An amazing new study shows that branding can alter kids' perceptions of products.
This summer, Stanford University researcher Dr. Tom Robinson published a study that clearly illustrated the powerful impact name brand products have on kids. Kids age 3-5 were given different food items: three from McDonald’s (hamburger, chicken nuggets, and French fries) as well as milk or juice and carrots. Each received two of each item: one in McDonald’s packaging, the other in plain wrapping. What happened? Overwhelmingly, the kids preferred the food in the McDonald’s wrappers. (Robinson, T.N. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, August 2007; vol 161: pp 792-797.)
The children’s association with this “brand” apparently altered their perception of taste. This held true even for carrots, which (last time I checked) McDonald’s doesn't even sell. The study also found that the kids who ate at McDonald’s frequently and those who were more regular TV watchers tended to rate the branded items higher (no real surprise there). To me, the most astonishing thing about this study is the fact that the children were so young. It is interesting that this study arrives on the heels of major announcements from several food companies that they are going to limit marketing to children.
We see evidence of branding with teens all the time. It makes sense, as they are highly desirable customers and are marketed to everywhere, including online and in schools. Teens are very conscious of which brands are “cool” and which aren’t. No doubt teens perceive that their favorite brands to be of superior quality. But wouldn't we hope that teens would be savvier consumers, and would see through the hype? How would teens would perform in a similar study? How would they rate items in plain packaging versus those that appeared to come from Abercrombie and Fitch?
For more on marketing to kids, check out New Cigarette Targets Girls or Alcohol Advertising and Teens.
