Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Food Advertising on Children’s Knowledge about and Preferences for Healthful Food
Table 3
Role of commercials on diet: OLS.
YHEI
Relative sugar intake
Relative fat intake
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(A) Parental norms and attitudes
H1: attitudes towards ads (parents): usefulness and credibility
.177
.228
1.355
1.214
−.904
−1.584
(.800)
(.869)
(1.190)
(1.320)
(.960)
(1.040)
H1: attitudes towards ads (parents): effects of ads
−.966
−1.298*
.941
.523
3.388*
2.682*
(.674)
(.778)
(1.140)
(1.370)
(1.040)
(1.190)
H2: discussing TV programmes with child
1.270
1.443
−.565
.725
−2.800*
−2.640
(1.190)
(1.390)
(1.600)
(1.950)
(1.380)
(1.620)
(B) Physical environment
H3: TV consumption (hours per day)
−.843
−.941
.792
.809
.334
1.034
(.658)
(.748)
(1.030)
(1.160)
(.908)
(1.010)
H3: bedroom equipment
−.341
−.207
3.354*
3.106
−1.505
−.922
(1.190)
(1.350)
(1.790)
(1.970)
(1.540)
(1.760)
(C) Advertising
H4: credibility dimension
−.234
−.301*
.735***
.534**
.343
.264
(.144)
(.154)
(.216)
(.246)
(.210)
(.234)
H4: suspiciousness dimension
.100
−.013
.079
.272
.031
.303
(.170)
(.197)
(.240)
(.272)
(.214)
(.238)
H4: entertainment dimension
.413***
.397***
.097
.031
−.124
−.224
(.159)
(.192)
(.295)
(.345)
(.241)
(.281)
(D) food knowledge and preferences
H5: food knowledge
.290
−.346
.478
(.590)
(.895)
(.701)
H5: food preference
−.393
.301
.202
(.239)
(.351)
(.295)
Observations
216
183
235
200
235
200
.147
.178
.143
.152
.143
.166
-value/Wald
3.24
2.78
2.93
2.78
2.22
2.03
value
.000
.000
.000
.000
.008
.013
Robust standard errors in parentheses; control variables are sex and age of child, parental education (ISCED), and country dummies. Reference category for age is 9 years and for countries Belgium. ; ; . OLS: ordinary least squares estimator.
