Parental Perception of the Impact of t.v Advertisement on Childrens Buying Behaviour

The IUP Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. IX, Nos. 1 & 2, 201040

Parental Perception of the Impactof Television Advertisements

on Children’s Buying Behavior

IntroductionAccording to a recent survey in the US,children spend more time watchingtelevision than they do anything else andchildren between ages of 6 and 14 watchabout 25 hours of television per week andare exposed to 20,000 commercials in asingle year. Television advertisementsstimulate wants in children and they pesterparents for advertised products (Leonhardtand Kerwin, 1997). Children in the

© 2010 IUP. All Rights Reserved.

About the Authors1 Lecturer and Program Coordinator, Daly College Business School, Residency Area, Daly College

Campus, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India; and is the corresponding author.E-mail: [email protected]

2 Student, Daly College Business School, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India; and pursuing BA (Hons.)Business Studies degree from Leicester Business School, DeMontfort University, UK. Specializing inMarketing. E-mail: [email protected]



modern society have assumed larger rolesin their homes and are involved in theshopping and buying decisions. In the US,children under the age of 12 are estimatedto influence $130-670 bn in the familypurchases (Schor, 2006) As children areexposed to several advertisements, theyacquire product-related information whichtranslates into increased purchase requestsby them.

Parents believe that television advertisements are changing the pattern and behavior ofchildren. They have negative impact on children since children demand, nag and pestertheir parents to purchase the advertised product. Television advertisements are animportant factor which drives their product choice and inculcate unhealthy eating habitsin them. The present study indicates that Indian children love watching television andprefer it over social interaction, physical and developmental activities. It also indicatesthat TV advertisements provide children knowledge about products and brands.It demonstrates that children demand more of the product whose advertisements theylike. The study was carried out in Indore, a city of Central India, using a sample size of300 parents and the data were collected through a structured questionnaire.

Manish Mittal1, Anisha Daga2, Ginni Chhabra3

and Jyoti Lilani4

41Parental Perception of the Impact of Television Advertisementson Children’s Buying Behavior

In India, too, Television has come up in ahuge way and advertising is a hugemultimillion dollar industry that has anenormous impact on the development of achild (Clay, 2000). Parents believe thatthere is change in the pattern and behaviorof children when they watch televisionadvertisements. Television advertisementshave a negative impact on children sincewhenever they come across anadvertisement, they demand, nag andpester their parents to purchase theadvertised product. Refusal of such requestsoften results in conflict and deterioratesparents’ relationship with their children.They think that children need some kindof protection from advertisements;otherwise advertisers will exploit theircredulity and loyalty (Sullivan, 2005).This is the reason many countries have triedto control advertising through certainregulations. Norway has introduced a totalban on television advertising directed atchildren. In Sweden, televisionadvertisements are banned for childrenunder the age of 12 years. Australia doesnot allow advertisements on televisionduring programs for pre-schoolers.Countries like Greece have proclaimed apartial ban on advertising, prohibiting toyadvertising between 7 am and 10 pm. Onthe other hand, in countries like Indiamarketers are increasingly targetingchildren because they find children are theonly market segment that do not changetheir preferences rapidly and are easy toinfluence through advertisements.

Television advertising offers product andbrand-related ideas and information tochildren that results in purchase requestto parents (Sullivan, 2005). This issue—to what extent television advertisements

are effective in defining and changing thebuying behavior of children—is worthinvestigating, and has motivated us toundertake this study. The section after'Introduction' presents a brief review ofrelevant literature. The section thereafterdescribes the methodology of the study.Analysis and results are presented next,followed by conclusion in the end.

Literature ReviewMany earlier researches have concludedthat children participation in familypurchase decision is increasing andtelevision advertisements are playingimportant role in defining their productchoice and buying behavior pattern.Kunkel et al. (2004) reported thattelevision advertisements are effective ininfluencing children who lack the relevantknowledge, but still want their parents toget them endless array of products whichthey have seen in advertisements. Televisioncommercials are also changing children’seating habits. Unhealthy and junk foodcommercials have resulted in theirincreasing demand among the children.This has resulted in parents’ negativeattitude towards television advertisements.Spungin (2004) concluded thatadvertisements play vital role in moldingeating habits of children in UK. Around80% of mothers agreed that they had beenrequested to buy the advertised productsby their children and also agreed that iftheir children asked them to buy certainfood product it was because of theadvertisements. The results of his studyshowed high level of acceptance ofadvertisements among parents, but only asmall segment of them showed positiveattitude—9% of the parents agreed that


advertisements offer their children a chanceto learn and 6% agreed that it providesproper knowledge about the products.While 84% of the parents claimed thatadvertising manipulates children.

Galst and White (1976) and Stonemanand Brody (1982) in their studies madean attempt to measure the efficacy oftelevision advertising in shaping thepurchase-related behavior of children. Theyexposed children to food advertising in anexperimental situation and then observedthe effectiveness of food advertisements ininfluencing selection of products andbrands in a natural situation (whileshopping with their mothers). In a similarstudy Reeves and Atkin (1979) alsoobserved children’s behavior whileshopping, but the children were exposedimmediately prior to the shopping trip, totelevision advertising in general and notonly to food advertising. All three of themobserved a strong correlation between‘purchase influence attempts’ with totalnumber of hours of commercial televisionwatched per week.

Buijzen and Valkenburg (2003) found thattelevision commercials lead to increase innumber of requests for advertised productswhich also increases number of productdenials because parents cannot honor allrequests made by their children. This makesthe child unhappy. They observed a directrelationship between unhappiness andexposure to commercials. This may also bebecause when a child watches anadvertisement, he compares his situationwith the idealized world in the commercialsand the gap between the two makes himunhappy.

Similarly, Wilson and Wood (2004) andHansen et al. (2005) found that television

advertisements targeted at children forcethem to nag their parents due to theincrease in desire in them to acquire theadvertised product, thereby influencing thefamily buying decisions. Due to theconstant exposure of children to televisionadvertisements, they are able todifferentiate between good and badproducts and are in the situation toconvince their parents easily to purchasethe product they desire (Wilson and Wood,2004). Their research study points thatparents have agreed to the fact thatchildren play a very imperative role ininfluencing decisions of the family,sometimes parents even seek theirchildren’s advice. For example, manyparents (71%) consult their children whenthey want to purchase computers.

The Indian ContextIndian culture is collectivistic which meansthat Indians emphasize their self asrelational and interdependent within-group members such as family andrelatives (Hofstede, 1980; Verma, 1999;and cited in Mukherji, 2005).Traditionally, the joint family system wasthe dominant form of family with multi-generations living together. However, withmodernization and migration to urbanareas, the joint family is giving way tonuclear family structures (Mukherji,2005). Another development which hastaken place in the recent years is that, theproportion of women in the workforce hasincreased tremendously. This has caused ashift in the role of purchase agent for thefamily from women to children. Childrenare increasingly becoming the ‘buyers’ forthe entire family. In most of the Indianfamilies children are consulted not only for


buying the products which are intendedto be consumed by them but also for theproducts not meant for them.

Children in India represent the directpurchase powers for the kid’s products.According to the statistics given byIndiantelevision.com (2006), childrendrive 84-96% purchase decision forthemselves and their family for theproducts like ice creams, candies, books,etc., which are for their direct consumption(Figure 1). Their powers go far beyond.Children have indirect purchase influencefor big-ticket items like computers, mobiles,refrigerator, washing machine and otherconsumer durables. Cartoon Networkundertook the study to understand kids’influence on purchase decision for 27consumables and 10 durables covering3,253 children and 735 mothers in 14prime cities of India and the results werestriking. Children drive 10-32% of thepurchase decision for durables (Figure 2).

The survey demonstrates that the Indiankids are becoming far more judicious. Theyhave more knowledge about product thantheir parents especially for products likeTVs and computers. In homes whereparents are old or are in the lower level inthe company, children tend to invariablyknow more than their parents (John,2002). Children in such homes play acritical role in category as well as brandpurchase decisions.

Television viewing tops the list of preferredactivities among Indian children. A surveyby AC Nielson also showed that on anaverage an Indian child watches TV forabout three hours on weekdays and 3.7hours on weekends and the time spent infront of television increases with age (TheChild, Branded, 2004). Television plays animportant role in influencing purchasedecision of children in India. A study doneby Media Consumer Insights division ofcommunications services major Group M

Figure 1: Kids’ Influence on Spending [Kids InfluencePurchases Made for Themselves/The Family

(% Moms Claiming They Consult Children/Children Choose)]

Source: Indiantelevision.com

Ice

Cre

am

Can

dy

Gam

es/T

oys

Che

win

g G

um

Juic

e D

rink

s

Salt

y Sn

aks

Scho

olSu

pplie

s

Coo

kies

Boo

ks

96

94

92

90

88

86

84

82

80

78Products

% o

f P

urc

has

e D

ecis

ion


which covered about 700 respondents in13 countries revealed that Televisionadvertising influences the purchasedecision of the Indian children the mostwith 77% of the respondents indicatingtelevision advertising as key influencerdriving children’s purchase decision (TVAds Influence Kids Most, 2003).Bandyopadhyay (2001) also foundchildren to be an important audience whowatch television and influence familypurchase decisions and so marketers arenow targeting them. Television commercialslead to frequent demand for the advertisedproduct and 61% of the parents succumbto the demands of children. Dudani et al.(2006) in their study found 90% of theparents agreeing that children play animportant role in family’s buying decisions.About 95% of the parents said their kidswatch television for two to three hours aday and during holidays it goes up to fourto five hours a day. Around 99% of theparents agreed that the frequency ofwatching television is too high and kids

carry that influence for a long time with45% parents agreeing that advertising isthe major tool which influences the opinionbuilding process of their children. Whenkids were asked what they do when parentsdon’t get them the product they want, 95%of the kids said they nag, cry loud till theirparents surrender. But the parentalperception on the impact of televisionadvertisements on buying behavior ofchildren in India has not been studied bythe researchers extensively; this is the reasonwhy we have selected this topic for ourresearch.

MethodologyObjectivesThe objectives of the study are to studyparental perception about:

• Whether their children like watchingtelevision and the number of hours theirchildren spend before television onweekdays (school days) and onweekends and vacations (non-schooldays).

Figure 2: Kids’ Influence on Spending [Kids Influence Purchasesfor Durables (% Moms Claiming They Consult Children/Seek Their Advice)]

Source: Indiantelevision.com

Tele

visi

on

Com

pute

r

Mus

ic

Syst

em

Bic

ycle

s

Ref

rige

rato

r

Car

Mob

ileP

hone

Mic

row

ave

Ove

n

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Durables

% o

f P

urc

has

e D

ecis

ion


• Whether children prefer watchingtelevision over talking to their friends,playing outdoor games and studying.

• The role played by children in familypurchase decisions.

• The most influential factor drivingchildren’s purchase decision (demandfor a product).

• Impact of television advertisements ontheir children (whether televisionadvertisements are increasing children’sknowledge of brands and products,encouraging unhealthy food habits,increasing purchase requests andturning them into naggers).

• What category of productadvertisement their children likewatching the most and whether ittranspires into demand for the same.

Tools of Data Collection andAnalysisThe study employs primary data collectedby communicating with the parents withthe help of a structured questionnaire.Before undertaking the survey, pilot surveywas undertaken with 40 parents. Theirviews were incorporated in the finalquestionnaire. The survey was carried outin Indore city (in Central India) duringFebruary-March 2008. The studyemployed non-probabilistic quotasampling. In the sample size of 300, 150fathers and 150 mothers were surveyed.The analysis of data was carried out usingStatistical Package for the Social Sciences(SPSS) 15.0 for Windows.

A closed-ended questionnaire was used forthe purpose of data collection. To determine

the average television viewing we asked aclosed-ended question to the children—how many hours on an average do theywatch television daily. They were presentedfour alternatives—less than 1 hour, 1-2hours, more than 2 hours but less than 3hours, and 3 hours and above. Theresponses were collected separately forschool days and non-school days. Theparental perceptions of various issuesselected for the study were collected on a5-point Likert scale (1-strongly agree;5-strongly disagree). Through the last partof the questionnaire the demographicdetails of the participants like their gender,number of children and gender of thechildren were collected.

Analysis of Data and Results

Children’s Television ViewingHabit

The findings for parental perception aboutthe television watching habits of theirchildren are shown in Figure 3 andTable 1. Parents believe that their childrenlove watching television. About 85% of theparents agreed when asked about it. Theyalso indicated that their children watchtelevision on an average of 2.48 hours onschooldays and 3.47 hours on non-schooldays.

Parents also perceive that their childrenprefer watching television over moredesirable physical, social and developmentactivities. Around 60% of the participatingparents agreed that their children preferwatching television over talking to theirfriend (with 29% strongly agreeing to it).They also agreed (48% of them) thatchildren prefer television viewing over


playing outdoor games with 21.7%agreeing strongly to it. The most concerningfactor from parents’ point of view is thatthey find their children preferringtelevision watching over their studies. Awhopping 68.3% of the parents believethat their children prefer to spend timebefore television than studying with 37%of the parents strongly believing it.Table 2 presents results of our analysis.

Children’s Buying BehaviorParents agree that the present day childrenplay an important role in family buyingdecision. About 73.3% of the parentrespondents agree that their children areconsulted and heard for during familypurchases which indicate childrendominance in family purchase decisions.Parents’ responses are summarized inTable 3 and presented in Figure 4.

Figure 3: Children Enjoy Watching Television

300

200

100

0

Do Your Children Enjoy Watching TV?

Freq

uen

cy

NoYes

Table 1: Average Television Viewing Time of Children

N Mean Std. Deviation

How many hours in a day do your childrenwatch TV on schooldays? 300 2.4800 1.16653

How many hours in a day do your childrenwatch TV daily on non-schooldays? 300 3.4767 1.29681

Valid N (listwise) 300 – –

Table 2: Children’s Preference for Television Viewing

Talking To 87 93 28 60 322.5233 1.36956

Friends 29.0% 31.0% 9.3% 20.0% 10.7%

Playing 65 79 16 110 302.8700 1.37334

Outdoor Games 21.7% 26.3% 5.3% 36.7% 10.0%

Studying 94 111 27 43 252.3133 1.27825

31.3% 37.0% 9.0% 14.3% 8.3%

Prefer TVOver

StronglyAgree

Agree Can’tSay

Disagree StronglyDisagree Mean

Std.Deviation


There are many factors which affectchildren’s product choice/demand. When theparents were asked to identify the mostinfluential factor driving their children’spurchase decision, they indicated thattelevision advertisement is the mostimportant factor influencing the demand fora product among children with 38.7% of the

participating parents choosing it over otheroptions. Peers (Friends) were also found tobe very influential with 33.7% of the parentspicking it over other factors. Other factorslike radio, comics, hoarding and sibling werenot found to be very influential in drivingthe demand of a product. The results areshown in Figure 5.

Table 3: Children’s Role in Family Buying Decisions

Frequency Percent Mean Std. Deviation

Valid Strongly Agree 111 37.0 – –

Agree 109 36.3 – –

Can’t Say 29 9.7 – –

Disagree 36 12.0 – –

Strongly Disagree 15 5.0 – –

Total 300 100.0 2.1167 1.17800

Figure 4: Children’s Role in Family Buying Decisions

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Do Children Play Major Role in Family Buying Decisions?

Freq

uen

cy

StronglyAgree

Agree Can’tSay

Disagree StronglyDisagree

Figure 5: What Drives Demand for a Product in Children?

Factors Driving Children’s Demand of a Product

Freq

uen

cy

Radio TVAdvertise-

ments

Sibling Others

120100

80604020

0HoardingsComicsFriends


Impact of TelevisionAdvertisements on BuyingBehavior of ChildrenTable 4 summarizes the findings of impactof television advertisements on children’sbuying behavior. Parents strongly agree(49.3%) that television advertisements helpin economic socialization of children byadding to their knowledge of products andbrands with another 35.7% agreeing withthe statement. Parents believe that foodadvertisements on television are inculcatingunhealthy eating habits in their childrenwith 44% of the responding parentsstrongly agreeing with it and another 29%of them agreeing with it. They also agreethat TV advertisements tend to increasepurchase request of children. When theysee a product advertisement they want toown it resulting in purchase request toparents. Around 36.7% of the parentsstrongly agree and 41.7% agree that TVadvertisements are instrumental inincreasing purchase request of their

children. Parents, obviously cannot fulfillall and frequent requests made by theirchildren. The refusal to buy the productmakes children nag with their parents tobuy them the advertised product. Parentshold TV advertisement responsible forturning their children into naggers. In oursurvey 32.3% strongly agree with thestatement that TV advertisements areturning children into naggers with another36.0% agreeing with it.

We also investigated from the parentswhich product category advertisementstheir children like watching the most andwhether the children demand thoseproducts. The findings are as follows.Figure 6 show that children like chocolateadvertisements the most followed bysnacks advertisements. It also reveals thatfood advertisements are liked by childrenmore than any other product category.Figure 7 indicates that children’s likingfor a product advertisement translates

Table 4: Impact of TV Advertisements on Children’s Buying Behavior

TVAdvertisements

StronglyAgree

Agree Can’tSay

Disagree StronglyDisagree Mean

Std.Deviation

Add value tochildren’sknowledge ofbrands andproducts

Encourageunhealthyfood habits

Increasepurchaserequests ofchildren

Turnchildren intonaggers

148 107 21 14 101.770 1.000

49.3% 35.7% 7.0% 4.7% 3.3%

132 87 29 44 82.030 1.169

44.0% 29.0% 9.7% 14.7% 2.7%

110 125 21 33 112.033 1.099

36.7% 41.7% 7.0% 11.0% 3.7%

97 108 40 43 122.216 1.160

32.3% 36.0% 13.3% 14.3% 4.0%


into its demand. About 72.3% of theparents agree that their children demand

interaction with television and televisionadvertisements and their impact on

Figure 7: Children’s Demand for the ProductWhose Advertisements They Like

Demand More of the Product

Freq

uen

cy

No

250

200

150

100

50

Yes Missing

Figure 6: Product Category Advertisements Children Like the Most

200

150

100

Product Category

Freq

uen

cy

Chocolate Stationery Snacks Others

more of the product whose advertisementthey like.

ConclusionThe study provides important insights intoparental perception of their children’s

children’s buying behavior. The studyindicates that parents accept that theirchildren love watching television for longhours. They on an average watch televisionfor 2.48 hours on weekdays and 3.47 hourson weekends. The children also prefer


spending time before television thanengaging themselves in talking to friendsor playing outdoor games or studying. Theparents also believe that children areincreasingly playing important role infamily buying decision and televisionadvertisements are the most importantfactor affecting children’s demand for aproduct. The study also reveals thatchildren demand more of the productwhose advertisement they like. Parentsconsider television advertisementsresponsible for changing their children’sbehavior. They feel that TV advertisementsdo help in economic socialization of theirchildren by providing them relevantknowledge about brands and products butalso are changing their food habits, makingthem demand the advertised products morefrequently and turning them into naggersto fulfill their demands. Of all the productcategories, children like watching food(chocolates and snacks) advertisements themost. But the limitations of the researchare that the data were drawn from a singletime period and a single region of Indiaand studied limited product categories.Thus, future research should validate thesefindings using other times, cities andproduct categories.

Nevertheless, the study provides evidencethat parents perceive that TVadvertisements help in economicsocialization process of children byproviding them relevant knowledge aboutbrands and products. So they will notrecommend a ban on TV advertisementstargeted to children. As consumers, thechildren need to learn how to make choices,to collect relevant information and assessand compare products. Advertising willcertainly help in all these. There is a needto make children understand the intention

of advertising in their early stage ofdevelopment so that they can becomebetter at using the advertisementsconstructively.

The serious issue is that televisionadvertisements are changing eating habitsof children. In our research we find that ofall the product categories children like theadvertisements of chocolates and snacksand they demand more of these products.The results are consistent with priorresearch (Kelly et al., 2002) whichindicates that advertising for a brand tendsto increase desire for the product category.Both may not be considered ‘good forchildren’, but neither are theyinappropriate products that the law wouldprohibit selling to children. Much of thepublic policy literature has dealt withexposure of children to advertising for adultproducts such as cigarettes, alcohol, etc.By comparison, advertising for foodproducts that may contribute to childobesity seems tame, but child obesity is agrowing concern in developed countriesworldwide (Bridges and Briesch, 2006).Using the results of our research we cansay that advertising food category brandsis likely to increase the desire for theproduct among the children. Thus, thefood category would appear to be the mosteffective level for any public policyintervention. To make children aware of thehealth hazards consumer educationalcampaigns and product labeling may alsobe used. J

References1. Bandyopadhyay S (2001), “Is

Television Advertising Good forChildren: Areas of Concern and PolicyImplications”, International Journal ofAdvertising, Vol. 20, No. 1,pp. 89-116.


2. Bridges E and Briesch R A (2006),“The ‘Nag Factor’ and Children’sProduct Categories”, InternationalJournal of Advertising, Vol. 25, No. 2,pp. 157-187.

3. Buijzen M and Valkenburg P (2003),“The Impact of Television Advertisingon Materialism, Parent-Child Conflict,and Unhappiness: A Review ofResearch”, Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology , Vol. 24,No. 4, pp. 437-456.

4. Clay R A (2000), “Advertising toChildren: Is it Ethical?”, Monitor onPsychology, Vol. 31, No. 8, September.

5. Dudani C, Chandak K and Soni A(2006), “Role of Children inAdvertising”, Working Paper, IndiraInstitute of Management, Pune,available at http://www.indiainfoline.com/content/bschool/Students_Corner/2006/05/30052006/role.pdf, accessed on15/2/2008.

6. Galst J P and White M A (1976), “TheUnhealthy Persuader: The ReinforcingValue of Television and Children’sPurchase-Influencing Attempts at theSupermarket”, Child Development ,Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 1089-1096.

7. Hansen F, Nielsen J and ChristansenP (2005), “Children’s Influence UponFamily Purchase Decision Making”,Working paper, Copenhagen BusinessSchool, available at http://www.warc.com/LandingPages/Generic/Results.asp?Ref=344, accessed on18/2/08.

8. Hofstede G (1980), Culture’sConsequences: International Differences in

Work-Related Values, Beverly Hills,Sage Publications, California; cited inMukherji J (2005), “MaternalCommunication Patterns, AdvertisingAttitudes and Mediation Behaviors inUrban India”, Journal of MarketingCommunications, Vol. 11, No. 4,pp. 247-262.

9. Indiantelevision.com (2006), “KidPower: Excerpts from the IndianSurvey”, available at http://w w w. i n d i a n t e l e v i s i o n . c o m /marketdatabase /demographics /kidpower.htm, accessed on December15.

10. John S (2002), “Marketers Bow toMighty Kid Power”, The Times of India,February 2, available at http://t i m eso f i nd i a . i nd i a t i m es . c om/a rt i c l esh ow /1 2 38 58 0 44 4 .cms ,accessed on January 1, 2007.

11. Kelly K J, Slater M D and Karan D(2002), “Image Advertisements’Influence on Adolescents’ Perceptionsof the Desirability of Beer andCigarettes”, Journal of Public Policy andMarketing, Vol. 21, No. 2,pp. 295-304.

12. Kunkel D, Wilcox B L, Cantor J, PalmerE et al. (2004), “Psychological Issuesin the Increasing Commercialization ofChildhood”, Report of the APA taskforce on advertising and children,available at http://www.apa.org/releases/childrenads.pdf, accessed on15/2/2008.

13. Leonhardt D and Kerwin K (1997),“Hey Kid, Buy This!”, Business Week,June 30, pp. 62-67.

14. Mukherji J (2005), “MaternalCommunication Patterns, Advertising


Attitudes and Mediation Behaviors inUrban India”, Journal of MarketingCommunications, Vol. 11, No. 4,pp. 247-262.

15. Reeves B and Atkin C K (1979), “TheEffects of Television Advertising onMother-Child Interactions at theGrocery Store”, Paper Presented at the62nd Annual Meeting of the Associationfor Education in Journalism, August5-8, Houston, Texas, available at http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/32/9e/91.pdf, accessedon 25/2/2008.

16. Schor J B (2006), “Regulation,Awareness, Empowerment, YoungPeople and Harmful Media Contentin the Digital Age”, Nordicom,p. 103, June.

17. Spungin P (2004), “Parent Power, NotPester Power”, Young Consumers, Vol. 5,No. 3.

18. Stoneman Z and Brody G H (1982),“The Indirect Impact of Child-OrientedAdvertisements on Mother-ChildInteractions”, Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology, Vol. 2, No. 4,pp. 369-376.

19. Sullivan T (2005), “Advertising andChildren: What do the Kids Think?”,International Journal of Market Research,Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 371-384.

20. The Child, Branded (2004),Exchange4media Chennai Bureau,Hindustan Times, March 1, available athttp://www.exchange4media.com/Kids/KidsFullStory.asp?section_id=24&news_id=11101&tag=5765,accessed on January 3, 2007.

21. TV Ads Influence Kids Most (2003),The Hindu Business Line, December 9,available at http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2003/12/09/stories/2003120902110600.htm, accessed on January 2, 2007.

22. Verma J (1999), “Collectivism in theCultural Perspective: The IndianScene”, in Lasry J C, Adair J and DionK (Eds.) Latest Contributions to Cross-Cultural Psychology, pp. 228-241, Swetsand Zetlinger, Lisse, The Netherlands;cited in Mukherji J (2005), “MaternalCommunication Patterns, AdvertisingAttitudes and Mediation Behaviors inUrban India”, Journal of MarketingCommunications, Vol. 11, No. 4,pp. 247-262.

23. Wilson G and Wood K (2004), “TheInfluence of Children on ParentalPurchases During SupermarketShopping”, International Journal ofConsumer Studies, Vol. 28, No. 4,pp. 329-336.


Research Questionnaire

1. Do your children like watching television?

Yes No

2. How many hours on an average do your children watch television daily?

3. Do your children prefer watching television over-

4. Do your children play an important role in family purchase decision?

5. What according to you is the most influential factor affecting children’s purchasedecision?

Annexure

Talking to friends

Playing outdoor

Games

Studying

StronglyAgree Agree

Can’tSay Disagree Strongly

Disagree

School days Less than 1 hour 1-2 hours 2-3 hours More than 3 hours

Holidays Less than 1 hour 1-2 hours 2-3 hours More than 3 hours

StronglyAgree

Agree Disagree StronglyDisagree

Nither AgreeNor Disagree

Friends

Comics

Radio

Hoardings

TV advertisements

Siblings

Others

.


6. State your level of agreement with the following statements?

7. Advertisements of which product category do your children like watching themost? (Please tick)

8. Children demand the product more whose advertisement they like? (Please tick)

Annexure (Cont.)

StronglyAgree Agree Can’t

Say DisagreeStronglyDisagree

TV Advertisementsadd value tochildren’s knowledgeof brands andproducts

TV Advertisementsencourage unhealthyfood habits inchildren

TV Advertisementsincrease purchaserequests of children

TV Advertisementsturn children intonaggers

Chocolate

Stationery

Snacks

Others

StronglyAgree

Agree Disagree StronglyDisagree

Nither AgreeNor Disagree

Reference # 03J-2010-02/05-03-01

Copyright of IUP Journal of Marketing Management is the property of IUP Publications and its content may not

be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Parental Perception of the Impact of t.v Advertisement on Childrens Buying Behaviour

Documents

Transcript of Parental Perception of the Impact of t.v Advertisement on Childrens Buying Behaviour