey National (1997), a Local Government

Association of UK the “Pester Power” has spread to all areas of family life and

children are exerting a major influence on the choice of everything, from the family

car to where to go on holiday. Indeed, today's parents claim to consult widely on most

household decisions, such as what they eat and the new colour scheme for the

bathroom, in a manner that would have been alien to mothers and fathers of just 40

years ago.

The bank's survey of 950 families across the country found that as well as helping to

select the annual holiday destination (65%), nine in 10 children dictate the choice of

evening meal. Weekend and leisure plans are also joint decisions, with 84 per cent of

families deciding what to do and where to go together. For three-quarters of modern

families, redecorating family rooms also presents an opportunity for everyone to chip

in ideas. And when it comes to moving house, nearly half (42 per cent) of parents

claim to seek their children's views, especially those of teenage children, before

putting up the ‘For Sale’ boards.

Facts and Figures (http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/food_jan97.html)

The following are some advertisements that illustrate the trend of Advertisement

Industry for targeting children that consequently results in the ‘pester power’:

“Nokia has a naughty eight-year-old girl looming large from the billboards thrusting

the 3210 in your face.”

“Onida's salesman goes blue in the face (literally) trying to convince his 10-year-old

customer that the Candy brand does not come in a vanilla flavour.”

“Papa finds it hard to decline his six-year-old's request to give half the school a ride

back home in his squeaky new Fiat Uno.”

“When papa nicks his chin while shaving, the toddler crawls up with a tube of

Boroline in its cute hands.”

14

Marketing minds are finally taking kids seriously. In other words, marketers are

realising that the road to a customer's heart (and mind) is the child at home. From

mobile phones, cars and soaps to noodles and potato chips, children seem to have a

say in it all.

Today children between four and nine years old watch an average of more than 2½

hours of television or video a day. But of course it's not just television advertising

which children see - there is also sponsorship of programmes and films, link-ups with

particular products, plus posters, newspapers, magazines and other "give-aways".

Children are under constant bombardment from both advertising and their peers, and

from a very young age. If anything, peer pressure is the major influence and is more

difficult to deal with.

Survey Statistics for UK in comparison with other countries:

According to a survey for the “Consumer concerns about the ethics of modern Food

Production and Advertising”, the parents were angry with food and drink advertisers

who target their children with sugary and fatty products, fanning the flames of ‘pester

power’, setting child against parent. More than eight in 10 said they wanted to see

tighter controls on advertising to children. Three in four (77 per cent) would like to

see a ban on the advertising of such products to their children.

Children around the world are bombarded with television advertisements telling them

bad food is good. The UK has the highest level of advertising to children in Europe,

according to a study by Consumers International released in November comparing

advertising during 20 hours of children's television. Only the USA and Australia had

higher levels of advertising.

In the UK there are no restrictions on the amount of TV advertising aimed at children

beyond those, which apply to all advertising. Many other countries have, however,

restrictions.

Sweden and Norway do not permit any television advertising to be directed towards

children under 12 and no adverts at all are allowed during children's programmes.

Australia does not allow advertisements during programmes for pre-school children.

15

Austria does not permit advertising during children's programmes, and in the Flemish

region of Belgium no advertising is permitted 5 minutes before or after programmes

for children.

Sponsorship of children's programmes is not permitted in Denmark, Finland, Norway

and Sweden while in Germany and the Netherlands it is not practiced even though it

is allowed.

In virtually all the countries in the survey (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark,

Finland, France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the UK and the

USA) there were more ads during kids' TV for food than any other type of product,

with ads for confectionery, breakfast cereals (mainly sweetened) and fast food

restaurants making up over half of all food advertisements in the survey.

Source: http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/food_jan97.html

Children’s responses to answer “no” from their Parents:

Source: www.co-op.co.uk/blackmail37.pdf

16

Children’s responses to advertising of sweets & crisps

Source: www.co-op.co.uk/blackmail37.pdf

Advertisers take their responsibilities very seriously when advertising to children or

featuring them in their campaigns. In 1998 the ASA received 12,217 complaints; 212

concerned children of which 53 were upheld relating to 7 advertisements. This

compares with 10,678 complaints received in 1997; 84 concerned children of which 6

were upheld relating to 2 advertisements. (Source: http://www.asa.org.uk/)

(Please find The British Codes of Advertising and Sales Promotion concerning

Children by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the Appendix.)

Debates on concerns about Pester Power in Children:

Marketers call it "pester power," the large influence children have in the family's

buying decisions. A related phrase is the child's "power of tears" or what is commonly

known as dabog. Past surveys showed that more than 90 percent of children are

successful in exercising this pester power. The younger children also tend to be more

"powerful". Previous studies focused on children eight years old and above, because

of the difficulty of getting data from the younger age group.

According to the official Food Advertising Unit (FAU) of UK the advertisements

marketing food to children must be banned with the view of improving the health of

children. Suggesting a restriction on food advertising is based on the assumption that

certain foods are unhealthy. This assumption necessitates viewing food on an

17

individual, rather than cumulative basis. All foods, even the most healthy, would not

contribute to a balanced diet if they were over-consumed. The same holds true for

food children consume - all foods, eaten in moderation, can be part of a healthy diet

for children. The most common explanation for advertising's effect on children's diet

is the following - children see advertisements; these generate desires (Pester Power);

the desires lead to requests; requests are satisfied by parent purchases and children's

consumption. Interviewing parents of young children will examine the phenomenon

of Pester Power. The following research deals with parents of young children.

Methodology

Due to the time limit and in order to gain a better understanding of Pester Power as it

is held in the minds of parents the survey was qualitative in nature.. As was felt that

questionnaires would have been insufficient as Pester Power has different definitions

by different people, interviews with parents of young children (5-11) were conducted

in order to have a discussion on Pester Power and advertising to children in general.

The children go to 4 different schools in Greater Manchester and some have siblings

who attend the same school. Altogether, 12 Mothers and 2 Fathers with a total number

of 23 children in the age group 5-11 were interviewed. The advantage of interviewing

parents rather than giving them questionnaires is that during an interview different

point of views can be discussed and parents can exchange their points of views and

new points can arise out of a discussion, whereas a questionnaire only offers a limited

possibility for parents to express their views and feelings. Parents have been invited

into my home and the discussion has been recorded and an assistant also took some

notes, that a recorder couldn’t catch, e.g. gesticulation, anger and emotion, etc.

The purpose of the discussion was explained and parents were asked to feel free to

express their points of view and to be as honest as possible. The discussion was

opened with a quote of a marketing practitioner who stated at a recent conference that

there is no such thing as pester power, but a negotiation between parents and children.

Results

Definition of Pester Power. 50% of the parents could not define the expression

Pester Power. They had never heard of it and did not know how to interpret this term.

The other half understood the term as a typical way of children to get what they want

and equalised the expression with children who are notorious nagging their parents

18

into buying them the latest toy or clothing. Pester Power was also understood as a

method by children to obtain what they need in order to be accepted by peers.

Furthermore, it has been understood as an ‘annoying’ marketing tool.

Do your children use Pester Power? One mother did not underestimate the power of

pestering, ‘ They ask for something and you say no. But all their friends have got it,

everyone in the neighbourhood is playing with it, and your child is the only one

without it. How can you resist that?’(Mother of 2 boys and 1 girl aged 2, 5 and 10).

Most of the parents did not agree with the marketing practitioner’s statement

mentioned above. They thought it was meant ironically. ‘Especially around birthdays

and christmas time there is no way to sit down and negotiate with the children. They

know exactly what they want and the increased amount of adverts makes it worse.

Pester Power exist especially around that time.’ Only one father agreed with the

marketing practitioner, he stated that it’s a parent’s fault if they let Pester Power

happen. By negotiating with children there is no such thing as Pester Power (Father of

a 5 year old boy). Another mother of a 7-year-old boy and an 11-year-old daughter

stated that children are very brand conscious nowadays, even from a young age, and

she said, that parents should try to give children what they want and need to compete

in their social environment.

A father thinks that mostly mothers give in to pester power and that parents should be

careful that children realise that they are not valued by the presents or toys that are

bought. Parents need to spend time with them, not try to substitute by buying them

gifts. He has the opinion that parents who are feeling pestered, have gone down the

wrong track. A majority of the mothers feel pressurised by their children’s’ demands.

About 60% said that Pester Power took place in particularly when children are very

young (2-6 years), as they want everything they see on TV and in the shops. While

children getting older they overcome this phase and think more precisely what they

need and want, as they understand the value of money better than very young

children. Some parents think the opposite way. They stated that pestering increases

with age as they watch more television and the competition among friends becomes

more important. A minority do not agree at all and believes it is in the hands of the

parents to be firm enough not to be under pressure to buy certain things.

19

Why do children pester? The majority of parents found that the biggest influences

are friends and the peer pressure at school. A mother of an 11-year and 15-year girl

blames peer pressure. ‘I am constantly buying expensive brand name clothing for my

girls. I almost always give in to their demands, as all their friends wear brands and

they would be bullied if they wore no-name clothing. I know, that bullying is a big

problem at schools, so I give in and let them wear what everyone else wears. If I don’t

buy them than they will start nagging until I will.’ The majority also agree that

television programs and adverts play an important role, as adverts for children are

mostly shown during the day when little children watch TV. ‘My son (6) loves

watching cartoons, and to my annoyance there are adverts every 10 minutes or so, so

he is constantly pestering me if he can have this or that.’ There was a total agreement

on the opinion that there should be separate standards and guidelines for advertising

to children. One father finds that television adverts are to blame for pestering

children, but that parents should watch television with their children so they can

explain to them that the adverts are only information for the consumer and that they

cannot have everything they see. Most of the parents agreed with him, but do not

think it would work when you have more than one little child. One mother responded:

‘In an ideal world it would work to watch TV together so you can explain everything

to your child, but when there is more than one child in the house it his hard to control.

I have other things to do than watching cartoons. Even with an only child it will be

bound to mix with other children and there is the peer pressure again. Let’s be honest,

TV can be a good babysitter now and then.’ It has been found that parents have also a

responsibility for pestering children. If they give in too easily than children have an

easy play to get what they want and to use their pester power.

To what extent do children respond to adverts? Mothers of children aged 5 and 7

find that watching children’s programs means a bombardment of adverts to their

young minds. They mostly see it as part of the program and enjoy watching the

adverts. They find that their children want an object they see straight away, but most

of the time they forget about it later. When they see it in the shops they remember it

and ask to have it. As adverts are very repetitive they got these pictures somehow

implanted in their mind and as soon as they see it in the shops or another child playing

with it they recall that advert. Some mothers found that very young children enjoy

watching the adverts and do not understand them fully. It is more when they see their

20

friends play with that toy or wear that clothing they saw on television that the desire

of possessing that certain item comes up. ‘It is not just the adverts that makes my

children nagging at me, but the fact that everybody else has it.’ One father claims that

he taught his child about the value of money at a very early stage. ‘When he wants an

expensive item, I explain to him what the week’s household budget is and what

money has to cover. I encourage him to save money and get him to earn at least some

of the money by taking on extra chores or special tasks. So if he really wants that toy

or clothing he saw in an advert he knows he has to earn it.’

Do adverts influence your buying decision? The majority of parents claim that the

influence of adverts is pretty strong. Most of them would not buy everything what is

on TV but it helps to know what your children are in to and therefore it helps to make

a buying decision. ‘Especially before Christmas, I purposely watch adverts for

children and the reaction of my children, so I can surprise them with the right

presents.’ Some parents said that they do not feel much influence from adverts when

watching them, but the children make sure they tell you all about it. A minority is the

opinion that they are not influenced by adverts at all. ‘My children normally use the

advert as a break to go to the toilet or to get something to drink or eat. Of course, it

happens that they ask if they can have this or that, but I refuse to buy the expensive

stuff and get something cheaper. The children have to learn about the value of money

now or they will never do.’ (Mother of an 8-year old boy and a 10-year old girl).

Should children be protected from advertising? I mentioned that in Sweden and

Norway any television advertising is prohibited to be directed towards children under

12 and no adverts at all are allowed during children’s programmes.

The majority of the asked parents agree with such measures and think it would be a

very good idea to forbid adverts to children especially during children’s programs.

‘The children are used as a tool for marketers to sell their products. They bombard

them with adverts during their programs to be sure they see it and make them to pester

their parents. At the end of the day, we as parents have to deal with our screaming

children, who wont leave the shop with a certain product they have seen on TV.’ A lot

of mothers thought it were exploitation and children should be protected as they

cannot protect themselves. If there weren’t constant adverts on TV then the children

would not know about it. ‘Those adverts should be forbidden during the day and at

21

night when the children are in bed the adverts should be used as a source of

information for parents.’ Some parents said that they should be reduced but not

forbidden, as children have to learn to deal with adverts. ‘If children were protected

from adverts now they will not learn how to deal with them later in life. And parents

should make sure that children concentrate more on school matters than watching TV

all day. It is up to the parents to reduce the hours spent in front of the television.’

Nevertheless, all the parents agreed that children should not be used in adverts for

adult products, like cars, washing powder etc.

Discussion

Evidence has been found to strengthen the argument that, to some extent at least,

Pester Power in young children does exist and that a majority of parents are

influenced by it. Evidence has been found in existing facts and figures on that subject

and the most compelling evidence lies in the results of the interview with parents of

young children. Most parents stated that the peer pressure and adverts were the main

factor and influence of Pester Power. The results of the study support former research

and findings by Greenberg (1986) for example, as he stated that young children talk

especially with their friends about adverts. In the opinion of the interviewed parents it

is true that exposure to adverts has a great effect on children as well as copying or

competing with peer members. The results also support that consumer socialisation

plays an important role in developing pester power and therefore the desire to obtain a

certain object children see on TV or within their social environment. This study

confirms McNeal’s hypothesis (1999) that children try to learn new and improved

ways of fulfilling their needs and desires by asking their parents for that object.

Parents feel that most requests stem from the child seeing the item on television and

among peers. We can conclude that children watch a lot of television today as

Sylvester, Schulmann and Clancy (1992, 1995) discovered already. The research also

found that the school has an important impact in marketing to children. Some parents

stated that the bullying at school seem to form children’s desires to wear only certain

brands and therefore there is a kind of pressure on the child to possess those brands.

They try to achieve it by telling their parents that they need to have that certain item

to keep out of trouble at school. School and peers are certainly linked as an influence

and support in pestering children, as the peer pressure mostly starts at school and goes

on after school during leisure time. My research also shows that parents are a certain

22

influence in children’s pestering and buying behaviour. They feel under pressure by

their pestering child and do not want to deprive them from certain things, ‘everybody

else’ has. Parents feel that marketers use the children’s programs and therefore target

them by their repetitive adverts, resulting in asking their parents again and again for a

certain product. That repetitive asking is seen as nagging and could be defined as

Pester Power as children use exactly that Power to ‘convince’ their parents to buy that

certain product. The theory of Vygotsky (1978) appears to be relevant in life today, as

he stated that children need instruction through social interaction to be helped in

understanding the world. As our and existing research show social agents such as

parents, school, peers and television have a great influence in the views how children

see the ‘world’. Children learn of new products by watching television and peers.

They let they parents know about the products they see and want to have them. Most

of the parents give in as they are pestered by their children and do not want to deprive

them and be an ‘outsider’ in front of their friends. Negotiations with children do not

seem to exist in replacement of Pester Power. Only one person interviewed thinks that

it is in a parent’s Power to control children’s behaviour and that Pester Power can be

prevented. The rest of the interviewed parents think that Pester Power is part of

today’s life and only can be controlled in its intensity.

In summary, this research looks at the influences in a young child’s life and to what

extend it and the social environment influences the parent. Furthermore it looked at

the fact if Pester Power is just a new marketing expression or if it really exists.

Various theories have been considered in order to explain these points, including a

conceptual model of consumer socialisation (Moschis & Churchill, 1978) and

Vygotsky’s theory of child development. By the primary research we found that the

secondary data has a lot of similarities.

Conclusion

It is the opinion of the author that Pester Power exists to a great extent. This

dissertation has dealt with the concept of child development and has found that the

understanding of that concept help us and marketers to reach a better understanding

how children see their environment and to what extent they recognize environmental

influences. By highlighting social agents, such as parents, peers, school and

television, the dissertation describes the main influences in marketing to children. The

23

primary research has supported the existence of these social agents and it has been

said that peers and television are the main influences and mostly lead to Pester Power.

The problem of this research is that the sample might not be representative for all

parents, as only a small part of parents in a small area of Greater Manchester has been

chosen.

Recommendations

It is suggested to conduct further research concerning the topic Pester Power. Future

research should expand on the number of parents considered in this study. Different

demographic characteristics of parents should also be considered, as our research only

interviewed parents in one part of Greater Manchester and can be seen as a group of a

similar demographic background.

Research could be conducted if Pester Power might be effected by gender differences.

Furthermore, differences between regions and even countries (cultural environment)

should be taken into consideration. For example, does Pester Power exist in other

countries and to what extent are there differences.

24

References

Baumrind, D. (1980), ‘New Directions in Socialization Research,’ American

Psychologist, 35, July, 639-652, cited in Carlson, L. and S. Grossbart (1988),

‘Parental style and consumer socialisation of children,’ Journal of Consumer

Research, 15, June, 77-94

Barrie Gunter and Adrian Furnham (1998), Children as Consumers, Routledge

Brown, A. L. Metz, K. E. Campione, J.C. (1996). Social interaction and individual

understanding in a community of learners: The influence of Piaget and Vygotsky. In

Piaget-Vygotsky: The Social Genesis of Thought. Anastasia Tryphon and Jacques

Voneche (Eds). Psychology Press.

Carlson, L. and S. Grossbart (1988), ‘Parental style and consumer socialisation of

children,’ Journal of Consumer Research, 15, June, pp77-94

Doyle, P.(1994), Marketing Management and Strategy, Prentice Hall

Grusec, J.E. and H. Lytton (1988), Social Development: History, theory, and

research, Springer-Verlag, New York

Goldstein, A. (1999). Children and advertising – The research. International Journal

of Advertising and Marketing to Children. Vol. 1 Number 2

Gorn, Gerhard.J., Renee Florchein, ‘The effects of commercials for adult products on

children’, Journal of consumer research. Vol 1, March 1985, p. 962-967

Gunter, B. and Furnham, A. (1998), Children as Consumers: A psychological analysis

of the young people’s market, Routledge

Maier, Henry W. (1978). Three theories of child development. University of

Washington, Harper and Row

McNeal, James U. (1992). Kids as Customers. Lexington Books

25

Moschis, G.P. (1985), ‘The role of family communication in consumer socialisation

of children and adolescents,’Jounal of Consumer Research, 15, Nov, 599-609

Moschis, G.P. and R.L. Moore (1979), ‘Decision making among the young: a

socialisation perspective,’ Journal of Consumer Research, 6, Sep, 101-112

Roedder John, D. (1999), ‘Consumer Socialization of Children: 25 Years of

Research,’ Journal of Consumer Research, 26,3,p. 183

Roedder John, D. (1999), ‘Through the Eyes of a Child: Children’s Knowledge and

Understanding of Advertising’ in Macklin, M. C. and L. Carson, eds, (1999),

Advertising to Children: Concepts and Controversies, Sage

Rossiter, J.R. ‘Children’s consumer research: A call for rigor’, Journal of consumer

research, June 89, p.16-23

Schafer, D.A. (1999), Developmental Psychology: Childhood and Adolescence, 5th

ed., ITP/Brooks/Cole, p.63-66

Smith, P.K. Cowie, H. Blades, M. (1999). Understanding Children’s Development,

3rd ed., Blackwell

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological

Processes. Harvard.

Ward, S. (1974), ‘Consumer Socialisation,’ Journal of Consumer Research, 1, Sep, 1-

14

Wood, D. (1998), How Children Think and Learn, 2nd ed., Blackwell

26

Other Sources

http://www.co-op.co.uk/

http://www.bctf.ca/bctfnews/archive/2000-01/2001-01-10.html#5

http://www.inquirer.net/issues/oct2000/oct20/features/fea_main.htm

http://www.asa.org.uk/issues/bckground_briefings/show_briefing.asp?briefing_ik=13

27

Appendix

The British Codes of Advertising and Sales Promotion concerning Children by

the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)

There are many regulations and guidelines over advertising, including how

advertisements might affect children. TV and radio advertisements are pre-vetted

using guidelines formulated and enforced by the ITC and RA. Non-broadcast

advertisements are subject to self-regulatory guidelines administered by the

Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).

The effect of advertising on children and the use of children in advertisements are

sensitive issues. The British Codes of Advertising and Sales Promotion - the self-

regulatory guidelines written by the advertising industry - include vital requirements

in this area. When dealing with complaints about advertisements featuring or aimed at

children, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is guided by the following basic

principle:

“Advertisements should contain nothing which is likely to result in physical, mental

or moral harm to children, or to exploit their credulity, lack of experience or sense of

loyalty”.

Today’s consumer receives hundreds of advertising messages each day. Adults can

view these with a sceptical eye, but children are more vulnerable. The Codes contain

special rules for advertisers who target this group:

Pester Power: A crucial requirement of the Codes is that advertisements targeting

children should not actively encourage them to make a nuisance of themselves to

parents or others. One magazine advertisement for a children’s TV channel was

criticised by the ASA for suggesting that children without access to it should

complain to their parents

Easy to understand: Advertisers should clearly state the price of a product featured

and should not exaggerate its appeal or performance. A toy, for instance, must not be

shown to be larger than it really is. Complex issues should not be over-simplified: in

1998 complaints were upheld about an advertisement which implied that a diet

involving breakfast cereal could help to stop overweight children being bullied.

28

Direct appeals: Goods, which are considered too expensive for the majority of

children to buy, should not be advertised to children. An electronics firm advertising

computer software at prices starting from £40 in a children’s publication was

criticised by the ASA; most children would not be able to afford them.

Nuisance: Advertisements should not actively encourage children to make a nuisance

of themselves to their parents or others. Neither should they make children feel

inferior or unpopular for not buying the advertised product. The ASA recently upheld

a complaint against an advertisement, which showed a grinning boy being scowled at

enviously by two other boys, whose faces had been, shaded green. The headline read:

‘Who’s Got The New [Computer]. Then?’

Responsible: Advertisements should not encourage children to eat or drink at or near

bedtime, to eat frequently throughout the day or to replace main meals with sweets

and snacks.

Parental permission: Advertisements should make clear to children that they must

obtain permission to buy complex or expensive products. For promotions where the

prizes may cause a conflict between parent and child, consent is also required.

Advertising Which Features Children:

The safety of children is of paramount importance in advertisements. Advertisements

must not, either by message or example, lead a child into a potentially dangerous

situation. The Code details a number of specific requirements in this area. The general

rule is that:

“Children should not be encouraged to copy any practice that might be unsafe for a

child”.

Advertisements should not encourage children to talk to strangers or enter strange

places. Children should not be depicted unattended in street scenes or be shown

playing in the road unless they are old enough to be responsible for their own safety.

Likewise, they should always be seen to observe the Highway Code. Children should

not be shown using or in close proximity to dangerous substances such as medicines

or equipment such as electrical appliances, without direct adult supervision.

29

Subject, Context And Choice Of Media:

Advertisers would break the Codes if their approach were violent or capable of

disturbing young readers. In judging such complaints, the Authority takes into

account the context in which the advertisement appeared and the relevance of the

advertisers’ approach.

Source: http://www.asa.org.uk/issues/background_briefings/index.asp

30