If you're new here, you may want to learn what this site is about. I encourage you to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
How powerful is marketing? How young are we when we first feel its effects? Can marketing really change the way we perceive the things we buy? Earlier today I shared a passage from Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink that explored how marketing works. A recent study funded by Stanford University and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation demonstrated that advertising influences even young children.
Lindsey Tanner of the Associated Press writes:
Anything made by McDonald’s tastes better, preschoolers said in a study that powerfully demonstrates how advertising can trick the taste buds of young children. Even carrots, milk and apple juice tasted better to the kids if it was wrapped in the familiar packaging of the Golden Arches.
[...]
Study author Dr. Tom Robinson said the kids’ perception of taste was “physically altered by the branding.” The Stanford University researcher said it was remarkable how children so young were already so influenced by advertising. The study involved 63 low-income children ages 3 to 5 from Head Start centers in San Mateo County, Calif. Robinson believes the results would be similar for children from wealthier families.
The study included three McDonald’s menu items — hamburgers, chicken nuggets and french fries — and store-bought milk or juice and carrots. Children got two identical samples of each food on a tray, one in McDonald’s wrappers or cups and the other in plain, unmarked packaging. The kids were asked if they tasted the same or if one was better. (Some children didn’t taste all the foods.)
McDonald’s-labeled samples were the clear favorites. French fries were the biggest winner; almost 77% said the labeled fries tasted best while only 13% preferred the others. Fifty-four percent preferred McDonald’s-wrapped carrots versus 23% who liked the plain-wrapped sample.
When I see my young friends who love Thomas the Tank Engine and Bob the Builder, I wonder how they’d feel about generic toys of the same nature. Are the kids obsessed with the stuff because of the branding? Or do they just like trains and construction equipment? And what about those Disney princesses? I suspect there’s some of both going on, but that marketing plays a key role in creating desire, in creating young consumers.
[USA Today: Marketing tricks tots' taste buds]



August 13th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Over 20 years ago, a friend’s elementary school class performed an experiment during a field trip. Half the class got a “large” french fries from McD’s, and 1/2 got “regular” french fries. The students counted the french fries before eating them and reported to the teacher.
In each case, the “regular” size actually had more fries than the “large”.
Naturally, this meant whenever any of the students when to McD’s, they’d demand that their parents buy them a “regular” because they wanted MORE FRIES than the “large” size. Loudly. My friend said the loudness was very important, so as to make sure one would have the chance to educate other patrons.
I don’t think those kids were very popular at McD’s.
August 13th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
I’d like to see how my child would do on the results. We don’t eat at McDonald’s and he is not allowed to watch TV that included branded characters (no Dora…just educational PBS fare from shows that have no licensed characters). I will pay more to buy him things that don’t have characters or brand names on them. He *does* like to eat out, but he isn’t allowed chicken nuggets or fries. (If we get fries, we share one order among the family.) He’s still a preschooler, so I know he’ll be influenced by outside groups over time. But, for now, I bet he wouldn’t pick the McDonald’s stuff.
August 13th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
This kind of study is scary. I have a one year old and I’m hoping to hold off on things like McD’s for as long as possible but I know that inevitably he’ll end up being a fan.
I guess I have to work on my cooking skills so he’ll want to eat at home!
Mike
August 14th, 2007 at 4:54 am
In relation to toy branding I’d have to agree 100% that children are affected.
In fact I was pleasantly surprised that I enjoyed The Transformers movie sooo much b/c it started reminding me of fun times from my childhood. A favorite game of mine I play with new people is actually talking about some dorky cartoons growing up…someone made a fortune on my childhood.
August 14th, 2007 at 4:59 am
My two-year-old son put it well one day while he was in front of the TV. He told my wife, “big hamburger”, then asked with the cutest smile, “McDonalds, please!”.
August 14th, 2007 at 5:18 am
If the brand is associated with quality, then the brand preference is fine.
But in many cases, it isn’t. And kids are especially susceptible to the whole “BrandX is better than NoBrand” phenomenon.
This can be applied to grocery shopping too. Buying store brands can save you a lot of money on your groceries.
August 14th, 2007 at 6:50 am
I’m not sure whether I should be proud or ashamed that I’ve only heard my two-year-old recognize three brand names:
1.) Koigu
2.) Red Bull (no, she’s not allowed to drink it)
3.) Whole Foods (there are only so many places her MSG-intolerant celiac mom can eat lunch out and, uh, that’s one of them).
JenK, I *love* your story.
And count us in the no TV bandwagon. (We have one, but no cable — it’s in the basement so we can watch the odd DVD. The spawn’s never watched any. And we’re not McD’s fans, so she’s never been there.)
August 14th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Sociologist Juliet Schor has written a really good (and readable) book about the problem of marketing to children, called “Born to Buy: The Commercialized Child and the New Consumer Culture.” See: http://www2.bc.edu/~schorj/
August 14th, 2007 at 11:02 am
My daughter has mostly watched PBS and Animal Planet - although she’s only experienced TV with commercials during the past year or so (she’s 6.5). Recently we went to McDonald’s with a relative for a “treat.” My daughter nibbled desultorily on a McNugget and told me it tasted “weird,” then insisted on trading for the grilled chicken off of my salad. She doesn’t like fries and refused the toy with her happy meal because it was a plastic Hello Kitty thing that she wouldn’t use. (She REALLY had to fight the clerk on that one.) I was impressed with her self-determination - and I think it’s because she’s had so little brand influence, she just doesn’t care. It’s kind of dumbfounding to me — as a kid, I would have been one of the McDonald’s kids, I think.
August 15th, 2007 at 11:09 am
My 2 year old is just now starting to show brand preference. He loves to watch Thomas, but we bought the generic wooden train set and he loves to play with that. But when we visit the toy store, he goes straight for the Thomas branded stuff.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:54 am
I’m hesitant to believe this study has any validity whatsoever– if anything it sounds like market promotion for McDonalds.
Case in point: it wasn’t that one food was wrapped without the logo and was was wrapped with the logo; one food was clearly ‘unwrapped.’ There are psychological implications to this as it seems like the food wasn’t prepared *for* them. It just *was*.
Second– this study doesn’t test other types of branding. It could be that the kids saw an emblem– in this case the golden M of McDonalds– and associated that with a company producing a product. Again, this is a case of someone creating something FOR them versus them picking something out that just was.
Looking at it that way, I don’t see why the kids *wouldn’t* have thought the wrapped product tasted better. And it had nothing to do with McDonalds.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:56 am
Nevermind the second paragraph in my comment– I just reread the article and noticed that they did indeed use unmarked packaging.
The second point still holds up, though. It might have just been a case of ‘official’ branding versus generic, not a case of McDonalds being successful at marketing to extremely young children.
August 23rd, 2007 at 6:56 am
[...] this week, I was reading how marketing affects how children perceive food at Get Rich Slowly. The original study claims that low-income children from age 3-5 perceived [...]
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:52 am
I’m not surprised as kids state of mind seems to alter based on suggestion. Weren’t ants on a log much more fun to eat than celery and peanut butter? As a kid, other food was just other food, but McDonalds was a ‘treat’. I think the parent’s attitude and behavior about McDonalds would be insightful.
Mike
March 5th, 2008 at 6:01 am
I remember being brand-influenced as a kid. I had licensed characters on everything - sheets, blankets, lunchbox, clothes, and of course toys. I want to shield my sons from some of that consumer mania.
By the way, a really good organization is the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood. I’m not sure if J.D. will let me post a link, but here it is:
http://www.commercialexploitation.org/