;. r .1... ¢ ., 1:29:35... ......,:.:.19 . . 1 Jr. F I‘Ouifo answe- GAT RY,TALND-_ mars; Logsnsgzgzfi lN-DUST vesn 0 .CHI :Z‘ADVE {0F PERCEPTIONS UN Es 'cousuMER; AN EMPIRICA TELEVISION OF T.“ F. M. V, 0 G LIBRARY . _ \\\\\§\§\>\> W (This is to certify that the ’ thesis entitled PERCEPTIONS OF CHILDREN'S TELEVISION ADVERTISING: AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES OF CONSUMER, INDUSTRY, AND GOVERNMENT RE‘SPONDENTS presented by '. has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in Marketmg and Transportation /’ Admirfistration‘ 4 7X4/ 71m £5ij ' Major professor Date January 7, 1974 0-7639 ABSTRACT PERCEPTIONS OF CHILDREN'S TELEVISION ADVERTISING: AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES OF CONSUMER, INDUSTRY, AND GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS BY James Donald Culley Purpose Much has been written and said about the effects of television advertising on children. From time to time, the opinions of the general public have been gathered on certain aspects of the problemo Prior to this study, how- ever, no comprehensive investigation of the attitudes of individuals actually involved in the creation, production, regulation, and evaluation of children's television adver~ tising had ever been undertakeno The actual study centered on the attitudes of four specific groups: spokesmen for Action for Children“s Television (ACT);1 the presidents and top executive officers of advertising agencies creating and producing children‘s television commercials; top executives in companies adver- tising heavily on children's television programs; and members of the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, and key members of Congress° James Donald Culley Data Collection and Analysis A mail questionnaire was used as the major research instrument. The questionnaire was divided into two major sections. The first section contained a number of Likert— type attitudinal items designed to test the variance within and mean difference between the responses of the surveyed groups on major issues regarding children's television advertising. The second section of the questionnaire was designed to measure three relationships between the various respondents: the extent of cognitive overlap, or similarity in attitudes of the respondents; the perceived‘cqgnitive overlap or extent to which each reSpondent thinks hi8» beliefs are the same as others; and the accuracy of the respondents in estimating the position of other reSpondents on issues involving children"s television advertising. Six general hypotheses and twentymtwo research hypotheses were included in the study. All the general hypotheses and seventeen of the research hypotheses con- cerned the following tOpics: (l) the need for regulation of children's television advertising; (2) the method of regulating children's television advertising; (3) the effects of television commercials on children; (4) the techniques used in commercials aired on children‘s tele- vision; (5) the products advertised on children"s James Donald Culley television; and (6) major prOposals regarding the future of children's television advertising. Five research hypotheses concerned the ability of the individuals involved with children's television advertising to interact effectively on the issues involved. T-tests, analysis of variance tests, and Duncan range tests were the basic statistical tools used in the analyses. Several of the major study findings are summau -rizéd'be10w. Major Findings 1. Members of the industry, government, and ACT samples agreed that advertising directed at children requires special attention and regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. The various samples dif- fered, however, in their attitudes towards how children's television advertising should be regulated. 2. The majority of the industry sample felt that children's television advertising helps to develop a child's ability to make good consumer decisions. The majority of the ACT and government samples.strongly dis- agreed. Similar differences in attitude were found on statements relating to the effects of television advertis— ing on children and the techniques that should be allowed on children's television. James Donald Culley 3. There was a definite division in attitude between the industry respondents and the ACT and government respondents regarding the truthfulness and taste of coma mercials directed at children. For example, not one of the ACT respondents and less than twenty percent of the government respondents felt that children’s television commercials present a true picture of the products adver— tised. Nearly seventy percent of the industry respondents felt that they do. 4. All samples were relatively "accurate" in estimat— ing the position of other groups concerned with children's television. The various groups seem to understand each other's positions on most issues related to the subject remarkably well. lThis Boston based consumer group has had consider— able success in petitioning the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission for changes in present policies regarding children's television advertising. PERCEPTIONS OF CHILDREN'S TELEVISION ADVERTISING: AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES OF CONSUMER, INDUSTRY, AND GOVERNMENT RESPONDENTS BY James Donald Culley A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Marketing and Transportation Administration 1974 @ Copyright by JAMES DONALD CULLEY 1974 To my wife, Mary Camille 14, 1.» PI ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to the following individuals: Dr. William Lazer, Professor of Marketing and Transportation Administration, Michigan State University, under whose inspiring supervision and unselfish contribu— tion of time and encouragement this research was completed. My over-all debt to Dr. Lazer extends far beyond this single work. Dr. William J. E. Crissy, Professor of Marketing and Transportation Administration, Michigan State Univer— sity, who served as a thesis committee member. Dr. Crissy was always available with comments and assistance, even under the most difficult circumstances. Dr. Charles K. Atkin, Assistant Professor of Com- munications, Michigan State University, who, in addition to being a constant source of guidance during this study, provided me with much needed financial assistance. Dr. Atkin was an invaluable member of my thesis committee. Dr. Sherilyn Zeigler, Associate Professor of Communication, University of Tennessee, for her valuable comments on the preliminary drafts of the thesis. I am also indebted to Mrs. Peggy Charren and Mrs. Evelyn Sarson, of Action for Children“s Television, Dr. Seymour Banks, Vice-President of Leo Burnett Company, and Mr. Robert Choate, President of the Council on Children, Media, and Merchandising, for their assistance and sugges- tions throughout the study. Mrs. Shirley Swick typed many of the preliminary drafts of the thesis and helped put together the thesis in its final form. Mrs. Margaret Hazzard spent many hours going over the final draft of the thesis with me. And finally, I wish to extend my appreciation to my wife, Mary Camille, for her assistance and understanding throughout the four years I took to complete my doctorate. Mary did without many things to make my studies easier and I love her deeply for it. iv ?%'~ TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I. IMPORTANCE, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY. . 1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Purpose of the Study: . . . . . . . . . 5 The Major Research Hypotheses . . . . . . . 9 Research Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Limitations of the Study. . . . . . . 20 Potential Contribution of the Study. . . 22 Organization of the Report: A Preview of Subsequent Chapters. . . . . . . . . . . 23 II. A SYNTHESIS OF THE MAJOR RESEARCH FINDINGS REGARDING CHILDREN AND TELEVISION ADVERF TISINGO 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O Q 0 0 25 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 The Limitations of Past Research. . . . . . 26 The Longitudinal Problem . . . . . . . 27 The Experimental Situation Problem . . . 29 The Problem of Measurement . . . . . . . 30 The Problem of Definition. . . . . . . 31 The Measurement of Attitudes and Opinions. . . . . . . . . 32 Recent Research on the Subject: . . . . . . 33 Studies of Children0 5 Viewing Patterns . 34 Children“ 5 Reactions to Television . . . 36 The Techniques Used in Selling to Children. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Celebrity Endorsements, Testimonials, and Other Surrogate Indicators . . 39 Standards of Performance. . . . . . . 40 Ed1t1ng Techniques. . . . . . . . . . 41 Qualifiers. . . . . . . . . . 42 Ambigious, Misleading and Missing Information. . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Types of Appeals. . . . . 44 The Effects of Advertising on Children . 47 Development of Materialistic Atti: tudes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 TABLE OF CONTENTS--C0ntinued CHAPTER Distrust of Advertising, Generalized Cynicism, and Skepticism --. ... . DevelOpment of Consumer Purchasing Behavior in the Child. . . . . . . smary O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 1: The Research Instrument . . . . The Preliminary Instrument . . . . . . . The Pre-testing Procedure. . . . . . . . The Research Instrument. . . . . . . . . Section 2: Data Gathering Procedure. . . . Data Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY (PART 1) . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The General Research Hypotheses . . . . . Need for Regulation of Children' s Tele- vision Advertising. . . . ... . . . . The Job of Regulating Children's Tele- vision Advertising. . . . . ... . . . The Perceived Harmful and Beneficial Effects of Television Commercials on Children. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Techniques Used in Children‘s Tele- vision Commercials. . . . . . . . . . The Products Advertised on Children's Television. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proposals Regarding Children's Tele- vision Advertising. . . . . . . . . . Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY (PART 2) . .'. . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Research Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . VI. SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCHO 9 O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 O 9 0 General Summary of the Study. . . . . . . . A Summary of the Findings . . . . . . . . . Implications and Directions for Research. . vi Page 48 49 51 53 53 54 57 59 63 67 70 73 73 73 73 84 94 106 119 121 126 132 132 132 177 177 179 185 TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued APPENDICES Page A. Cover Letters and Interview Guide. . . . . . . 191 B. Firms Included in the Industry Sample. . . . . 204 C. Discriminatory Power Rankings of Opinion Statements Used in Pre-test . . . . . . . . 209 D. Survey Instrument. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 LIST OF TABLES Calculation of Discriminatory Power of Opinion Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Questionnaire Composition by Respondent Group. Composition of the Industry Samples. . . . . . Questionnaire Return Results . . . . . . . . . Summary of Analysis of Variance Tests on Items Pertaining to the Need for Regulation of Chil— dren's Television Advertising. . . . . . . . . Is There a Need for Increased Regulation of Children's Television Advertising? . . . . . . Summary of Analysis of Variance Tests on Items. Pertaining to Whose Job It Should Be to Regu— late Television Advertising Directed at Children 0 0 0 O G O D O O O O O D 0 O O O G D Whose Job Is It to Regulate Children's Tele— vision Advertising?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Analysis of Variance Tests on Items Pertaining to the Effects of Television Adver— tising on Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Effects Does Television Advertising Have on Children? 0 O D O D D 0 O O O O 0 O O O O B Summary of Analysis of Variance Tests on Items Pertaining to the Techniques That Should Be Allowed in Commercials Directed at Children. . What Techniques Should Be Permitted in Commer— cials Directed at Children?. . . . . . . . . . What Type of Products Should Be Advertised On Children's Television?. . . . . . . . . . . viii Page 61 65 69 71 75 79 85 89 95 100 107 112 120 LIST OF TABLES--Continued TABLE Page Summary of Analysis of Variance Tests on Items Pertaining to Major Proposals Regarding Adver- tising on Children's Television. . . . . . . . 122 How Do the Groups in the Study View Some of the Proposals Made on the Subject? . . . . . . 127 Perceived Agreement Test: 2—1. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers themselves 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O o 0 0 e o 140 Perceived Agreement Test: 2—2. There is noth— ing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children's television programs . . . . . . . . 141 Perceived Agreement Test: 2-3. "Bunching" commercials before or after a program.wou1d. significantly lessen the impact of the adver— tiser's message. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Perceived Agreement Test: 2~4. Children's television advertising requires special regula— tion because of the nature of the viewing audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Perceived Agreement Test: 2~5. The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children's television advertising . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Perceived Agreement Test: 2e6. Commercials to children should be regulated by the govern— ment 0 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O 0 O 0 0 D D O O 0 O O 145 Perceived Agreement Test: 2-7. Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. . . . . . . . . . 146 Perceived Agreement Test: 2~8. A11 commer- cials on children's televison should be pre- ceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 ix LIST OF TABLES—-Continued TABLE Perceived Agreement Test: 2—9. Most adver- tisers on children's television are not really concerned about kids; they just want to sell their products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Analysis of Variance Tests on Group Estimates of Network Position. . . . . . . . . Respondent Estimates of the Attitudes of Net— work Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Respondent Accuracy in Assessing the Attitudes of Act Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Respondent Accuracy in Assessing the Attitudes of Agency Respondents. . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 148 150 152 159 168 gee CHAPTER I IMPORTANCE, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY INTRODUCTION The role of television in the development of children has been one of the most extensively examined areas of mass communications research. A review of the literature for the Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior yielded reports of hundreds of empirical investigations focusing on television's impact on children.1 Most of these studies dealt with the harmful effects of pro“ gramming on children and adolescents, as did the series of investigations commissioned by the Surgeon General's Televi= sion and Social Behavior Program.2 Recently, a number of researchers and writers have begun to examine the possible harmful impact of television 1Charles K. Atkin, John P. Murray and Oquz B. Naymen, editors, Television and Social Behavior: An Annotated Bibliography of REEearch Focusingjpn Television's Impact on Children (Rockville, Maryland: National Institute of Mental Health, 1971). 2Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, Television and‘Growing‘Upg The Impact of Televised Violence (Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1972), pp. 245—260. advertising on young viewers. They note, with concern, that before the advent of television it was almost impos- sible for an advertiser or a salesman to reach a young child without first encountering a protective adult. Door-to-door selling was dealt with by a parent, the sales— man was barred from the classroom, and magazine and newspaper ads were beyond the reading ability of most children under the age of nine or ten. Today, however, all this has changed. , Television appeals to small children as no other medium can. Children must be taken to the movies and their admission paid. Comic books cost money and must be acquired from outside the home. Books must be read to the preschool child for him to enjoy them. But the TV set is an experi- ence in independence. It exists in the house, it costs the child nothing, and a toddler learns early to manipulate the dial that starts the whole thing going. While a radio pro- duces only music and talk, television turns on a live world of pictures and sound and, sometimes, color. The preschool child often identifies cues as to when his favorite programs are on the air even before he has learned how to tell time by the clock.1 lClara T. Appell, "Television Viewing and the Pres i school Child," Marriage and Family Living, August 1963, 312. One writer estimates that today's child is exposed to more than 350,000 commercial messages before he graduates from high school.1 In fact, television commercials repre- sent a significant portion of children's television program- ming. Up to 16 minutes per hour, or more than 25% of many television programs for children, are devoted to commer- cially sponsored messages.2 Many recent events testify to the uncomfortable position currently facing advertising managers on the issue of children and television advertising. Consider: . the 1971 Federal Trade Commission hearings into modern television advertising practices which included a study of "The Impact of Television Advertising on Children." 0 the particularly strong statements on children's television advertising before the Senate Subcom— mittee on Communications in 1971 and 1972 and in the Surgeon General's report released by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior in 1972. 1Gerald Looney, "The Ecology of Childhood," in Action for Children's Television, edited by Evelyn Sarson (New York: Avon Books, 1971), pp. 55-57. 2As of January 1, 1973, stations subscribing to the National Association of Broadcasters' Television Code can devote no.more than 12 minutes in any 60-minute period of children's weekend programming to non—program materials. Up until 1973, the limit was 16 minutes of non-program material per 60-minute period. It should be noted, however, that a number of stations do not subscribe to the NAB code. Moreover, the loss of the use of the NAB Seal of Good Prac— tice for exceeding the lZ-minute limit is probably not con- sidered a serious threat by most broadcasters. 4 ._.,__, 1..._‘__ ._._._. _ 1” 4 . , . o the increase in interest in television _advertising to children shown by consumer interest groups such as Action for Children's Television (ACT), the Consumer Research Institute (CR1), the Consumers Union, and the Council on Children, Media, and Merchandising. o the 1970 White House Conference on Children and the 1971 White House Conference on Youth which called for the immediate establishment of a National Children's Media Foundation to try to cor- rect what the White House Conferees called the failure of the media in America to realize their potential for nurturing the healthy growth and development of our nation's children.1 0 the increased funding of special studies in the area such as the work of Atkin and.Ward2 on the effects of television advertising and news program— ming on children; the work of Melody3 and Pearce” on the economics of children's television advertis- ing; the work of Buell5 on changing practices in the advertising control process; and the work of .......... 1See Report of the White House Conference on Chil- dren (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970) and'Repdrt of the White Honse‘COnference‘on Youthf (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971). 2Charles Atkin, Michigan State University, and Scott Ward, Harvard University, were awarded substantial grants by the Office of Child Development, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, in 1972 to study the effects of television advertising and news programming on children. 3William H. Melody, Children's TelevisiOnz"Econom— ics and Public Policy (Boston: Action for Children's Television, December 1972). "Alan Pearce, The Economics of NetWOrk Children's Television Programming, Staff report submitted to the Federal Communications Commission, July, 1972. 5Victor P. Buell, Changing Practices in Advertising Decision-Making and COntrOl (New York: Association of National Advertisers, 1973). A special section of the study discusses how companies are reacting to public policy issues such as advertising to children. Barcus1 and Winick and Winick2 in analyzing the content of television commercials directed at children. In contrast to the plethora of research on tele- vision programming, however, there are few empirical . studies relating to television advertising and the child. The serious nature of the charges leveled against advertisers on children's television and the kind of recom- mendations being made point out the need for well-planned research on the project. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY It has been said that much of the current contro- versy regarding television advertising and its effect on children is the result of ineffective communication between broadcasters, researchers, and critics of television broad— casting.3 Each of these interest groups pursues the subject with markedly different assumptions concerning the issues and with erroneous or incomplete perceptions of how 1F. Earle Barcus, Saturday ChildrenFS'Television (Boston: Action for Children's Television, 1971) and F. Earle Barcus, Romper Room: An Analysis (Boston: Action for ChildrenTs TeleviSIon, 1971). 2Charles and Mariann Winick, Content AnaLysiS‘of Childreni§_Television AdVertising. Report available from Praeger Special Studies, 111 Fourth Ave., New York, 10003. 3Scott Ward, "Kids TV-Marketers on Hot Seat," HarVard Business Review, July-August 1972, pp. 16-18+. the other parties involved view the same issues. The result is a series of "dialogues that never really happen."18 Although there exists a large number of studies focusing on the general public's attitudes towards advertis— ing as a marketing tool, in only a few cases has an attempt been made to deal with areas of specific concern to those interested in children's television advertising. Moreover, a survey of the literature revealed practically no attitude studies of the key people involved in the creation, produc- tion, research, and evaluation of advertising directed at children.2 Yet, these people are the best sources of information on the various issues involved, the ones most likely to influence and to be influenced by policy decisions in the area, and the expert opinion leaders for much of the general public. The purpose of this report and research study is to present an objective examination of the attitudes and co—orientation ability of five key respondent groups towards the major issues surrounding the subject of children‘s )— 1See Raymond A. Bauer and Stephen A. Greyser, "The Dialogue That Never Happens (Thinking Ahead),"'Harvard Business Review, November-December 1967, pp. 2+. 2See Chapter II for a brief review of the major attitude studies in the area. I... television advertising.1 The five groups included in the . study are: 1. Action for Children's‘TelevisiOn'SpokeSMen'CACT). This Boston based consumer group has had considerable suc- cess in petitioning the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission for changes in present policies regarding children's television advertising. ACT has also been successful in raising money for research on the subject of children's television and children's tele- vision advertising and in influencing public opinion on the major issues involved with children's television advertising. A judgment sample of sixty ACT spokesmen was selected for the survey by the founders of ACT; eighty-five percent of the sample completed the survey. 2. Advertising Agency ExecutiVes. Much of the criti- cism of children's television advertising has to do with the techniques and the content of commercials aimed at children. In this study, 107 presidents and top executive officers of twenty-four advertising agencies that create, produce, and buy broadcast time on children's television ................ 1When children's television is referred to in this report, it means regularly scheduled network programs for which children make up the largest percentage of the view- ing audience. "Children" designates any individual age 12 or younger. Most network programs on Saturday and Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and the Captain Kangaroo Show weekdays on CBS would, therefore, be considered children's television shows. programs were sent c0pies of the survey. Sixty-six percent completed the questionnaire. In gathering preliminary data for the study, personal interviews were also conducted with the top eXecutives at ten of the twenty-four agencies included in the final survey. 3. TOp advertisers. There is a great variety of prod- ucts advertised on children's television, but most fall into one of four categories: toys, cereals, candies, and other food items. In this study, seventy-five copies of the final questionnaire were mailed to the presidents and top executive officers of thirty firms sponsoring shows, or frequently running commercials, on network children's tele— vision. Forty-five percent of the sample mailed back usable questionnaires. 4. MeMbers of the Federal Trade Commission'(FTC),'the ‘Federal CommUnications CommiSSion (FCC), and Key Members ofVCOngress. A judgment sample of forty-nine congressmen was included in the government sample. These congressmen were selected because of their expressed interest in and voting record on consumer causes. In addition, fifteen commissioners and tOp staff officers of the FTC and the FCC were included in the sample. Sixty-six percent of the government sample responded to the survey, but only thirty- four percent of the sample sent back completed question- naires. 5. Members of the Network ReyieW‘Boards. Major gate- keepers for all commercials destined for airing on network television are the network review or continuity boards. Though the number of people on these boards is small, the board members hold a major position in determining what is or is not acceptable for showing on the networks. Thirteen review board members from the three major networks were mailed copies of the survey, but only six responded. Due to the small size of the sample group and the low response rate, no statistical analyses using the review board sample were attempted. THE MAJOR RESEARCH HYPOTHESES The study is organized around six general hypothe— ses and twenty-two specific hypotheses. The six general hypotheses and first seventeen specific hypotheses deal with the variance within, and mean difference between, responses of the groups surveyed concerning major issues regarding children's television advertising. The last five specific hypotheses concern the co-orientation abilities of the various respondent groups.1 1Co-orientation is also referred to as "role—taking“ or "person perception" in the literature. 10 The model underlying the last five hypotheses sug- gests that, for a meaningful dialogue to take place, each person involved in the dialogue must have a belief or atti- tude about the various issues himself and an estimate of what other persons involved in the dialogue believe. Thus, in every dialogue at least three kinds of relationshipscan be measured. The first relationship concerns the amount of'COg- attitudes are alike. In this study, cognitive overlap was measured by comparing the mean response of each surveyed group on nine questionnaire items. The second relationship is that of perceived cogni— tive overlap or congrUengy. That is, the extent to which each participant in a dialogue thinks his beliefs are the same as other partiCipants in the dialogue, or'vice'versa. In this study, the congruency of the various respondent groups was measured by comparing the difference between the mean response of each group on nine queStionnaire items and the mean response of each group's estimate of other par— ticipants' attitudes on the same nine items. Finally, in a dialogue, each participant's esti- mate of other participants' attitudes may match what other participants really do believe. This relationship is called accuracy. The accuracy of the surveyed groups was measured 11 by comparing the mean response of each group's estimate of other participants' attitudes on nine survey items and the mean response of the other participants' actual atti— tudes° The six general hypotheses and twenty-two specific research hypotheses included in the study are: H1: There are significant differences in the verbal— . iflzed. atmtitudfles .Of. Itlihe ma ...................... fr regard to the NEED FOR INCREASED'REGULATION'OF CHILDREN S TELEVISION COMMERCIALS. r Hl—l: ACT and government respondents will be more likely to express strong agreement with the statement "children's television advertising requires special regula— tion because of the nature of the viewing audience" than will industry respondents (i.e., the advertiser and adver- tising agency samples). All four respondent groups will agree that special regulation is needed. Hl_22 ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that more regulation of children's television commercials is needed. The industry respondents will not I agree. H ° 'There are significant differenceS'in'the'verbal— ; 2 iZed attitudes of the major respondent group8'in regard to WHOSE JOB IT SHOULD BE TO REGULATE TELEVISION ADVERTISING DIRECTED AT CHILDREN. H2 1: ACT and government respondents will favor government regulation of advertising directed at children. Industry respondents will favor self-regulation and 12 industry guidelines. H2_2: ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that trade association guidelines have done little to improve the quality of television advertising directed at children. Industry respondents will not agree. H3: There are significant differences in the Verbal- ized'attitudes of the major‘resp0ndent'grou23'in regard to the HARMFUL AND BENEFICIAL EFFECTS OF TELEVISION COMMERCIALS ON CHILDREN. H3-l: ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that commercials directed at children arouse anxieties and feelings of insecurity in children. Industry respondents will not agree. H3_2: ACT and government respondents will express the belief that television commercials lead to an increase in parent-child conflict. Industry respondents will not agree. H3_3: ACT and government respondents will not express the beliefs that most children understand what com— mercials are trying to do and that, in fact, commercials help develop a child's ability to make good consumer decisions. Industry respondents will express these beliefs. H4: There are signifiCant differences in the'verbal- ized attitudes of the ma'or res ondent"rou'S'in _____________________1___..IL_____JI__IL___ regard to THE TECHNIQUES THAT SHOULD BE "ALLOWED IN COMERCIA'LS DIRECTED AT CHILDREN. 13 H4 1: ACT and government respondents will not express the belief that most commercials directed at children present a true picture of the product adver- tised. Industry respondents will express this belief. H4_2: ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that there is something wrong with allowing performers to sell products on children's television shows. Industry respondents will not express this belief. H4_3: ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that advertisers purposely disguise children's televisiOn commercials to blend in with the program material. Industry respondents will not agree. H4_4: All four respondent groups will express the belief that there are too many commercials on children‘s television. However, the ACT and government respondents will be more likely to express strong agreement with the statement, “there are too many commercials on shows children watch,“ than the industry respondents. H4_5: ACT and government respondents will express the belief that television commercials aimed at children are usually in bad taste. Industry respondents will not agree. he 'hhee ehehihheeht. ehhifeheheee he. "the; .V'eh'h‘eh- Ized att1tudes of the major respondent groups in. regard to THE TYPE OF PRODUCTS THAT'SHOULD BE ' ADVERTISED'ON‘CHILDREN'S‘TELEVISION. 14 H -"There are signifiCant differences in the verbal— ' ized attitudeS'of’the‘major‘respondent'ngUES'in regard to THE MAJOR PROPOSALS MADE REGARDING ADVERTISING ON CHILDREN'S TELEVISION. H6—1: ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that all commercials should be eliminated from children's television programs. Industry respondents will not agree. H6—2: ACT and government respondents will favor an industry-sponsored "Television Broadcast Center" to finance quality children's programs. Industry respondents will be against the idea. ‘ H6-3: All four respondent groups will express the feeling that simulcasts (permitting two or more networks to run the same program) will not help improve the quality of children‘s television programs. There will be a significant difference, however, in the strength of their disagreement. H6—4: ACT and government respondents will favor the proposal that commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is i an ad. Industry respondents will be against the idea. HE-S' ACT and government respondents will express the feeling that "bunching" commercials before or after a program will not significantly lessen the impact of the advertiser‘s message. Industry respondents will not agree. 15 The last five research hypotheses refer to the dif— ferences in the co-orientation abilities of the four respondent groups. H7—l: There will be little overlap in the attitude of ACT and industry respondents on major issues concerning children's television advertising. There will be consider— able overlap, however, in the attitudes of agency and advertiser respondents on the same issues. H7_2: The accuracy of all four respondent groups will be relatively low in estimating the position of other groups on issues relating to children's television adver— tising. H7_3: There will be little perceived agreement between the advertiser, agency, and government respondents' position on the nine co=orientation items in the study and their perception of the position of ACT spokesmen. There will be little perceived agreement between the position of ACT and government respondents on the nine co—orientation items in the study and their perception of the position of agency and network respondents. There will be considerable perceived agreement between the position of the agency and advertiser respondents and their perception of the position of the network respondents on the nine co-orientation items in the study. 16 H7_4: There will be significant differences in how ACT, industry, and government respondents perceive the net— work respondents' position on issues relating to children's television advertising. H7_5: The more a respondent reads and hears about the position of others on the subject of children's tele— vision advertising, the more accurate the respondent will be in estimating the opinions of others on issues relating to the subject. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 1 Before designing the research instrument, the author undertook a review of the literature on television program-' ming and advertising and their effects on children. The source materials included textbooks in marketing and adver— tising, trade and research journals, published works of advertising practitioners and critics, case studies, personal discussions with practitioners, researchers, and critics, and so forth. Audits were made of a sample of network children's shows during Summer and Fall, 1972. Records were kept for each advertisement aired during the audited period. 1See Chapter III for further details on all aspects of the research methodology employed in the study. 17 Each record included the name of the product advertised, the length of the commercial, and the time the commercial was shown. This information, along with the commercial 1 logs of the Barcus, Pearce,2 and Atkin3 studies and the sample of network program logs supplied by Broadcast Advertisers Reports,1+ was used in compiling a list of the products advertised on children's television. The Standard Directory of Advertising Agencies,5 6 Standard Directory of Advertisers, and the account changes published in Advertising Age were used to determine the agencies responsible for the creation of the commercials listed. Letters were written to the presidents of all lSee Barcus, Saturday'Children'S'TeleviSIOn. .28ee Pearce, The ECOnomics of Network Children's ‘Television Programming, pp. 8—10. 3Professor Atkin was video taping a sample of net— work children's television commercials during this period for his study on the effects of television advertising and news programming on children. His study was funded by the Office of Child Development, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. ‘ “BAR provided the author with program logs for the second Saturday in each month for the six month period from September 1972 to February 1973. 5Standard Directory of Advertising'AgencieS:"The Agency Red Book (Skokie, I11.: National Register Publish— ing Co., October 1972). 6Standard Directory'of'Advertisersr' Classified Edi— tion (Skokie, Ill.: National Register Publishing Co., April 1972). 18 New York and Chicago agencies involved in the creation and production of children‘s television commercials. The letters explained the purpose of the study and asked each agency president to submit the names of key individuals within his agency who were presently involved in promoting to the juvenile market.l Eighteen agency presidents answered the letter, and personal interviews were arranged and conducted at ten of the eighteen agencies that responded. To structure the personal interviews and insure that all the major issues were covered, an interview guide was used. Tape recordings were made of the interviews where this was permitted. Data from the literature search and preliminary agency interviews was used to prepare a list of 96 Likert- type attitudinal items. These items related to the six general hypotheses of the study. As a pretest, the 96—item scale was administered to a sample of undergraduate college students majoring in marketing.2 The students were asked to indicate the extent of their agreement or disagreement with each item on the list. After completing the survey, the students were asked to comment on any items in the lSample copies of the agency president letter, interview guide, and other correspondence pertaining to the preliminary interviews and final questionnaire will be found in Appendix A. . 2Copies of both the pretest and final question— naires will be found in the Appendix. 19 survey that they thought vague, misleading, or otherwise questionable. .The pretest results were the major input into the final mail questionnaireo The final questionnaire comprised three sections. The first section contained twenty-nine Likert-type atti— tudinal items or statements and was designed to test the first six general hypotheses of the studyo Twenty-six of the twenty-nine items came from the pretest questionnaire. Three items were added to the final questionnaire to cover recent prOposals made regarding children's television advertisingo The second section of the final questionnaire was designed to test if there was a significant difference in the co-orientation ability of the respondent groups° Nine Likert-type items from the first section were repeated in this section, and the various reSpondent groups were asked to respond to them as they thought the other reSpond— ent groups would respondo The third section of the questionnaire contained several demographic questions and two semantic differential scales. The semantic differential scales were included to test for differences in respondent attitudes towards two concepts germane to the subject: children's television advertising in general and self-regulation in advertising° 20 Copies of the final questionnaire were sent to a judgment sample of: seventeen United States Senators; thirty—two members of the United States House of Representa— tives; 107 presidents and top executive officers of adver— tising agencies involved in creating, producing, and researching commercials for children's television; seventy— five presidents and top executive officers of companies involved in advertising products on children's television; thirteen members of the major network review boards; nine top staff members or commissioners on the Federal Trade Commission; six top staff members or commissioners on the Federal Communications Commission; and fifty-nine spokesmen for Action for Children's Television“ LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY The use of a mail survey with multiplewchoice ques~ tions has many advantages° For example, it eliminates the problem of interviewer bias, is easy to administer and code, and is a very economical instrument for measuring attitudes among widely dispersed populations° However, this research tool also has limitationsa Multiple—choice questions limit the range of answers open to the respondent and possibly introduce semantic dif— ficulties into the test results, With a mail survey, the 21 respondent is free to go back over his answers and make changes and to consult with others before marking an answer. In face-to-tace testing situations, the respond— ent may be limited to his first choice of an answer and. may be kept from consulting with others as to the "correct" response. However, it is difficult with a mail survey to determine whether the attitudes of non-respondents differ significantly from the attitudes of those that did reSpond and even whether the person actually completing the ques— tionnaire is the person to whom the survey was addressed. These limitations are probably not important in this study. Since the study was aimed at identifying the attitudes and beliefs of the various respondents, it did not matter if the respondents changed their answers or went back over test items. In fact, going over the items a second time might add to the aCcuracy with which the reSpondents completed the questionnaire. Moreover, the leadership positions of all the respondents, the fact that only a few questionnaires were sent to any one company, the geographic dispersion of the various respondents, and the low variance on questionnaire items within the samples indicates that the usual limitations of a mail survey were probably not that serious. 22 POTENTIAL CONTRIBUTION OF THE STUDY The findings of the study should be of use to edu- cators, regulators, broadcasters, critics, and the population at large. The study centered on the beliefs and attitudes of key respondent groups--the groups of people most likely to influence and to be influenced by policy decisions in the area° Any actions taken by these groups regarding the regulation and use of children's tele- vision advertising may eventually affect us all. The final questionnaire was designed to measure respondent attitudes toward six facets of the subject fre- quently discussed in the literature. The questionnaire was also designed to indicate significant differences in beliefs and attitudes between individuals and respondent groups. Hopefully, the questionnaire will be of use to researchers conducting additional attitude studies on the subject. The findings may be used in attitudinal models to predict and to explain the reactions of the various respond— ent groups to proposals made regarding children's television programming and advertising. The findings may be used as a benchmark for future attitude surveys among the same respondent groups. The findings should also be of use to indicate the polarization of attitudes that now exist on the subject. And finally, the findings should act as guides to What must be done by the various groups in order to per— suade others to accept new positions on the subject. 23 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT: A PREVIEW OF SUBSEQUENT CHAPTERS This thesis consists of six chapters. Chapter II, A Synthesis of the Major Research Findings Regarding Children and TelevisiOn Advertising, examines many of the limitations of past research in the area and summarizes the major findings of the more recent research on the sub— ject. Chapter III is titled'Research Methodology. Included in this chapter are details on the preliminary and final research instruments, on the field procedure, and on the data analyses used in the study. Chapters IV and V, Findings of the Study, report the results of the study in a series of summary tables. Each table is followed by an explanation of the major study findings. Chapter V describes the results of the statisti— cal tests regarding the co~orientation hypotheses. Chapter VI, Summary, Implications, and DirectiOns for Research, presents a brief summary of the entire research project. It uses the findings of the project to identify those areas where empirical research into the advertising communication process, particularly as it re— lates to child markets, is most likely to provide opera— tional pay—offs for practitioners and private and 3..-- l- .. 24 government institutions concerned with the subject of tele- vision advertising and children. The Appendices at the end of the report contain a copy of the final research instrument and reproductions of the data collection materials used in the study. CHAPTER II A SYNTHESIS OF THE -MAJOR RESEARCH FINDINGS REGARDING CHILDREN AND TELEVISION ADVERTISING INTRODUCTION The question that has dominated most research on the subject of television and the child is, what has been television's effect? How have television programs and adver— tising influenced children? Has it caused them to believe in new ideologies; to purchase or attempt to persuade their parents to purchase particular goods; to learn, alter, or abandon particular cultural tastes; to reduce or strengthen prejudices; to commit acts of delinquency or crime; to lower or raise the standard of sexual morality; to alter patterns of family recreation; to adopt an innovation; or to change patterns of behavior? The first half of this chapter contains a brief examinatiOn of many of the difficulties that have plagued researchers when they attempted to measure the effects of television on the child. The second half of the chapter examines the recent studies on the subject of televisiOn and the child. An understanding of the limitations and 25 26 types of past research is necessary in order to appreciate the full implications of this research project. Moreover, the lack of definitive research in-many of the areas dis— cussed in this chapter helps explain the tremendous vari- ance in attitudes among the various groups included in the study. THE LIMITATIONS OF PAST RESEARCH Since the early 1950's, numerous articles have been written about the effects of television programs on the child. Until three or four years ago, however, the sub- ject of the effects of television advertising on the child was almost completely ignored. Schramm, Lyle, and Parker's study of television and children and Tannenbaum and Green- berg's study of recent mass communication research are two cases in'point.l Both studies are major sources of informa— tion for researchers interested in the effects of television On the child. However, neither treats the subject of tele- vision commercials and their effects on children. From twelve to sixteen minutes of every hour of children's television is devoted to commercial messages. 1Wilbur Schramm, Jack Lyle, and Edwin Parker, 'Efilevision‘in‘the‘LiVeS'of Our Children (Stanford: Stan- ford University Press: 1961)? Percy H° Tannenbaum.and Bradley S. Greenberg, "Mass Communications," The Annual "Bavi'ew' ‘o'f ‘P'slc'ho'l‘ogxr 1968 , 19 r 351‘385 ° 27 These messages are primarily aimed at selling products rather than entertaining the viewer. Moreover, the commer- cial sponsorship system largely determines what type of products will be aired on children's television. With so nmch time devoted to commercial messages and with the mmmmrcial sponsorship system so much a part of the present system of children's programming, why have researchers avoided examining the subject of children's television advertising until recently? This section of the thesis attempts to answer this question. The'LOngitudinal Problem Much of the children's television research done in the past has focused on whether some particular effect does or does not occur. In reality the relationship between advertising and human behavior is far more complex.l' For example, some researchers studying the effects of television on the child have attempted only to measure the immediate behavior of research subjects who have been exposed to a particular ad or series of ads. In almost every case there was little or no follow-up to see what the long-term effects might be. .......... 1See, for example, the cases listed by Dr. Harry Deane Wolfe, James K. Brown, and Go Clark Thompson in :Measurin‘ Advertising‘Resultsz"StudieS'in'BusineSSIPoliCy, NOE‘IOZ 3New York: National Industrial Conference Board, 1962). 28 A research subject who shows an immediate change may be reacting to some prior stimulus, or the impact of a.particular stimulus may be only temporary with little cm'no carry-over into real life. It is also conceivable that, after repeated exposure to the same stimulUs, the research subject may show little reaction to the original stimulus. To test the long-term effects of a television show, series of shows, or television advertising campaign, it might be necessary to study the same subject over a period of years. For example, some psychologists believe that it is necessary to study three generations in order to examine the effects of a specific child-rearing practice, such as toilet training. First, one must study the parents who are carrying out the specific toilet=training technique. Then, one studies the child who has been toilet trained. And finally, one studies how the original child trains his own children and how they develop.1 Even if it were possible for a researcher to draw a matched sample of research subjects and control the relevant variables available over time, the practical difficulties of conducting such a study would 1See M. Kessen, "Research Design in the Study of Developmental Problems/'in Handbook of Research MethodS‘in Child Develo ment, edited by P. H. Mussen (New York: John WlIey and Sons, 1960), pp. 36-70. 29 prove virtually insurmountable. For instance, there would be little chance of controlling the TV exposure patterns of the various research subjects effectively. The Experimental Situation Problem Many of the studies that have been done on the impact of television in early childhood are based on experi— ments in special playrooms which are strange to the child. Researchers have found that the things children learn and the ways they behave in such settings are often quite dif- ferent from learning and behavior patterns occurring in the child's home.1 To some extent, such variations in background condi— tions can be reduced by a research design which uses an adequate number of subjects and randomly assigns them to the Various treatment conditions. But when experimental studies are extrapolated to real life situations, other factors interfere with the results.2 For example, when a young child is feeling strong and confident he is probably not so likely lSee Albert BanduraVS discussion of research on children's imitation and identification with others, in "Social—learning Theory of Identification Processes,“ \ 'HEndbook‘Of'socialfzatron’TneoryfiandiResearch, edited by David A. Goslin (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969), pp. 213—262. 2Carl I. Hovland, "Reconciling Conflicting Results Derived from Experimental and Survey Studies of Attitude ghinge, “‘ The American P's‘y‘c'hoilo‘gfi'sta 1463 (Januaryy ~1959) , on 7 o hi 3. ’CJ 30 to confuse fantasy with reality. Thus, the preschool child whose mother is in the house may watch a television program or commercial with more detachment or aplomb than when the nmther is not present and the child is uncertain that he is being well cared for. The Problem of MeaSurement The problem of recording accurately what television programs and advertising a child has been exposed to is a vexing one. Schramm §£;§l. studied six common ways of esti- mating a child's television viewing behavior--a general estimate by the parent, a general estimate by the child, a supervised diary, an unsupervised diary, aided recall, and unaided recall. They concluded the unsupervised diary method and parent's estimates for children in the earlyv _grades tended to give the most accurate estimates.1 These authors placed the greatest faith in aided recall interviews, if made the following day, and in whole family interviews. Both methods, however, are quite costly. In-home camera studies have suggested a reason for such a variety of viewing estimates. Films of subjects' Viewing behavior have shown that many subjects count ............. _.. 1Wilbur Schramm, Jack Lyle and Edwin Parker, Telem Eggion'in'the'LiveS‘of'Our'Children (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1961), pp. 213—218. .T' a W. “V P‘s 31 puograms they View only sporadically or partially as fulle time viewing. What comprises viewing? If a subject is listening to a program, is that viewing? Must the subjectfis. eyes be on the television for the researcher to say the subject was “viewing" the program? (How many times have we found ourselves staring at the television while our minds were far away?) The Problem of DefinitiOn There is at present no adequate conceptual framework within which to classify the diverse types of effects reported. Besides distinguishing between "long-term" effects and "short-term" effects, some authors distinguish between effects which are "manifest" and those which are "latent."1 Distinctions are also made among psychological, political, economic, and sociological effects. Engel, Kollat, and Blackwell distinguish between "intended" and "unintended" effects.2 The use of the various methods of classification may seem arbitrary and artificial. It does, however, highlight 1See Harold H. Kassarjian and Thomas S. Robertson, Perspectives in Consumer Behavior, rev. (Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1968), p. 101. 2See James F. Engel; David T. Kollat; and Roger D. Iflackwell, Consumer Behavior, 2nd ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968), p. 309. 32 the fact that "effects" can only be artificially abstracted from behavior. Thus, one cannot talk about‘thg effects but only about particular sets of responses selected for study. For example, the major networks tend to evaluate the "effectiveness“ of their shows in entertainment terms by relying heavily on rating services to describe the size of the audience reached. Tme‘Measurement of‘Attitudes‘and'QpiniOns Some researchers have attempted to circumvent the problems involved in measuring effects directly by interview- ing segments of the public familiar with children, such as nwthers of small children and'teachers.1 Unfortunately, such research may be unreliable since the subjects tend to be influenced by their own attitudes and are often poor judges of the attitudes of others. For example, Himmelweit g3;§l. found that mothers tended to underestimate the amount 0f time their children viewed television and were rarely 1Few such studies contain questions specifically related to the effects of commercials on children. Among those that do are: the Yankelovich (1970) study of mothers' attitudes toward children's television programs and advern tising; the Parade magazine study of readers' attitudes towards childrenfis television advertising (see F. Earl Barcus, Concerned Parents Speak Out‘on‘Children‘S‘TelevisiOn (Boston: Action for ChildrenVS Television, 1973); and the Roper opinion pools conducted for the Television Information Office (see Burns W. ROper, An Extended VieW'Of'PubliC'Attin "Egges Toward Television and Other Mass Media:"1959~1971 (New York: Television Information Office, 1971)). 33 familiar with their children's viewing preferences. They concluded that mothers tended to belittle the effects of television since any changes might reflect adversely on their maternal capabilities. They also found that teachers" reports lacked objectivity. Too often, teachers assessed) changes brought about by television in the light of their own overall attitudes toward the subject.1 Nevertheless, in an economy such as ours, where decisions are frequently based on opinion polls and majority rule, certain types of attitude studies may be immensely useful. For example, to the critic concerned with the extent to which "everybody sees the necessity of increased regula- tion of children's television advertising," an attitudinal study would indicate whether this concern was at least partly justified. RECENT RESEARCH ON THE SUBJECT Research on the subject of television and children can be divided into four categories: studies of children"s television viewing patterns, studies of how children react 1Hilde Himmelweit, A. N. Oppenheim, and Pamela Vince, Television and the Child:‘ An‘Empirical'Study'of the Effects ’9;‘Te1evision'on’the Young (Oxf6rd: Oxford University Press, 1958). Hereinafter referred to as Television and the Child. 34 to television, studies of the techniques used in children‘s programming and advertising, and studies of the effects of television on the child. Studies of Children's Viewing‘Patterns Researchers studying children's viewing patterns attempt to answer such questions as: How much time do chil- dren spend watching television? What hours do they watch? What programs do they View? Studies of this type have been conducted since the earliest years of television in a number of countries and across many different cultures. We now know, for example, 'that television for the American child takes up almost as much time as school in the first years of life.1 In fact, (many children have become purposeful viewers with regular viewing times and favorite programs long before they start school.2 By age 16, Schramm calculated, the average 1For example, Lyle and Hoffman (1972) reported that over a week-long period, first graders Spend the equivalent Of just less than one full day watching television, while sixth through tenth graders exceed that level. 2For example, Schramm, Lyle, and Parker (1961) reported that the average American child views 45 minutes of television.;xn: day by the time he is three. Murray (1972) reported that total weekly Viewing time ranged from 5 to 42 hours among the kindergarten and first grade Negro boys he studied. And Stein and Friedrich (1972) documented an average weekly viewing time of 34.5 hours for boys and 32.4 hours for girls, in their study of nursery school chil- ren. 35 American child can be counted on to have spent from 6,000 to 12,000 hours viewing television-~and most of the hours are devoted to commercially sponsored programs.l Perhaps the most interesting finding of this type of study has to do with the programs watched by children. Most researchers agree that prime—time (7:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.) Monday through Sunday is the time when the preschool child's viewing is the heaviest.2 Most regularly scheduled network children's programming is shown, however, in the Saturday/ Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. time period. Nielsen found this period receives only fourteen percent of the preschool child's total viewing time.3 Clearly, an important consider— ation in the regulation of advertising seen by children is this variety of viewing patterns. 1Wilbur Schramm, editor, The Effects of Television 9§_Children and Adolescents (Paris: The United Nations Edu~ cational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1964), p. 11. ...-~- 2See, for example, Thomas F. Baldwin and Colby Lewis, 'yiolence in Television: The Industry Looks at Itself (East Lansing, Michigan: Department of Communication and Tele— vision and Radio, April 1971), p. 10; Jack Lyle and Heidi Hoffman, "Explorations in Patterns of TV Viewing by Preschool Age Children,"-in Television in Day—to-Day Life: "Patterns of Use, edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), \ .__,_,_. Mfi" 257-2730 3A. C. Nielsen Company, A Review of Audience'Trends (Chicago:' The A. C. Nielsen Company, Inc., 1971), p. 13. 36 Children's ReaCtionS'to Television A second category of research on the subject of television and children concerns children's reactions to television programming and advertising. Studies in this category ask such questions as: What programs and com- mercials does the child like the most? What content does the child believe? What frightens or amuses the child? What programs and commercials attract the most attention from the child? Examples of this type of research would include the work of: l. ward, Reale, and Levinson on children's awareness of television commercials;1 2. the McNeal study on the perceived credibility of television advertising as a function of age groups;2 3. the Ward, Levinson, and Wackman study on children's 1Scott Ward, Greg Reale, and David Levinson, "Children's Perceptions, Explanations and Judgments of Tele— vision Advertising: A Further Exploration," in‘Televisign_ ' in Day—to-Day Life: ' Patterns of Use, ed. by E. A. ’“ Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), 468-490. 2James U. McNeal, "An Exploratory Study of the Con— sumer Behavior of Children," DimensiOns of‘Consumer‘BehaviOr (New York: Meredith Publishing Company, 1965). __._.... 'W—I- 37 attention to childvoriented television;1 4. the James study of children's attitudes toward television advertising compared to their attitudes toward advertising in other mediums;2 5. the works of Brumbaugh3 and Lyle and Hoffman” on what children remember from television commercials; and 6. the works of Thompson5 and Ward and Wackman6 on lScott Ward, David Levinson, and Daniel Wackman, "Children's Attention to Television.Advertising," in'Tele— 'vision'in‘Day—to-Day‘Life:"PatternS'of‘USe, edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), 491-515. ' 2Don-L. James, Youth, Media and Advertising, Stud- ies in Marketing No. 15 (Austin, Texas: Bureau of Business Research, Graduate School of Business, University of Texas, 1971). 3F. N. Brumbaugh, “What Effect Does TV Advertising Have on Children,“ Educational Digest, 1954, 19, 32=33. “Jack Lyle and Heidi Hoffman, "Explorations in Pat- (terns of TV Viewing by Preschool Age Children," in Tele-‘ Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock and J. P. Murray (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), 257-273. 5Glenn W. Thgmpson, "Children" s Acceptance of Tele- vision Advertising and the Relation of Televiewing to School Achievement," Journal of EducatiOnal Research 1964, 58,171- 174. 6Scott Ward and Daniel Wackman, "Family and Media Influences on Adolescent Consumer Learning, "‘American Ben ‘havioral Scientist, January/February 1971,14, 415-428. Hereinafter referred to as "Family and Media Influences.“ 38 factors such as age, IQ, and school achievement as predictors of commercial recall. The Techniques Used in Selling to Children A third category of research on the subject of television and children concerns the techniques used in selling to children. Many critics center their arguments on how the message is presented, rather than what is said or what effects the message may be having on the child viewer. Puffery, emphasis on peer group approval, celebrity endorsements, unusual camera angles, the hardsell, repeti- tion, emotional appeals, close-up photography, speeded—up action, elaborate sound tracks, and premium offers have all been used or are being used in attempting to sell products to children on television. The research on these techniques may be divided into six sub-categories: (1) research on the use and effects of celebrity endorsements, testimonials, and other surrogate indicators in children“s television advertising; (2) research on the standards of performance set forth in advertising directed at children; (3) research on the use and effects of various editing techniques in commercials directed at chil— dren; (4) research on the use and effects of qualifiers in commercials directed at children; (5) research on the use nd effects of amgibious, misleading, and missing information 39 in children*s television advertising; and (6) research on the use and effects of various types of appeals in commer~ cials aimed at children. Celebrity Endorsements, Testimonials, and Other Surrogate Indicators The effect of testimonials and endorsements is known to mass communication theorists as the "source" effect. It is believed that the more trustworthy, credible, or pres: tigious a communicator is perceived to be, the less manipu— lative the audience considers his intent and the greater the tendency to accept the communicatorVS conclusions.l Communications attributed to sources of low credi~ bility are considered more biased and unfair than similar communications attributed to sources of high credibility. The audience"s perception of the source thus tends to influ= ence both the interpretation and acceptance of the commer~ cial message.2 1A considerable body of research exists on the source effect in communications. See, for example, Raymond K. Bauer's "Source Effect and Personality: A New.Look," Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer BehaviOr, dited by Donald F. Cox (Boston: Harvard University Divi- ion of Research, 1967), pp. 559-578; and H. C. Kelman's Processes of Opinion Change," Public Opinion'Quarterly, 5 (1961), 57—58. 2Bernard Berelson and Gary A. Steiner,'Human Behav- or: An Inventory of Scientific'Findings (Neszork: arcourt, Brace and WOrld, Inc., 1964), p. 538. 40 Although the use of testimonials and endorsements in advertising directed at children has provoked a great ieal of discussion and research,1 there has been very little research on the effects of such tactics on the young viewer.2 Standards of PerfOrmance Spokesman for Action for Children"s Television (ACT) have remarked that many commercials aimed at children feature standards of performance and enjoyment which the average child would find difficult or impossible to achieve. For example, children can make cookies, but they cannot decorate them like a master chef; they can play with target games, but not hit the bull“s-eye every time; they can manipulate some mechanical toys, but often not as easily as the commercials promise. Unfortunately, no research has een conducted on how extensive this practice is in chil- ren°s commercials or what effect the practice has on the hild. 1See, for example, F. Earle Barcus, Romper Room: 7 Analysis (Boston: Action for Children's Television, 971). 2Besides testimonials and endorsements, the use of urrogate indicators such as colors, symbols, and magnitudes re beginning to be questioned in some circumstances. See ,orothy Cohen, "Surrogate Indicators and Deception in Adver- ising," Journal of Marketing, 36 (July 1972), 10-15. ...-”Mana- ' 41 Editing Techniques The ability to separate programs from commercials is alleged to be more difficult for younger children.1 And yet, a technique used on children's programs is to include the commercial message as an integral part of the overall program through the use of fades and dissolves and 1 through the use of similar sets and characters in both the program and commercial. Morris feels that such a technique blurs the boundary "between the fantasy of the story and the reality of the product commercial. Thus, deliberate advantage is being taken of children who cannot tell where the story line drOps off and the commercial begins."2 Barcus reports that Romper Room, a syndicated format program aired locally as a live program, is perhaps best known for its use of this technique. Over the five—day period included in the Barcus study, the Boston version of the program devoted forty—five percent of its program time to commercials, tie-ins, promos, and time spent playing with brand-name toys.3 1John A. Howard and James Hulbert,'AdVertising and Ehg Public Interest (Chicago: Crain Communications, 1973), Pp. 62-63. ' 2Norman S. Morris,‘Television‘s Child (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1971), pp. 54-55. 3Barcus, Romper Room: An Analysis. 42 Qualifiers Barcus also drew attention to the heavy use of qualifiers on children's television.1 Twenty percent of the advertising messages included in the Barcus study con- tained some form of qualification. These qualifiers were frequently quite brief, and often restricted to one channe1—-video or audio—-of the commercial broadcast. Barcus points out that there is considerable potential for deception in commercials which fail to communicate the conditions by which an offer is constrained. To date, however, no one has studied the effects of such qualifiers on children of different ages. Ambigious, Misleading and Missing InformatiOn Some critics hold that commercials directed at hildren contain outright deceptive claims. For adults he problem is not so bad. Most adults are expected to ecognize the meaning of the commercial before relying on t. The matter of ambigious or misleading statements, 1The term "qualifier“ indicates the use of a hrase, Visual or verbal, which modifies or qualifies the eaning of the primary sales message. For example, an dvertisement for a retail department store sale which tates that the sale "runs Friday and Saturday only,“ ualifies the primary message. "Batteries not included“ 3 a classic example of the use of a qualifier in a tele- [sion commercial. howe tisi pure fact tis. For qua to use ra+ tel in 43 however, is particularly difficult with regard to adver- tising directed at children. What may be interpreted as pure fantasy by a third grader may be taken as straight fact by the pre—schooler.1 A special type of ambiguity exists where an adver— tisement involves, not a double meaning, but a vague asser— tion which has little meaning at all, unless explained. For example, the statement that a toy has a "life-time guarantee" has little meaning until the conditions attached to the guarantee are explained. Some critics argue that it is not the techniques used in advertising to children that are so deceptive, rather it is the information that is omitted in children's television advertising.2 Such critics claim additional information is often needed both for the parent who must gay for the toy as well as the child who is learning {Much of the literature on child development con“ 3irms this belief. See L. Kohlberg, "The Development of {oral Character and Moral Ideology," Child Development, (1964), 415- 424; J. Loevenger, Measuring Ego Development San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970); J. Piaget, The Chind‘ 'onceptionr of the Wbrld (Towaowa, New Jersey: L1ttlefield, dams and Co., 1965), F. L. Ilg and L. B. Ames, Child ehaviOr (New York: Harper Row, 1966). 2See the testimony of Evelyn Sarson and Peggy harren, spokesmen for Action for Children's Television, efore the FTC”s Hearings on Modern Advertising Practices, ovember 1971. 44 )nsumer habits by watching commercials on televis roadcasters point out, however, that no commercial assibly say everything relevant to a purchasing de ..— - .—4-" ad that, beyond a certain point, greater comprehensiveness ill interfere with communication of the most important aformation. ypes of Appeals A number of critics have complained about the ppeals used in advertising directed at children. Many of hese complaints center on the technique of using children 3 pressure their parents into buying things for them.1 averal prominent physicians and professors have warned of 1e serious consequences of manipulating children to reach 1rents.2 Dr. John Condry, Professor of Human Development 1d Psychology, Cornell University, feels, for example, lat this technique may seriously interfere with family fe by creating conflicts between parents and children, ‘teaching children to be materialistic, and by disrupting 1See the testimony of Frederick C. Green, Associate ief,.Children's Bureau, U.S. Department of Health, Educan on and welfare, before the FTC's Hearings on.Modern vertising Practices, November 1971. .ZSee the testimony of Dr. Richard Gladstone, Assis— lt Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, and . John Condry, Professor of Human Development and Psy— >logy, Cornell University, before the FTC"s Hearings on lern Advertising Practices, November 1971. 44 onsumer habits by watching commercials on television. roadcasters point out, however, that no commercial could assibly say everything relevant to a purchasing decision 1d that, beyond a certain point, greater comprehensiveness .ll interfere with communication of the most important lformation. pes of Appeals A number of critics have complained about the peals used in advertising directed at children. Many of eSe complaints center on the technique of using children pressure their parents into buying things for them.1 feral prominent physicians and professors have warned of a serious consequences of manipulating children to reach 'ents.2 Dr. John Condry, Professor of Human Development Psychology, Cornell University, feels, for example, t this technique may seriously interfere with family a by creating conflicts between parents and children, :eaching children to be materialistic, and by disrupting JSee the testimony of Frederick C. Green, Associate f, Children's Bureau, U.S. Department of Health, Educaa and welfare, before the FTC’s Hearings on Modern rtising Practices, November 1971. 28ee the testimony of Dr. Richard Gladstone, Assis— Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, and Tohn Condry, Professor of Human Development and Psy— >gy, Cornell University, before the FTCFS Hearings on rn Advertising Practices, November 1971. attempts to teach the child responsibility. In Dr. Condry's iew, the dangers posed by television advertising are in- reased by changes in technology which have broken down the xtended family, weakened family life, and led to a mobility hich destroys the sense of community and reduces schools to hambles.1 There is some research evidence to support these llegations. Yankelovich, for example, found that mothers ear a great deal of hostility and resentment toward most ommercials on children's programs.2 Many mothers complain bout misrepresentation of the product, manipulation of the 1ild, and the stresses and strains imposed on low income 1milies by the demands created by children‘s television >mmercials. However, mothers' perceptions may also be caused by e purchase influence attempts of children, rather than by Vertising itself. For example, Ward reported that, where strictions were placed on children‘s television watching, ‘ldren.were no less inclined to attempt to influence chases.3 Thus, it could be argued that television llbid. IIIIII ion for Children's Television, 1970), p. 4. 3Scott Ward, Testimony before the FTC's Hearings on ern Advertising Practices as reported in Howard and ert's Advertising and the Public Interest, pp. 65—66. —m—-- . watc ence Code that ing less blai dri1 howe Pro. tio: att ana tec He Vis dis the be and Re} Se! 46 tching does not cause a greater number of purchase influu ce attempts. The National Association of Broadcasters Television e directs that commercials avoid "appeals contending t, if a child has a toy, he betters his peers or, lack— it, will invite their contempt or ridicule." Neverthe— 8, many advertisements appeal to this feeling, either tantly or subtle ("Get Johnny Lightning cars and jets and ve the others wild."). There is no research available, ever, on the emotional consequences of such advertising. The Code guidelines also discourage overselling ducts through inauthentic dramatization, over—glamoriza— 1, exaggeration, and demonstrations implying noneinherent :ibutes of the product. Nevertheless, the content- .ysis by Barcus1 cited numerous instances of misleading Lniques involving camera angles and close-up photography. udged that 25% of the nonaanimated commercials used al'deception. Either of these factors may lead the child to become atisfied with the actual social and performance value of purchased product. In addition, negative feelings may roused by the constant display of enticing4play objects food that the child cannot obtain. 4F. Earle Barcus,'Romper'Room:"An‘Analysis. t prepared for Action‘for Children's Television, mber 1971. While the child's reactions may be restricted to sappointment and displeasure, more serious inferences may .derived. The frustration—aggression theory suggests that blockage of goal directed activity may result in aggressive avior. The inability to possess desired products or the rtcomings of purchased products that do not live up to ectations appear to produce this beHEVior. Researchers e not explored this aspect of television viewing and ressive behavior. NEffects of AdVertising on Children The fourth category of research concerns television's ect on the child's values, knowledge, physical and mental 1th, and social behavior. The research in this category be divided into three subsections: studies on the elopment of materialistic attitudes; studies of children”s :rust of advertising, generalized cynicism, and skepticism; studies of consumer purchasing behavior in the child. lopment of Materialistic Attitudes Some Critics have voiced the opinion that television :amming and advertising promotes the idea that social suc- can be measured in terms of materialistic acquisitions.1 lNorman S. Morris,‘TelevisiOHVS‘Child (Boston: 56‘570 a Brown and Company, I971), pp. “I 48 vard and wackman found that a materialistic orientation L fas unrelated to television viewing time among teenagers, fhen other factors were controlled.1 It was, however, ielated to two reasons for watching commercials: social tility (motivation to watch commercials as a means of athering information about life styles and behaviors ssociated with uses of specific consumer products) and icarious consumption (motivation to watch commercials in :der to identify with or vicariously participate in attrac~ Lve life styles). Thus, the available evidence suggests at youngsters with a materialistic outlook may use com- rcials selectively to support their orientation, rather an being influenced to become materialistic by the com- rcials. strust of Advertising, Generalized 11c1sm, and Skepticism Because of the characteristic puffery and deception ociated with advertising appeals, some critics feel that mercials may be causing youngsters to lose faith in iness and society. A few researchers have begun to astigate this question. For example, Ward, Reale, and .nson recently reported that less than one-third of the lentary school children in their study of childrenVS 1Ward and Wackman, "Family and Media_Influences," \ 567. perc the ele\ feai proI Dev: Beha dre: sig as Pllb tis 49 :eptions agreed that television commercials always tell truth.1 James found that more than half the ninem to en-year-olds he was studying felt that television ured the least believable advertising, three times the ortion for any other advertising medium.2 lopment of Consumer Purchasing gior in the Child The role of advertising and, in particular, Chil“ .5 television advertising is thought by some to have a ficant effect on the development of the child“s role consumer.3 Indeed, attitude surveys show that the c attributes considerable power to television adverw g in influencing a child”s wants and needs.” ‘Some 1Scott Ward, Greg Reale, and David Levinson, iren°s Perceptions, Explanations and Judgments of Lsion Advertising: A Further Exploration," in‘Telen £_in Day=to=Day Life: Patterns of Use, ed. by E. A. :tein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray (Washington, Government PrintingOffice, 1972), 468N490. .2Don L. James,'Youth,'Media‘a """"""" 'Marketing No. 15 (Austin, Texas: Bureau of Business ch, Graduate School of Business, University of Texas, '3See, for example, the testimony of Seymour Banks, resident of Leo Burnett Company, before the FTC’s gs on Modern Advertising Practices, October 1971. “See, for example, F. Earle Barcus,‘Concerned @45peak'0ut on'Childrenis‘Televisiqn (Boston: Action hldrenvs Television, 1973). be] the hat the exe her fat QIO m ”II—I believe, for example, that excessive advertising of over— he-counter pharmaceuticals is directly linked with the ation's rising drug usage problem among youth.1 A number of researchers have begun investigating he consumer socialization process of the child. For example, Berey and Pollay,2 Ward and Wackman,3 and Wells“ have been looking at the part played by the child in the amily purchasing process. Several researchers have examined the link between child's contact with television and his buying behavior. 5 or example, Dickens and Johnson questioned nine— and ............. lSee, for example, A. Cheng, "Drug Abuse, Drug Cul- 1re, Drug Advertising," Food, Drug, Cosmetics Law Journal, :tober 1971, 482-486; “Drug Advertising and Drug Abuse,”- ;padcasting, July 17, 1972, 34_35; "Drugs on TV: Next in .ne for Federal Suppression," Broadcasting, July 24, 1972, ’ o 2Lewis A. Berey and Richard W. Pollay, "The Influu cing Role of the Child in Family Decision Making,“ yrnal'of’Marketing'Research, 1968, 70—72. 3Scott Ward and Daniel Wackman, "Television Adver— sing and Intrafamily Influence: Children‘s Purchase fluence Attempts on Parental Yielding," TeleviSion‘and gial Learning, ed. by J. P. Murray, E. A. Rubinstein and A. Comstock (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Eice, 1972), 516-525. “William D. Wells, "Children as Consumers," rfinowing the Consumer, ed. by J. W. Newman (New York: 1n Wiley and Sons, 1966), pp. l28~145. . 5Dorothy Dickins and Alvirda Johnston, Children“s Quence on Family Food'PurChase Decisions, Bulletin 671, '1cu1tural Experiment Station, Mississippi State Univer— .y, 1962. ten-yea fourths mother: child I viewed lation and th pro'gra televi Sumers heavy Cials reque: ViSiO] ear—old students and reported that more than three— s of those who had recently shopped with their 5 had requested that she purchase food products the had seen advertised on television. Thompson1 inter— third graders and found a moderate positive corre— between the amount of time a child views television e usage of products featured on the child's favorite ms. McNeal2 found that children readily admit that .sion commercials influence their behavior as con- . Ward and Wackman3 reported that mothers who are television viewers perceive that television commer- have a greater influence on their children's purchase ts than do mothers who are light viewers of te1e~ SUMMARY Making allowances for cultural differences and for noes-in the kind, quality, and amounts of television 1Glenn W. Thompson, "Children's Acceptance of Tele— Advertising and the Relation of Televiewing to School ment," Journal of Educational Research, 1964, 58, 2James V. McNeal, I"The Child Consumer: A New " Journal of Retailing, 1969, 45, 15~22. 3Ward and Wackman, 1971, 523—5240 avai what what pros tele who can: HOW reg. gre Tel its int are 11nd 52 lable, researchers can now predict with some confidence most children"s viewing patterns are likely to be, changes the introduction of television will make on a ly's leisure time, and what reactions to television ams and commercials children are likely to have. There are few researchers today who think that Vision has an undesirable effect on a child's health or Jelieve that television is the sole and sufficient 2 of asocial behavior such as delinquency or crime. 'er, in dealing with many of the more critical questions ding children and television advertising, there is a deal of conflict in viewpoint and little hard data. isiOn advertising’s role in causing asocial behavior, antributions to a child"s values and knowledge, its action with the maladjusted and the mentally ill—mall ensely complicated matters far from being completely stood. stu det fit Opl fix the st‘ th th CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY INTRODUCTION An overview of the research design employed in the was provided in Chapter I. Chapter III covers, in , the various steps in the research methodology. The chapter is divided into two sections. The gection describes the procedure used to generate statements for the survey, the pretest, and the research instrument. The second section describes Ipling procedure used for gathering data for the Tables presenting important statistics pertaining to pondent groups included in the study are included in ond section. 53 I we gove nifl i331 adv< of- to [ES 54 SECTION 1: THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT The twofold purpose of the study outlined in Chapter 3: (l) to determine if executives and spokesmen for rnmental, consumer, and industry groups differed sig— cantly in their beliefs and attitudes on the major s surrounding the subject of children‘s television tising; and (2) to measure the co—orientation abilities e various respondent groups. Before a research instrument could be constructed et the study objectives, it was necessary to select titude measurement technique, to generate Opinion state~ on the major issues to be included in the study, and lecify the research hypotheses to be tested. Likert-type attitudinal scales were chosen as the ry measurement tool.1 Likert scales are relatively to conStruct and administer, yet, "the technique stands narkably well compared to more SOphisticated approaches; 2 l'it yields virtually identical reSults.” The'eSSence‘ ,S technique is as follows: E 1The original source of this technique is Rensis "A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes," gsyof‘Psychology, No. 140 (1932). 2Bernard 8. Phillips,'Socia1‘Research:"Strategyrand 5 (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1966), p. 269. each “unde norma reSpc unfat used of 0] for- repr high grou Grit ment dig, the 01‘1- 55 1. For each scale, or dimension of attitude being :ed, a large number of opinion statements are formulated. 2. Statements are classified as "favorable" or aVorableV, and approximately the same number of each is used. 3. A range of categories of response is listed for statement. Five categories, "strongly agree", "agree", cided", "disagree", and "strongly disagree", are 11y used. . Scores of 5, 4, 3, 2, and l are assigned to the nse categories for favorable items, and reversed for rorable items. 5. A pre-testing procedure known as "item analysis" is in constructing the final instrument. A large number inion statements--at least twice the number desired he final scale--are administered to a group reasonably sentative of the final sample group to be tested. The St and lowest scoring subjects within this “judging“ (usually the top and bottom quartiles) are used as rion groups for the evaluation of each opinion state— The statements which reflect the greater power in minating between the two groups are used to construct nal instrument. An extensive review of the literature and research subject of television advertising and children was unde: vey. crea chil info vieh with cont tise inv< con res tho ind the Che tel Ch aken to help identify opinion statements for the sur- The presidents of advertising agencies involved in 'ng, producing, and researching commercials for en's television were contacted and asked for specific ation and assistance on the subject. Personal inter- lasting from one to three hours each were conducted op executives at ten such agencies. These interviews buted much information about the position of adver- and advertising agency personnel on the issues ed.1 Letters were written to academic, government, and r spokesmen, requesting assistance in formulating the ch instrument and guidance as to which items they t should be included in the questionnaire. A number Of iuals contributed suggestions and materials based on requests. Much of this material has been included in ’ II. The end result of the literature search was an ex- list of opinion statements regarding the subject of n's television advertising. The majority of these l—__ 1An interview guide was used in all preliminary ews. A c0py of the guide and cover letters used in Lse of the study may be found in Appendix A. : B lists the firms included in the final survey as the agencies participating in the initial interviews. stat: comm tlse beca list her The sic the CO! ents fell into six subject matter categories: need egulation, responsibility for regulation, effects of rcials on children, techniques used, products adver- , and major proposals in the area. These categories e the focus of the general and specific hypotheses d in Chapter I. The Opinion statements gathered in the literature h were then rewritten to conform to the Likert format. eneral criteria used in writing the survey items was they be: (1) relevant; (2) unambigious; (3) short; omplete, and (5) clear.1 Over two hundred statements constructed on this model. Seliminary;lnstrument A selection of ninety-six items was made for inclu- Ln a pretest version of the research instrument from st of several hundred opinion statements. A number of erations entered into this selection process. 1Many investigators have suggested criteria for ing items for attitude scales. Three classic refer- on the procedure are: K. A. Wang, "Suggested Criteria iting Attitude Statements," Journal of Social Psychol- (August 1932), 367-373; L. L. Thurstone and E. J. The’Measurement‘of'Attitude (Chicago: Chicago Univer- ess, 1929), 28-35; and A. L. Edwards and F. P. ick, "A Technique for the Construction of Attitude ," Journal of Applied Psychology, 32 (1948), 374-394. For exam] statemen‘ of agree order to his atti and nega would in would it est wer. nary in altered test Ve fOIlowi 7' Comme child r9911] Verti Salw one to pedred for he r example, an attempt was made to include a number Of atements covering the same t0pic but varying in intensity agreement or disagreement with the expressed idea in er to allow the respondent greater freedom in expressing attitude. Also, an attempt was made to balance positive negative items, i.e., statements to which agreement 1d imply favorable attitude, and ones where disagreement 1d imply unfavorable attitude. Items pertaining to the Six major issues of inter- were mixed in the sequence of statements in the prelimi- y instrument, and positive and negative statements were ered. The general appearance of statements in the pre- t version of the instrument is illustrated by the lowing: Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Agree Agree Uncertain ‘Disagree"Disagree ommercials to hildren should be agulated by ad- artisers them- elves. Although the response categories were valued from to five for scoring purposes, no numerical values ap- ed under or adjacent to the response categories.1 1The value of the response categories was reversed legative items. This for] a respon subject absence and nega marking the fine The Pre- Sixty-o Courses PrEIimi genera] six Lil had cor items ; questi. when t “‘- and tt to f0] diffe] CrosSe e e: HOted Seeti. 59 :,format was intended to discourage the development of Sponse pattern based upon scoring categories, i.e., a ect might begin to regard himself as a "4". The nce of scoring values and the alternation of positive negative items were designedto minimize any automatic ing patterns. A similar format was carried over into final research instrument.1 :reetestinq_Procedure' .In March 1973, the pre-test was administered to r--one marketing-majors enrolled in three senior level :es at Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville. The minary questionnaire was ten pages long and contained a1 instructions for completing the survey and ninety- ikert—type_attitude statements. After the students ompleted the survey, they were asked to comment on any in the survey that they thought vague, misleading, or ionable. ’ The weighting of a number of statements was reversed he surveys were coded so that a high score on any 1Perhaps because of the length of the questionnaire e nature of the technique, several respondents seemed low automatic patterns in completing the semantic ential portion of the final survey. The number of d-out and changed answers in this section pointed to istence of such patterns. Also, a few reSpondents on their questionnaires that reversing items in this n was "tricky". state] tude ' surve cal P Compu of ti drawr anal} latet sele fina of e the (the Con: oar: Sta MTG P11; l‘ew the ire SOt \ tement and a high total score indicated a favorable atti- e toward the dimension being measured. The completed Veys were then tabulated and analyzed using the Statisti- . Package for the Social Sciences and BMD: Biomedical tputer Programs.1 The mean and standard deviation of each the ninety-six variables was calculated, a histogram was wn of the responses to each variable, the data was factor lyzed to identify clusters of statements which intercOrre- ed highly with each other, and the data was item analyzed. The item analysis was the primary means used to act statements with high discriminating power for the 11 survey. In doing the item analysis, the total score each reSpondent was computed, and the questionnaires of fifteen students with the highest and lowest total scores a top and bottom quartiles) were removed for analysis.2 tmputing sheet, such as that illustrated in Table 3P1, was :tructed for each of the ninety-six items in the prelimi- ' research instrument. The statements were then ranked ..... 1See Norman H. Nie, Dale H. Bent, and C. Hadlai Hull, igtical Package for the Social Sciences (New York: aw-Hill Book Company, 1970), and BMD:‘ Biomedical Com- Programs, edited by W. J. Dixon—TLOS Angeles: Health ces Computing Facility, University of California, ed Sept. 1, 1965). 2Sometimes deciles are used in lieu of quartiles but atter are considered to provide more reliable criterion 8. See William J. Goode and Paul K. Hatt, MethOds in 1 Research (New York: McGraw—Hill, 1952), p. 276. in order 0 of the nir CAD "~— —--—i._ Item Number Picture of WI. Group Nu: Low High generall diScrimi any, Whi that die in Selet StanCes and thu rder of their discriminating power (DP). The rankings he ninety-six statements are reproduced in Appendix C. TABLE 3-1 CALCULATION OF DISCRIMINATORY POWER OF OPINION STATEMENTS fig Number 16: In general, commercials do not present a.tnue' re:of the product advertised.: Score Weighted Weighted D.P. (high Total Mean weighted Number 1 2 3 4 5 (score x (weighted mean - low number total/ weighted checking number of mean) that score) cases 15 7 l 25 1.66 7 15 4 6 5 46 3.06 1‘40 When using quartiles as criterion groups, it is ally desirable that as many items as possible with a iminating power of over 100 be used, and that few, if which drop below .50 be used.1 It is felt, however, discriminating power should not be the sole criterion Lecting items for the final instrument. In some in- es where two items relate to the same general tOpic lus, quite logically, produce comparable DP values, A— ‘— ..... lGoode and Hatt, p. 276. the 10' an ite wise u in the Once a made : the f: survej of it Perta Oates the e the s reprt is b USed See DEr st, 600 IEgE USe( Pro} Ont in t itel Was 62 lower of the items is usually passed over in favor of item with a still lower DP value, relating to an other- e uncovered topic within the attitude dimension. It is desirable that a Likert scale be roughly equal the number of positive and negative statements included. e again, occasional substitutions of lower DP items were e in order to achieve an approximate balance. However, final criterion used in selecting items for the final 'ey was one of economy. Because of the limited number .tems that could be included, only items that strictly ,ained to the five dimensions of concern were selected.1 The exhibit of ranked statements in Appendix C indi- 3 those statements selected for the final survey, with above considerations in mind. The average DP value for statements included in the final instrument was .97.2 The preliminary sample was small, and not an exact tsentation of any of the populations to be sampled; 1This procedure for selecting items for the survey Lsed upon the original research of Rundquist and Slotto in the construction of the Minnesota Survey of Opinion. 1. A. Rundquist and R. F. Slotto, Personality in the :ssion (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 0 2Four of the items selected had DP values less than Three of these items pertained to recent proposals ing childrenVS television advertising. The students 'n the pretest were probably not familiar with these als; thus, DP values were probably not good indications items discriminating value among the groups included final survey. Excluding the DP values of these three the average DP ranking for the final items selected 08. nevertt For exe noted 1 test, t confir the st The Re naire divide Were e feren- the L Code numbe anal} the 5 clust faCte tion VQrs Samp 6'3 ertheless, valuable results were obtained in the pretest. example, a number of statements were reworded or elimiw ed from.the final questionnaire as a result of the prev t, and the factor analysis of the pretest data helped firm the existence of the five dimensions of interest in study.1 LResearch InStrument The final research instrument was a mail question- re of seven or eight pages.2 Each questionnaire was ided into three sections. The first and last section e common to all respondents. The second section was dif- ent for each respondent group. The first sectioncontained instructions for using Likert—type scale, space for a two-digit questionnaire 2 number,3 and twenty-nine Likertetype opinion statements. ............................................... JIt is desirable to have a significantly larger er of subjects than variables in conducting a factor ysis.‘ Nevertheless, the data were factor analyzed using sample of sixtyeone subjects, and the statements did tax on the five dimensions expected. The data from the 3r analysis were only a minor input to the item seleCE process. - 2The various respondent groups received different .ons of the questionnaire. 3Space was made for only a two~digit identification r, despite the fact that over 300 individuals were ed. It was felt that a smaller identification number In the see statement: or three ‘ page in t‘ tion of a anember tising ag researchi responder reflected Page. ment on 3 boards a resPonde they fel boards to mark how tinnity The bree groups ; \ xtools varions 64 1 the second section of the questionnaire, nine of the :atements from the first section were repeated either two : three times. ReSpondents were told at the top of each age in the second section to place themselves in the posi- ton of a Spokesman for Action for Children's Television, or member of one of the network review boards, or an adver- .Sing agency executive involved in creating, producing, and esearching commercials for children's television. The :spondents were then asked to mark the response that best :flected the View of the person listed at the top of the .ge. The respondents in the ACT sample were asked to come nt on how they thought peOple on the network continuity ards and advertising agency executives would feel. The Spondents in the industry sample were asked to mark how ey felt ACT spokesmen and members of the network continuity 1rds would feel. The government respondents were asked to 7k how they felt ACT spokesmen, members of the network con— .uity boards, and advertising agency executives would feel. breakdown of the second section by the various respondent ups is shown in Table 3-=2° l—_¥ td give the impression of a more limited sample. The Lous reSpondent groups were differentiated by the color :he ink used in writing the identification number and the wer of pages in the second section of the questionnaire. questionnaire number was left blank in the second mail— in the hopes of increasing the number of respondents. H N Industry Sample ACT Sample GOVernment Satmple Network Sample \- Semantic the Conc retiniatj lists 01 ential a end of . three m. Tannenh 65 TABLE 3—2 QUESTIONNAIRE COMPOSITION BY RESPONDENT GROUP Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Respondent"s Respondent's perception Semantic own of the attitudes of differential attitudes scales and ACT Agency Network personal data stry 1e / / / / le / / / / nment Le / / / / / wk e / / / / The third section of the questionnaire used ten ntic differential scales with bi-polar adjectives to rate :oncepts of "childrengs television advertising" and l”self- .ation in advertising." The adjectives Were drawn from : of the most common adjectives used in semantic differ- .1 analysis.1 A sevenminteryal scale was used. At the f the third section, respondents were asked to complete multiple choice items pertaining to their age, marital 1See Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, and Percy E. tbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana, Ill.: 'sity of Illinois Press, 1957). status reprod‘ 66 :atus, and educational level. The final questionnaire is eproduced in Appendix D. T the study In prelim Action fc made to c the ACT e this pro( unnecess; mailing, 90ing th Provide Because homever’ tion ple SamPles using t: determi- Chilnre made to inVO lVe 67 SECTION 2: DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE The procedure used in selecting respondents for he study varied for each of the respondent groups. Lpreliminary conversations with the executive director of tion for Children's Television (ACT) arrangements were de to channel all questionnaires to ACT members through e ACT office in Newtonville, Massachusetts. ACT initiated is procedure several years ago to protect its members from necessary harassment. Several days before the initial iling, the president of ACT questioned the necessity of ing through this two-step mailing procedure and offered to >vide the names and addresses of the ACT respondents. :ause the initial procedure was already established, 'eVer, no changes were made in the sampling and distribu- n plans. Names for the advertising agency and advertiser ples were drawn from the Standard Directory of Advertis— lflgenCieg and the Standard Directory of Advertisers, 19 the preliminary network children's show audits to ermine which companies were involved with advertising on Ldren's shows. In the industry samples, an attempt was e to include the top executives of all the major firms tlved with children's television advertising. trtunately, the employee turnover rate in the advertising indust time a les, t retire moved down 1 B cont Sampl Perso ViCe. indiv bOard 0f tt retu ComF anC turn the industry is very high, even among top executives. By the time an individual's name is listed in the trade directore ies, there is a good chance the individual will have retired,.moved to a new position within the company, or moved to an entirely different company.1 The respondents in the industry samples are broken— down by title and principal product in Table 3w3. Appendix B contains the names of the various companies surveyed. Respondent names for the network continuity board Sample were obtained by contacting the three major networks personally. One network would only provide the name of the vice—president in charge of commercial clearances, not the individual boardemembers. In that one case, the review board membErs listed for that network in the 1972 edition of the Television Factbook were added to the sample. The government sample was a judgment sample come Posed of senators and congressmen thought of as 'consumerists" by their colleagues, and the commissioners and top staff members of the FTC and FCC. CongresSman tosenthall°s (Democrat, New York) staff helped provide the tames of representatives and senators for the sample. ' . ........ J'Although several of the questionnaires were Eturned with the notation "retired" or "no longer with Dmpany" on the envelope, the media, advertiser, and agency ccount changes listed in‘AdVertising'Age indicate that the urnover problem is probably larger than the returned nvelopes indicate. 69 TABLE 3G3 COMPOSITION OF THE INDUSTRY SAMPLES ADVERTISER SAMPLE umber of Company Executives Surveyed by Title 25 Corporate chairman and presidents 14 Group vice presidents, executive vice presidents, and senior vice presidents 18 Corporate staff vice presidents, managers, and directors 9 Division presidents 5 Division marketing vice presidents, managers, and directors 3 Division advertising vice presidents, managers, and directors '_1 Other 75 gmber of Companies Surveyed bnyrincipal‘Product 1 Beverages 3 Candy 4 Cereals 7 Food (other than beverages, candy and cereals) 8 Toys _4, Vitamins 27 AGENCY SAMPLE er of Agency Executives Surveyed by Title 24 Presidents 22 Senior or executive Vice presidents 41 Vice presidents, management supervisors, and account supervisors 10 ‘Account executives 10 Other 107 The init individt the stud failing was made to ensu; reSpond t0 the. a more Of resF Amenus mailing actiOn and C01 data c 70 Two mailings of the final questionnaire were made. he initial mailing was made June 12, 1973, and went to 318 ndividuals drawn from the five populations of interest in he study. The second mailing, sent to all respondents ailing or refusing to complete the initial questionnaire, as made between July 12 and July 16, 1973. A total of eleven different cover letters was used ensure responses tailored to the situations of the various spondents in the samples. A hand—written note was added the bottom of many of the follow-up cover letters to add more personal touch and, hopefully, to increase the number 5 responses. Samples of the various cover letters are included in vpendix A. Table 3-4 breaks down the initial and follow—up ilings for each of the five samples according to the tion finally taken by the respondents. a Preparation The returned questionnaires were checked for comments coded, before the data were punched on standard IBM a cards. The coding and key punching of each questions re was double checked to ensure accuracy. The Statistical kage for the Social Sciences (SPSS) programs were used to mV .H “cam Nu...“ WSHUCH 71 TABLE 3-4 QUESTIONNAIRE RETURN RESULTS First Second Total Mailing: Mailing (percent of samplelt' Agency Sample Number in mailing 107 48 Completed survey 56 15 71 (66.4%) %q Returned by post office 1 -- Refused to participate 2 —- g No answer 48 33 E Advertiser Sample gg Number in mailing 75 33 fg‘Completed survey 23 11 34 (45.3%) (4 Returned by post Office 5 —- Refused to participate 14 1 No answer 33 21 ACT Sample Number in mailing 59 16 Completed survey 43 7 50 (84.7%) Returned by post office -- -- Refused to participate -- -- No answer 16 9 Sovernment Sample Number in mailing 64 44 Completed survey 11 ll 22 (34.4%) Returned by post Office —- -- Refused to participate 9 13 No answer 44 2O etwork Sample Number in mailing 13 10 Completed survey 2 l 3 (23.1%) Returned by post office -- -- Refused to participate 1 ~- No answer 10 9 anal: and 1 used 72 analyze the data,1 T—tests, analysis of variance tests, and Duncan range tests were the basic statistical tools used in the analyses. 1See Norman H° Nie, Dale H. Bent, andCo Hadlai Hull, tatistical Packa e for the Social SoienCes (New York: cGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970)° CHAPTER IV FINDINGS OF THE STUDY (PART 1) INTRODUCTION The findings of the field investigation phase E the study are presented in this chapter and in lapter V. This chapter summarizes the study findings alating to the variance within and mean difference be— veen responses of the groups surveyed on six major ssues regarding children"s television advertisingo laPter V summarizes the study findings relating to the t-orientation portions of the studyo THE GENERAL RESEARCH HYPOTHESES ed for Regulation of Children"s levision Advertising y The first general hypothesis is: There are significant differences in theyverbal— ized attitudes of the respondent groupS'in regard to the need for increased regulation of children°s television‘c'omme'rc'ialso 73 [7 __ __._ 1 spe wer 3am The sis in the mrrmc—rzZ 74 Five items on the final questionnaire referred specifically to this issue.1 Analysis of variance tests were used to detect significant differences among the sample means of the respondent groups on each item. The test results strongly supported the general hypothe- sis.2 The null hypothesis was rejected at the .01 level in all five tests. Table 4-1 summarizes the findings of the analysis of variance tests. 1Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients and Spearman rank correlation coefficients were computed aetween all 29 items on the questionnaire and used to Jroup the test items under the various hypotheses. Only in the discussion of the third general hypothesis was an attempt made to sum the respondent scores for the Jrouped items to develop an index of respondent perform- ince on that group of items. All 29 items are individually graphed in the :ables following the six general hypotheses in this thapter. However, only a few items were included in the liscussion of the findings in order to conserve space. br example, five items seemed to group well under.the irst general hypothesis. These five items were included n the analysis of variance test run in testing the ypothesis and are individually graphed in Tables 4-1 and ~2. Only two of the five items are specifically men- ioned in the discussion of the hypothe31s. 2In all tests of hypotheses in this dissertation, hen the null hypothesis is rejected at a = .05, the aSt results are said to "support" the alternate hypothe— 18. When the null hypothesis is rejected at a = 001, 1e test results are said to "strongly support" the Lternate hypothesis. 75 >UHfi-.. vrwNC—ffrnn 'WNIHKAWIF.UIUHI1VEOU a: THU!” W191; y‘lRINU \fllfln—thun!‘ Pv>0IqAUiIEJN| Isl. ..Inil \IQI‘I'4~I§OI\-bl~ V‘III|.V \C‘jfifll\u .‘pl,,\uyn.ilyiu V.I¢i mo.mmm mwa ampoa no.4 mm.a>a owa mmsouo canvas 00. mm.mm mm.a¢ ew.mma m monouo cmmzpwm huHHHQMMOHm oaumm .m mmumnWm Gmmz mmMMflUw mo 85m Eopmmnm mo mmmumwo condom .mmou mcflmflpum>pm CH coma mmswflanowu mgp uofiuumwm pasonm mGOHumasmmu Bmz oa.omm ova Hmuoe mo.a m4.ana boa mmsouw unsung oo. mm.mm om.@m Ho.wh m masono cwwzumm muflaflgmnoum oaumm .m mmumswm cams mmnmnmm mo Esm Eonmmum mo mmmumma monsom .mosmfipsm mcHBmH> may mo musumc map mo mmsmown GOHumasmmu Hafioomm wmnflcvmu msfimfluumbpm coamflbmflmu mscmupaflso mm.®mm 05H Hmuoe mm. Hm.mma has masons cabana oo. mo.ooa om.mm m6.msm m masons smmanmm spannnmnosm owuam .m mmumsam ammz mmnmsvm mo saw accommm.mo mmmummo monmmm .mfl hpmouam pa cmnp Gammaflmom whoa ma padoam smmmfifiso on mcwmwuum>pm soamfl>mwwfi UZHmHBmm>Q< ZOHmH>mQMB mszmeAHmU m0 ZOHBfiQDwmm mom Qmmz mmB OB,UZHZH m0 MHmMQ¢24 ho wmflfizbm How m9m¢9 76 mm.mmm mwa Hmpoe om. oo.msa SSH masons manna: oo. mm.me mm.mm om.4om m masons ammzumm hpfiaflnmaoum oaumm .m moumswm cam: mwstWm mo Ebm Eocowum mo mmmummm wousom umsn wwsu “mwflx usonm cmcnwocoo mHHmmH #0: can scamfl>waoa m .mNUSUoum Mambo Haom ou paws .coucaflco co mnwwfluum>pm “no: mm.OHN ova Hmuoa mH.H mv.an mma museum segues oo. mm.w comnb mm.mm m mmdono cwoauom muHHHQMQOHm 0Humm .MH mwnmswm cmmz mwnmswm Mo Sam Eoomeh 4D ouuan): ohmna 77 Hypothesis lnl states: ACT and_government respOndentS‘will'be‘more 'like1Y't0'expreSS‘Strong‘agreement‘with'the 'Statement‘"childrenVS‘television'advertising "reguireS‘special regulation becauSe‘of‘the_ nature of the viewing audienceW than Will 'industry respondents (i.e., the‘advertiser‘and ‘adVertising'agencyjsamples)."All'four'respond— 'ent-group8‘will'agree'that_special regulation 'iskneeded. Hypothesis lml was strongly supported. Eighty- four percent of the ACT respondents and twenty-seven per— cent of the government respondents expressed strong agreement with the item. Fourteen percent of the ACT respondents and fiftyunine percent of the goVernment respondents expressed agreement with the statement. While the majority of the agency and advertiser respondents also agreed with the statement, less than ten percent of either sample expressed strong agreement that special regulation was needed. Hypothesis 1m2 states; ACT and government respondents will expreSS'the feelingthat'more‘regulation'of‘ChildrenIS'teleé ‘vision'commercialS’iS'needed."The‘industry respondentswill‘not agree. This hypothesis was strongly supported. The issue f whether there should be more regulation of children's elevision commercials divided the respondents into two istinct groups. All of the ACT respondents and over inety percent of the government respondents felt that 78 television advertising to children should be more regu- lated than it already is. Sixty-six percent of the agency respondents and eighty-five percent of the adver- tiser respondents disagreed. Table 4-2 summarizes the results of the statis— tical tests used in testing the above hypotheses. . NWV Man—Hahn 79 mm.. am.v as oo. oo. oo. unmannm>ow om. om.v Nv III 00. oo. Bum mm. oo.m gm . III mo. Hmmfluu®>©4 mH.H ov.m on all mocmmm mcflmwuum>pm .U.m x a 50¢ Homfluuo>©¢ mucmmm Apmmucs wmaamnuosev mzmmz zmmzsmm mozmmmmmHo mo mozaonHonm mmummmflo . mmumm Mamsoupm mmummmwa camamooss. mmnmm _ mamcouum Ll F b . xx 5/ a \m Apmma omcmm mamflpass cmoqsnv /,/ \\.u woa .Hm>umucfl mocooflmcoo mm. m mcflms u :wom pcmummmap >HDCMOHMHamflm so: was mafia \\\ .u meow way an cmuoomumpcs mamme 03p mam / u \\\\ . mom I O . .. nm1Iwy {r . . .woe H mzamz .598 no 2033333 m / pamsqugov. .. vk; .. ...om r F . " _ / \ ‘00.! 09 . _ m .... . .. .1 ..mlw < M. .. . m w m m .meflpnm>tm fwoo e x O I . Om. m. ... m 4.. a w +wow 1 3 .mH mvmwuam 9H smzu commadmon whoa on casogm coupflflao ou mgflmflunm>©m sowmfl>maoe Nana Honesz ucmsmumpm 11‘ mUZHmHBmm>Qfl ZOHmH>mqu m.ZMMdAHmU m0 ZOHB¢QDOMM QMmdflMUZH.m0m,Qmmz 4 mmmmfi WH Mvwgflhnflnflaonvllmlv mqmfirfi 80 ow. Hw.v NW mH.H vm.m vm NN.H hN.M on .U.w x c 80¢ Mwmfluho>©m Aummuua wmaflmuuosev unwEGHobow Bow mefluuw>pd xocmmfi mqflmfluuo>©< Mocwm< m2¢fl2 zmmgBmm MUZMMMMMHQ m0 MUZ¢UHMHZUHm Apmma madam mamfluasz cmoasav .Hm>nwucfl mocmcflwcoo mm. m mcflws pameMMHt mauqmoHMHsmHm poc ohm mafia mEmm wry ma touoomnwwcs mummfi osu ham mzmmz moomo mo ZOHBDmHmemHo H [ A — axeAvai Aouefiv' IDVj -m quemuxenos 138T on“ mo wwdmomn coaumanmmu Hmwowmm mwuflsku mcflmfluum>wm coamfl>mamp m.: I!!! /lllilll|ll W7 omummwflo mamcouum. mocwmm ‘ \mW\LV mefipuw>cm memMmHQ mmumd wwnmm mamconpm CHfl¥HwUQD \ wrWOH \ . >.woN \\ N...om ILWIiIJV// \ ....wov ./< \\ x . ..wom , . ..wom Imu¢‘/ \ --mOh w. .wom .mocwflpcm mnflsofl> man no wusum: mhvaflao umHIH Hwnfidz ucwfiwumpm 8l IIIIIIIlllllllllllllllllllll!‘ xIIIIIIlIIIilIIIIlIIIIIIIIIIllllllllllllllllllllill. hm. on.m Hm oo. oo. oo. ucwaduwbou mm. mm.v Hv Ill 00. 00. Bow mH.H vv.m mm III mm. waHUHw>Ufl mm.H mw.m mm nan moawmw mcflwwuuw>©¢ .U.m x g 90¢ HmmHun>pm mocwmm Humwuua ewHHBaoEv mzmmz zmmzemm mozmmmmrHHo mo mozmonszHm mmHmMmHQ wwnmm Samsonpm wwnmmwflo aflmuumozb wmem mecouum HOH Auon wmamm wHQHuHDE cmocsov . .Hm>kucH mocopflwcoo mm. m mcwm: // mom pcmHoMMHc aHucmoHMHanm no: mum wzflH /,/{\.\\ /J// .( . .\ x . mom mean or“ an anoomnwpcd wcmwfi 03p >c< Hmmfluuw>UWIMWU o/xn “km N . wow means Home mo oneDmHmamHo mocwmm .Ifl /. \ .1 l ucwacum>oo /. . . - mom H I m \MW 1 .\ T __ - v u i 99.. 1.... . ..oo W .w m. N ..os H a . .. u. .m m . m.om ... m s e e u x 3 own: mwswflcaowp may uOHHume pasoam mQOHumacme sz "omua Hwnfisz usoewHMHm if!!! .thp mafimfluuwbpm C: H 82 H vm. vw.m Hm om. mo. mo. HcmEcHo>oo no.H mm.m mg III 00. oo. 90¢ gm. oo.m mm III «S. Hmmfluuo>o¢ ma.H vb.m mo III wocmmm mGHmeH0>U¢ .U.m x c Bum waHun>o¢ mocwmm prwB omcmm mHmHHHsz cmocsov .Hm>Hmch woswowwcoo mm. m msflms pcmHmMMHU meamoHMHcmHm uoc mum mafia 08mm way an oonoomnmocs mommfi 03H wc< mzmmz moomo mo ZOHBDmHmamHQ _b ‘I Aouebv' quemuxers. xesrqxeApva l LOV‘ you mownmuumn mm nosmo J Hummuue emHkuuozev mzmmz zmmsemm mozmmmmmHo mo mozaonHonm moummmwo mmumm wamcoupm memMmHo GHMHHooco mwnmm mamsoupm ” . \lallV\ \\ \ \\ HomHuHo> Bum . H Jim . om . WHMflOHmflEHOU mnmfiflmaomflo mo om: mnu mcflpuwmmn mwcHHoncm HmHOHHHm m.cwHoHH£o acme o>onmEH tacos Homosaocfl "HNIH Hmafisz ucwfimpmum woa wow wom wow wom wow wow wow MVQDHHHUHHOUIIIINIW‘ mqmghu 83 9w. No.m Hm oo. oo. oo. pcmfisum>ow N9. 9®.v me all 00. oo. 90¢ om. mm.H gm III Ho. Hmmflunm>o¢ 0H.H av.m mo III >0cmm¢ mcwmflpno>o¢ .o.m x c 90¢ Hmmwuum>o¢ mocwm¢ Inmmnue omHHmunozao mzmmz zmmzsmm mozmmmmmHo mo mozmonszHm moummmflo woum¢ mamcoupm ownmcmflo aflmuumono . mwum¢ .I mHmcouum bl, p, u . 4 . \\......uh w / /. \ ..Qw.’ \ \. \ l. a wOH // :/( \\\\ \\ // II) \\ \ \.rwom humm9 omcmm mHmHuHoz cmocoov .// \. . Jfl\\ . .Hm>umucfl cocooflmcoo mm.Hm mcflmd //_ / 2/ \ \l1.wom stHmMMHo >HUGMOHMHcmHm Hos mum mafia // / xx 4 x I mean any 9Q cmuoomuwocs mcmoe 03H mc¢. Imwhv // \\ // a, \ l. -wov x l H mZflmE nHDOMU .mO ZOHBDmHMBmHQ m meflUHw>U¢m/.\ IN» \ ,1 HH 4. wom . . . . so no . .I \ .+y . fill-II. ., - H -114 mocmmm u an >ow,/, \\ ltMWu, l [.406 < ’ ~ W ..w. m. w /.\ 90¢ ,1. 4 men .A He A L H m w m .4 .o 1. A W .m m T. s e .e u 1 4 .mpospoum Hflmfiu HHom on Hams umsn mmru “moH omwpnm>om umoz ”nmla Honfidz ucmfiwpmum 84 The Job of Regulating Children's 'TeieVision'Advertising The second general hypothesis is: There are significant differences in the verbal— ‘ized‘attitUdeS'of'the'respondent‘groups‘in 'regard'tO'Whose4jOb'it‘should‘be‘tO'regu1ate television'adVertising'directed'at'Children. Five items on the survey referred specifically to this issue. Analysis of variance tests between the sample respondent scores on these items strongly sup- ported the general hypothesis. In all five tests the null hypothesis was rejected at the .01 level. The find— ings of the analysis of variance tests are summarized in Table” 4"3 0 Hypothesis 2-1 states: ACT and government respondents will favor‘govern- ment'regulation of adverEESIng'directed'at children. ‘Industry;respgndentS'will‘favor'self- regulation and indUStry guidelines. This hypothesis was strongly supported. Over Sixty percent of the respondents in the industry samples favored self-regulation, while only fifteen percent of the ACT respondents and twenty-three percent of the Jovernment respondents favored this form of regulation. Over half the government and ACT reSpondents felt :hat commercials aimed at children should be regulated by :he government. Less than twelve percent of the indus- rY reSpondents agreed. 85 D]. b. r hvlkrlllhtiu. Hum.mmm OPH H6909. mm. PH.mOH boa mQDOHO Gdfifidg oo. no.mHH 60.69 9H.Hmm m mmsouo cmmzpwm mflfiafinmnoum Oflpmm .m mmumnvm ammz mmnmnmm MO 85m Eoommum m0 mmeme monsom .mSOflm SOHmH>mep m.GmHUHH£o mo mpfiamso 03H m>OHmEH ou mHupHH msoo m>mn 9mo0p mms ca mmsflamoflsm COHHMHoommm momuu $39 om.hmm woa Hmuoe mm.H mh.mmm moH mmdouo GHQHHB oo. mm.mm vo.mm mH.moH m mesono nmmzumm SHHHHanmHm .OHumm .m mmammmm saw: nonmaom no How Eoommum mo mmonmmo condom .mm>HmmEm£u mummflphm>om an omumazmmu whoa on oasogm smuoaflno 0p mHMHOHmEEo0 om.mm¢ mmH Hmu09 mm. ov.mmH moH mmsouw :HnuHs oo. no.mm 9m.om om.mem m mesons cmmzumm SHHHHnmnoum oaumm .m womanWm use: mmHMJWm mo 85m Eoommum mo mmmHmmo monoom .mHMHHOU mcflmwuum>om 9Q Umafiouucoo nos mHmB HH MH Hoppmn on oasos GOHmH>mHmp m.cmHoHH£o mo NHHHmsv $39 2meQHmU B< QMEUMMHQ GZHmHEmm>Q¢ ZOHmH>mQME m9¢dbwmm OE mm Qflbomm EH moo mmomg OB UZHZHmfimmm mZMBH ZO mEmMB MUZ¢HM¢> m0 MHmNQ¢Z¢ m0 mm¢zzbm mlv mqmflfi ‘‘‘‘‘‘ .QHIH 86 H vm.HvH moH Hmp09 h. mo.nHH me memouw GHQHHB oo 9m.HH mm.m mw.vm m mmfiouo comzpom thHmemo m ..ofiumm19...mmumsvm cmoz . mouwfiom mo Ham Eooomum mo wmouomn condom .H0H>M£wn mcHZoH> EOHwH>meu m.cmHoHH£o mumasmmn ou mucmhmm map on mm ma uH . mv.mmm 09H Hmu09 . mH H om.mmH 90H mmfionw gauflaz oo mH.m¢ 4n.4w ...... 87 Eighty-six percent of the ACT respondents and seventy-three percent of the government respondents felt that children's television programs would be of better quality if they were not "controlled by advertis- ing dollars." Seventy-eight percent of the agency reSpondents and ninety-seven percent of the advertiser respondents did not agree. One aspect of this issue, not included in a specific hypothesis, is that of parental regulation. a majority of the respondents of all four sample groups 1greed that "it is up to the parents to regulate chil— lren's television viewing behavior." None of the .ndustry respondents disagreed with the statement; cwever, eighteen percent of the ACT respondents and wenty-four percent of the government reSpondents did. A number of government and ACT respondents com- ented on the wording of this item. These comments ndicate that some respondents disagreeing with the item :tually believed that a major responsibility of parents 5 to regulate their children"s viewing behavior. >wever, many of the respondents felt the regulatory :sponsibility was also the task of the broadcaster, Le advertiser, and the government. For example, one T respondent wrote: 88 "Ideally I agree, but it doesn't happen and is even impossible in many situations. Although I feel it is my reSponsibility in my family, I feel a great deal of responsibility lies with broadcasters." Another member of the ACT sample added: ”What about those parents who can't or won‘t regu- late their kid's viewing behavior? I believe parents should help regulate children“s viewing behavior but broadcasters must'share the reSponsin bility.” Hypothesis 2~2 states: ACT and_government respondents will expreSs‘the feeling'that'tradE'association‘guidelineS'have 'done'little'tO'improve'the'guality'Of‘Children's television advertising."Industr 'respondents will net agree. Hypothesis 2=2 was strongly supported. Ninety- eight percent of the ACT respondents (one respondent narked "uncertain”) and sixty-four percent of the govern- nent respondents felt that the trade association guide- .ines in use today have done little to improve the [uality of commercials on children"s shows. Less than ixteen percent of the agency reSpondents and none of the dvertiser respondents agreed. The test results for the survey items relating o the question of who should regulate television adver- ising directed at children are summarized in Table 4~4. Hm. om.m Hm oo. oo. oo. ucmssnwboo om. oo.¢ we sun 00. oo. 90¢ om. mm.H mm ,, nun mo. meHusm>c¢ om.H em.H me an» mucosa mchHHHw>6H .o.m N s 90¢ Hmmfipsm>p¢ mocmm¢ Hummua9 coHHmplos9v;. mz¢m2 ZMMEBWm mozmmmmmHo mo m02¢0HmHonm mmHOMmHQ mmum¢ hamcouwm memmwflo swmummoqo mon¢ WHmCOHum . _ F’ o c I, 1!! H \ \‘u ‘41 ......«-n.Iu/.vfl-../V\\\ \.1 ....OH. Smoe macwm mHmHHHsz c8258 _ -/-/ .. \. ..l mom MW .Hm>nmucfi mocwoflmcoo mm. m moans I x .\ u ucwhmmmwo hapcmow9HsmHm Hos mnm mafia [bulky/I .fl \\\ n - wom 05mm man an Umuoomuwoco mamme osu 9s¢ pcmacnwbow II. LN N a wow // \x M . mzamz .596 so onesmHmemHo .AP.\N. - . . .. .- H m Hmmwwhmbo¢ \mufl. m dcm TqL A .... .J. so¢.....oo W... V. my W a N A A ..w A i ..\ ..oH e u e . .... m s e e u 1 1 .wHMHHoo mafimwunw>om 9Q omHHonpcoo no: wHwB uw WmaH Hmnfisz ucofioumum NH Hoppoa on oHsos conHbonu m.soHcHH£o mo muHHcow m£9 1! 1' NOZHmHBmm>D< ZOHmHPWHmB mazmeQHmU HB¢QDUmm 09 SH WH mOo mmoma Pi“ 1111!" 9O NH.H fiw.m Hm mo. 00. oo. pcmfisum>oo NNoH HboH No 01! oo. oo. 90¢ om. mmom vm nun om. HmeuHm>w¢ mN.H vv.m mo nun hosmm¢ msHmHuHo>o¢ .o.w X a 90¢ HmmeHm>U¢ mocmm¢ AHona9 owHHmquB9o mZHmcouum monmeo usuuwoqo mmum¢ hHmsouum _ H _ - Emma momma mHmeHsz unease rm/ . \ \\w/IIH. -u ct: uuuuu .1 Hilfig .HmSHmusH mosonmsoo mm. m. mchs H. ,/ // / \\\\\ x / \ \ . ..OH pstwMMHo mHHGMOHMHcmHm Hos mum mCHH H / II. \\\ : mfimm $3» an owuoomnmoss msmwfi 03p >s¢ m /.x \ \ mom , / x. \\ - wom mzmmz mpomo moZoHeDmHgmHm . / 4 ..WII.‘ / A lHl ..ll m ,, .../ \ HmmHunm>HvH woe . P . n - u \ _ W. _ mo _ W. W _ J / ... oo L mom i m w m I wow 1 o 1.,\\HWV m .A up 90¢ L won w a s . 1 I naom WVUH Honesz usmfiwumum Hm oo. oo. oo. pc$EsH$>oos mm. nm.v mv as: oo. oo. 90¢ mv. mo.H vm nnl mo. H$wHuH$>U¢ vo.H OH.N on unu >OC$m¢ osHmeH$>©¢ .U.m x. c 90¢ H$$Hpu$>o¢ >0s$o¢ Bmmuua HomHHmHuosfi mZEE ZMEmm mUZmEMhMHQ m0 HUZSHmHZOHm \l $$Hm$mHQ $$Hm¢ MHmQOHum $$Hm$mHQ cHMHH$UGD $$Hm¢ hHmcoupm hi \. la Hum$9 $mcmm $HmHuHsz smocsoo er II. \\ \ \-w0H .Hm>u$ucH $on$onsoo mm. m mchs \\ 1, l \ I loom ps$n$mme mHHCMOHMHcmHm #0: was $QHH I II // . \ a $E$w $£u ma U$Hoomn$os5 mcm$fi 03¢ 9s¢ //x .2; \. \ .wom // \ H mz¢m2 mbomw ho ZOHBDmHMBmHQ II, /V\ \ -wov H m luM‘lv / \ ///&oo ; 7/ . [mom Tia .1 _ c . ii.— / \ / H. w W m. W \ J - ..oo A e A I H$$H H$> m w m . .u o¢ nwom u. ,A m s 9 How a u 1 3 .ocHwHUH$>©$ GOHwH>$H$u mnqwhoHHAO mo huHHmdo $£p $>0HQEH ou $HuuHH $coo $>$£ >MWOH $m: CH m$cHH$UHDm QOHHMHUOmmm mpmnu $39 HmHUH H$QESZ us$E$U$pm li/ WOSQHufioofluvnw flqnfifi Hm. mm.m Hm oo. oo. oo. uc$EsH$>oo‘ mm. hm.v NV III 00. oo. 90¢ wv. m®.H VM nun mo. H$$HuH$>o¢ vooH OHom on nun mos$m¢ mCHwHuH$>o¢ .U.m x 2 90¢ M$mHuH$>o¢ moc$m¢ smouua 333535 mZ¢m2 zmm39mm mozmmmmmHQ mo moz¢0HmszHm \l $$Hm$mHQ $$Hm¢ hHmsonum $$Hm$mHQ chuu$oco $$Hm¢ hHmconum Hym$9 $mcmm $HmHuHsz smocomo .Hm>u$an $os$pHmsoo mm. m mcho uc$H$HMHU mHHQMOHMHcmHm Ho: $H$ $QHH mom $Emm $£u an ©$Hoomn$cso wc$$fi oSu 92¢ mom mzmmz mbomw ho ZOHBDmHMBmHQ , ILMH 1/ uc$ECH$>oo x i I H mvmom. V v 3 //\\ /// .. D. 6 o 3 . -woo A e A I meHuH$>©¢ 9 u a . J w‘ I O I 00% 4 K W m. a new a u 1 1 . .osHmHun$>U$ GOHwH>$H$u mHQ$HUHH£o mo %UHH$:v $£u $>0MQEH Op $HHuHH $206 $>$: wmwou $w: QH m$cHH$UHsm QOHHMHoommm mommy $£9 meUH H$QEDZ uq$E$Hmum UODGHHGOUHUVIW MHm¢H mv.m Hm ON. 00. oo. us$EcH$>oo mH.H mm.m Nv nun oo. oo. 90¢ om. mm.H vm all mm. H$MHHH$>U¢ no.H o9.H Oh nun >0s$m¢ mchHuH$>©¢ .U.m x c 90¢ H$mHHH$>p¢ 90C$m¢ EARTH anHSaosE mzmmz zmmgamm mozmmmmmHo mo mozmoEHonm $$Hm$mHQ meconum 9H ‘1 O o; Aum$9 $mgmm $HmHuHDE cmocsoo .Hm>H$usH $oc$oncoo mm. m mch: us$n$meo mHucmonHcmHm no: $Hm $sHH $E$m $£u an p$HoomH$ch m:M$E oSu ms¢ $$Hm¢. . $$Hm$mHQ_ sHmuH$oso $$Hm¢ >Hmsonpm m2U¢ 90¢ l A /\ \AN Tl'IJITIBV W. II. _ ms. aw. A Hos$m¢ 1 e A A I u e e A u m m. e e u 1 4 .HQ$EsM$>om $£p an o$HMHDm$H $Q UHsozm Q$HpHHno ou mHMH0H$EEo0 meuH u$nficz pc$E$u$um mo.H ov.m om VH. oo. oo. us$EcH$>ow MNH mm.m .2» .in mo. 00. 90¢ av .. mm . v Hum ...... wm . H$mHuH$>U¢ om . Hm .v on nun. >0Q$m¢ mchHuH$>o¢ ‘ . U. m x c 90¢ H$mHuH$>o¢ hoc$m¢ 3879 83363.3 mammz zmmsemm mozmmmmmHo mo mozsonHonm $$Hm$mHQ $$Hm¢ mHmCOHpm $$Hm$mHQ sHmuH$osD $$Hm¢ mHmcouum 3 AIM-4.1!! a \\V._ I r 9 Au$$9 $ocmfl $HmHuHH§H smocse IWw/ 4 4 9. a. ...! \ 9 / . . II \\b. //,/ HOH H$>H$unH $oc$©HHfioo mm m mchs 90¢ ¢/J¥Q\\\o A HQ$H$HMH© xHucmoHMHcmHm Hos $H$ $QHH MMWNWWHO /U. mom $E$m $ru mp p$noomh$wss mQM$E OBH >c¢ u. z 0 AI. . / .. . . \ How mz¢mH>H nHDomo mo on9DmHM9mHQ AFN: ~ l; 0.. 9‘ \ . wow H I m h‘IV / / . nwom T|IlIllIITlllllll+ll1||d|lTl14llll¢ HmmHuH$>p¢ \th. D V V V lth A wow 0 D. 6 o m m m m moc$o¢ . 1 1 o lwoh m u. A e s A nwow u e ) 1 x .HOH>$£$Q msH3$H> GOHmH>$H$u m.:$HoHH£o $u$H5m$H ou mpc$Mmm $£u on on mH pH nwmnH H$nfidz uq$E$umum U$HEHu200anvuv WHHHHH. 94 The Perceived Harmful and Beneficial Effects of TelevisIOn'Commercia1S'on‘Children The third general hypothesis is: There are significant differences in the verbal— ized beliefs of the respondent groups in regard to the harmful and bgpeficial effects of‘tele~ vision commercials on children. Six items in the survey referred to specific effects that television commercials have been said to have on children. Analysis of variance tests between the scores of the sample respondents on these six items strongly supported the hypothesis that there are significant dif— ferences in the beliefs of the respondent groups. The null hypothesis was rejected at the .01 level in all six tests. The results of the tests are summarized in Table 4H5. Four of the six items referred to possible harmful effects. These items were: 1. Commercials often persuade children to want things they do not really need. 2. There is a connection betWeen commercials for pharmaceuticals and the nation"s rising drug usage among young people. 3. Television commercials lead to an increase in parent-child conflict. 4. Television commercials often arouse anXieties and feelings of insecurity in children. mmowom me H$u09 no. mn.0HH moH mesons cHrpHs oo. mm.$m em.m$ mm.smH m masons c$$3p$m huHHHanonm 0Hflmm .m m$umnwm GM$E m$H$Qmm mo Eflm Eoo$$Hm mo m$$Hm$Q $onflom .oo ou mchnu $H$ msozm m.c$HUHH£o so mH$H0H$EEoo pars osmumn$©sd s$HcHH£u umoz mm.mvm. 46H Hence Hm. Hm.omH HoH mesons HquHz oo. we.mm ms.mm Hm.sm m monouo cmmsumm huHHHQmmoum oHHmm .9 m$n$mom sm$z $$H$5wm mo 55m Eoc$$nm mo m$$Hm$Q $ousom .©$$: mHHM$H won on 9$£u mmcHsu poms Op s$HmHH£o $U$5$H$m Q$umo mH$H0H$EEoo mm.mmm moH H$o09 .5 Hm. Hs.mmH moH mesons aHnqu o. oo. me.m$ mm.mm mo.HoH m masono Ammanmm >UHHHQ$Qon oHumm .m m$Hmnom s$$2 m$HMDWm mo How Eoommsm mo M$$Hm$Q $0HlmW .mQOHmH0$o H$Esmsoo ooom $x$E ow muHHHQn mDUHHao m QOH$>$o mmH$£ mchHuH$>o¢ ZMMQHHEU ZO UZHmHBmm>Q¢ ZOHmHPMHmB m0 mBUmmmm mmB OB UZHZHmBmmm mEmBH ZO wEmMB HUZ¢Hm¢> m0 mHqumzm m0 wm¢EEDm mflv mqmmfi .MHHH 96 44.46m moH kuoe oo. . 00 H no.66H 66H masons cHsuHe mm mm mb.mm 9m.wm -m : mmsouw s$$3umm m H . . u.HHanoum oHumm m. m$M$nwm QM$E m$H$som mo ESm Eoo$$Hm mo m$$Hm$o $oHsom mom mcH .$Hm0$m @2509 mcoam $omms o .mH.H mDQOHpmc $5“ tam mH$0Hps$omfiumnm How mHMHou$EEoo s$$3H$Q COHu0$ssoo m mH $m$£9 Ho.mmm moH H$H09 . mm. om.om moH mmflouwnguHB oo nn.moH wm.om HH.moH m mmdonw c$$3H$m NHHHHHnmnoum oHummw.m m$uwawmasM$z m$nmmmw mo Ecm EOt$$Hm mo m$$um$m $onnom .G$HUHH£o CH muHuso$wcH mo mmcHH$$m can m$Hu$Hxs$ $m50H$ s$umo mH$H0H$EEoo GOHmH>$H$9 mn.mmm moH Hmu09 H6. mH.HoH mmH masons cHnuHs oo. mm.m0H sm.v$ om.va m mmcouo cmmsumn 97 The Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coeffi- cients for the four items ranged from .45 to .80, with an average inter-item correlation coefficient of .62. An index of how strongly the various respondent groups felt about the harmful effects of television commercials on children was developed by summing the mean respondent scores for each sample on all four items. The lowest score possible on the index was 4 (a belief that television advertising is not harmful to children). The highest possible score was 20 (a belief that televishmn commercials are very harmful to children). The position of the four sample groups on the index points out the great differences in opinion that exist regarding the matter of effects. The index value for the agency sample was 9.7. The advertiser sample index was 8.3. The government sample had an index value of 14.9, and the ACT sample had an index value nearly twice as high as the industry respondents=ml7.l. Hypothesis 391 states: ACT and government respondents will expreSS'the feeling‘that'commercials'direCted'at'Children arouse anxietieS'and'feelingS'of'insecurity in children. Industry'reSpondents will‘not‘agreg. Seventy-five percent ofthe ACT respondents agreed that television commercials arouse anxieties and feelings of insecurity in children. Ninety-four percent of the .o—_.-_-——— #_ —.——-——-r— 98 advertiser respondents, seventy—nine percent of the agency respondents, and less than five percent of the government respondents disagreed. However, more than half the government respondents marked ”uncertain" on the item. Because of the high number of government respondents mark- ing funcertain", the hypothesis could not be supported. Hypothesis 3-2 states: ACT and goVernment'respondents will exPress, the ‘belief‘that'teleVision'commercialS'lead'tO'an 'inerease‘in'parentHChild‘confliCt."InduStry respondentS‘Will'nOt‘agree. This hypothesis was strongly supported. Ninety- three percent of the ACT respondents and sixty-four percent of the government respondents agreed that commercials lead to an increase in parent-child conflict. Seventy-one percent of the agency respondents and ninety-one percent of the advertiser respondents disagreed. A number of industry spokesmen have stated the belief that television advertising is beneficial to chilh dren. Furthermore, some spokesmen have stated that chil- dren old enough to be influenced by commercials understand the purpose of advertising and thus, like adults, are not easily persuaded to accept the advertiser"s message. Hypothesis 3-3 concerned these beliefs. Hypothesis 3_3 States: 99 ACT and goVernment respondents will not express 'thé’beliefS'that'mbst'bhildreh'underStahd'What ’commercialS'are'trying tO'do’and'that,‘in'faCt, commercia1S'help;develop;ayphildVS‘ability'to make'gond'consumer'decisions."InduStry'respond— ents'Will‘expreSS'these'beliefs. This hypothesis was strongly supported using one= tail T-tests of the differences between the sample means. Over eighty percent of the respondents in both industry samples felt that children understand what commercials on children's television shows are trying to do. Only seven percent of the ACT reSpondents and five percent of the government respondents felt the same. Sixty=five percent of the agency reSpondents and seventy~one percent of the advertiser respondents felt that commercials help develop a child°s ability to make good consumer decisions. Less than three percent of the ACT respondents and twentyuthree percent of the government respondents agreed. The results of the statistical tests used on the items relating to this general hypothesis are summarized in Table 4~6. ON.H mm.N HN oo. oo. oo. uc$acu$>00 on. om.H mv ill 00. oo. 90¢ mm. mm.m vm uln mv. H$mHuH$>p¢ hm. vm.m mo nun >0Q$m¢ msHmHuH$>U¢ .o.$ x Q 90¢ H$mHHH$>©¢ muc$m¢ Hum$un9 t$HH$u1039V mz¢mz 2mm39mm mozmmmmmHQ m0 WUZ¢UHhHZGHm $$HoMmHQ $$Hm¢ hHoQOHHm $$HmmeQ QHmun$osD $$Mm¢ mquouuw. wllill _ \\\kkL Hum$9 $ms$m $HQHuHsz smocsoo .1 I/// 0 .Hm>H$ucH $oc$UHmcoo mm. m mCHms u /v M” uc$H$mmHo mHusmoHMHcmHm uos $H$ $QHH . /// $E$m $au HQ ©$HoomH$UQD mc$$E osu >Q¢ w .1/ ‘ mz¢mz moomo mo on9DmHm9mHQ . //<. u H III: m . \ /Ie\ Afllumfll _ . . \ UC$ECH$>00 T A —- H ‘ I _ m C i I . n W. mo ..W W IWW‘. . H$mHuH$>U . I A e A 90¢. \ 9 u e o u 1 o 1 .‘ K 3 m I. s e s u e 3 1 .mGOHmH0$U H$Esmcoo ooom $M$E ou huHHHQm w .UHHQO m QOH$>$6 mQH$£ msHmHuH$>p¢ NZMMQHHEU ZO m>¢m UZHWHBMH>Q¢ ZOHWH>MHME mWOQ mfiommmm B¢EB 01v Wflmflfi “NuH H$oficz us$E$umum 101 0 m9. mm.v Hm oo. oo. oo. Hc$fisn$>oo mm. ww.v NV all 00. oo. 90¢ vH.H mm.m om an: no. H$meH$>©¢ vm.H Hv.m mo nun moc$m¢ msHmHuH$>U¢ .©.m x c 90¢ H$mHuH$>U¢ >Us$o¢ 3939 333635 mz¢mz zmmsemm mozmmMrEHo mo mozmonszHm $$HmmmHQ $$Hm¢ mecouum $$HmmWHQ quuH$oco $$Hm¢ meconpm . _ Hum$9 $mcmm $HQHHHDE cmossov \\\ m .H$>H$HCH $oc$©Hmcoo mm. m msHmD é HC$H$MMHU 9HHCMOHMHcmHm uoc $H$ $CHH \\ \‘1 H! c‘ Emm $3“ mm U$Hoomh$oc5 mLU$E 03H >Q¢ H$prH$>o¢ \\ \41 La mz¢m2 mDomO mo ZOHBDmHmBmHQ H m r H - — — h.“ H I. illlu ._ _ v. v A s v . /? p 6 o D r ... H A . . .. V ‘ x o 1 “WLV . A 3 A m 90¢. . t. o s e a. a u 1 x 1 I wow wow .U$$s SHHM$H Ho: 00 >$£p mmcHsu usmB ou E$HUHH£o $wmsmu$m s$umo WHMH0H$EEO0 MhuH H$Qfisz ps$E$u$um flODEHufloollmuv mHmflfi 102 mm. om.m Om Ho. 00. oo. uc$EcH$>00 mm. 9®.H mv nun oo. oo. 90¢ we. 9m.m vm nu: om. H$mHuH$>U¢ vw. mo.v mm nun hoc$m¢ msHmeH$>o¢ .o-w x s 90¢ H$meH$>U¢ woc$m¢ immune 833635 mzH©COuum Hum$9 $qcmm $HmHuHsE :moccov . .Hm>H$HCH $oc$mecoo mm. m mchs .oH uc$H$meo MHHQMOHMHcmHm Ho: $Hm $cHH .wom $EMm $£u ma t$MoomH$ch mQM$E ozu 92¢ mom mz¢m2 mbomw m0 ZOHHDmHmEWHQ H m wow i. . A . A. .q i. , .8. W m W.m. / \\ H$mHUH$>c wow I e e u IILmM \ 1 1 o uc$ECH$>oo won W 1 A T. m % mom 1 1 .oo ou ocHhhu $Hm msogm m.:$HUHH£o so mH$H0H$EEoo pmss occuwu$oss G$HUHH£o “mos AmHuH H$QESZ uq$E$u$um U$5QHUCOUJJ©UV mHm¢9 103 mo. mm.m Hm oo. oo. oo. uc$EsH$>00 mo. mm.v mv nun oo. oo. 90¢ Nb. H9.H wm can go. H$mHuH$>o¢ om. no.m mo uuu mos$m¢ mchHHH$>U¢ .t.m x c 90¢ H$mHHH$>t¢ mos$m¢ Hummbae emHHmpuozao mzsmz zmmsamm mozmmmmch mo mozsonHonm $$HmmmHQ $$Hm¢ l mHmsonum _ $$Hmmeo _ chuH$oco . $$Hm¢ mHmsouum Aflflw.-..2.al.:;aav . HWMHHW . Aum$9 $mcmm $HQHuHDz cmocsov IIMMWIWVIII. I. \\ \\. \ «A HOH ‘ .Hmbnwch $oc$Uchoo mm. 8 mchs / uc$EcH$>oo . .hx\\ . . I WON HQ$H$MMH© hHusmonHcmHm Hos $H$ $cHH /// IVa\\ ,,AT\N: \ 4 J 4 p . s In $EMm $£u >9 o$uoomH$ocD msM$E ozu >s¢ /.,/ moc$m¢w II .. 90¢.\ x .om / I mZHms gnome mo onsomHmemHo /<\\\ // .. . .-A. 1 nos 0 m , .. ..y . . “Hi .I .0. .0 _ h”. / W (.mOm _ m .v . s _ v .15 HmmHnnm>6H , P .6 o 3 //\_ 1 wow AA A. . . 1 o 1 1 wow u... m w w 1 wow 1 1 .HOHHMGOU UHHnonpc$H$m EH $m$$HosH cm on o$$H mH$H0H$EEoo :onH>$H$9 wmmaH H$QESZ us$fi$umum U$anuso0aumav mqm¢9 104 . .wmo. mmom , HNI 000 OO0 000 Ugmgumkwow vm. VH.V NV an! 00. oo. 90¢ we. mn.H vm awn Hm. H$meH$>m¢ m9. hm.H mo nun hos$m¢ msHmHuH$>o¢ .o.m x c 90¢ H$mHuu$>o¢ mos$m¢ Hnmwuaa ewHHmuaozeo mzamz zmmzemm mozmmmmmHo mo mozmonszHm $$HmmmHo sH hHHmDU$wGH mo mmcHH$$m was m$Hu$ch$ $wsoum C$umo mHMHoH$EEoo 20H$H>$H$9 ........................................... .................................... ................. $$Mm¢ hHmcouum $$Hm$mHQ chun$ocD $$Hm¢ mHmsoun r! . _ . .Lr . Iii Ilu4/ . [I \\i J x J ’I/ \ \ \I- W H. Hpm$9 $msmm $HmeHsz smocsoo \\\ s x o .Hw>h$ucH $cc$oncoo mm. m msHms \\\ \. \ 1 wow bc$H$MMHo mHusmoHMHcmHm Hos $Hm $cHH //// . \\vut..rll. . H 1 . . a) , . . . . A.I|u|.|N.l , v I I l \ mom $Evm $£u %Q U$Hocmhvocn msm$fi 02p ma¢ //// x02$o¢ \P..e:.:z \ mzmms mpomw mo onHDmHmech // .\\.\\\. .Immmm . .04 e m / .a U .38.? 3:530 I I I . .0 :\..\rG. C fill, lad - - JIH H$mHuH$>U¢ a wow mm m. m A e A I 1 won . ... A MA u ... wow T: m l s e e u 1 1 .Q$HUHH£0 .mmuH nmnssz qusmumum 105 mu» mv.m Hm vm. oo. oo. unmsduw>ow wm. whom NV nan oo. oo. 80¢ Hm. mmaH WM nun ma. meHpHm>©¢ MN,H mmom mm nun woqwmm mchHuHm>U< .U.m x c Hum mefiunw>wm hocwmm Ammouue uwaamuaozav mz¢mz zmmzamm mozmmmmmHo mo moszHmHonm wohmmwwo wwuad hfimcoapm mmumMmHQ dwapmwoqp wmnmm mflmcouum . _ _ 1} fl": I \\l l ' 'VN\ \n‘a \ ‘ \s\ K \ \h .. \ sx Aumwe mmcmm mamauasz cmocnov .Hm hwucd woqmwamcoo moo m madms {.0 § ucwhmmmq m haucmoamdhmam non mum 93,1 a \MNJ 1 wfimm m£p >9 wwwoonsmuns ncmmfi OBu ham flfl «no a. on o. \; Hum . «I, . I ’ ‘ I mzmmz moomw ho ZOHBDmHMBmHQ l.\ $15364 IIWV 1 pqmadum>9w :/ :1 USUIUJZBAOD L3 1 Koueb L ISSIQIGAP wad wow WOW. wow wow wow wen wow omHmoam masom macaw mmmms msuw mafimflu mDQOflumc wpu wan mfimoflusmomshmam Mom mHmwoumEEoo ammaumn gowuomqaoo m ma mamaa “mmua nmnfisz ugmfimumum wmsqflucoouaonv mqmms 106 The Technigues Used in Children"s Television Commercials The fourth general hypothesis is: "There are significant differences in the verbal- ized attitudes of the respondent groups in regard to the techniques that should be allowed in c0m- mercials directed at children. Seven items on the survey related to the format, characters” and techniques that should be allowed in children“s television commercialso Analysis of variance tests among the mean scores of the four respondent groups on each of the items strongly supported the fourth general hypothesis° The null hypothesis was rejected at the 001 level of all seven tests. The results of the analysis of variance tests used on these items are summarized in Table 4E7 o Hypothesis 4~l states: ACT and government respondents will not express the belief that mOSt'comMercials directed at_ Children present a true'picture of the products advertisedo Industry respondents will express this belief° Hypothesis 4el was strongly supported° Seventy- five percent of the ACT respondents expressed strong disagreement with the statemento All of the ACT respond» ents and eighty-two percent of the government respondents expressed at least some disagreement with the statemento Sixtywseven percent of the agency respondents and 107 Hwoth MO.H mmomma oow Nmofim mvomm mN.®OH mwa m®H m AMfiOB mmfiOHw CHfiflHB mmdouw Gmwzhmm muHHflnmnonm oeumm .m. .mmamsom mam: mmumawm mo snm Eocmwum Mo mwmnmmn ®OH90m .msosm sowmfl>oamu macmypaflno so mposooum Hamm on omSoHHm on vasoflm mHoEHomumm mm.vom mm. ooom0H oo. Noomoa vmobm Mb.HON 05H boa m Hmuoa mmsouw aflnpfiz mmfiouw somsumm hpfiaflnmnonm oaumm..m moumnvm Gmmz mommmwm mo Sow Eocmmum mo mmmumoo oouoom .ommfipuo>©m uosooum ms“ mo ouduowm mono c uqmmmum mamaommaaoo cowmfl>oawu mquuoaflno uwoz mm.0hm moo whooma ooo Hmomv mooov hH.ONH 00H mmfi m Hmuoe masono mwfluflz wmdouw coozuwm hpwafinmnoum Ofiuwm om. meMSWm coo: mwummwm mo Sow Eowmonm mo mmmumom momsow ugoum3 smuoaflao mzogm so mfimwommfifioo Mama oou mum whose zmmqumU Ed QMBummHQ mquQmmzzoo 2H omsoqqm mm Ddsomm Emma mmponmome BE on wzuzzammm mama zo .memma mozfim§ mo Bans/a no 3328 hmv mamdfi oOHUH 108 Ho.aom moH Hmuoe mm. mm.HOH mod mesono canuflz oo. oo.woa mecca mv.mmH m mmsouo ammznmm .NwwHwDMQOHm owumm..m mmumswm cmmz moummmw mo 55m Eooommm mo momamma meadow .muGMB Deansm map was? mpflbomm ow “won wafip mdfl>mu mamowfl poom mum mummeumm>©d umoz mmovom mv. Hmoflm OO. mm.mmH mmowh mh.mmm owumm .m mmuwQWm smog mmumswm mo 85m 05H Hmuoe boa mmdouw nflfipfiz m mgdouw cmmzumm Eoomwum mo mmmumvo mousom .waanmfluduu posponm Mflwnu ucmmmnm on puommo osmosfim m oxmfi oowmfl>mawu masmupfiwwo do mummflumwbwm umoz mm.mnm ova Hmnoe Ho.a mo.mwa boa wofloum caches oo. emomm ma.nm em.HHH m monono gmwzpom kywaflnmaonm owumm.wm. moumswm smog moumsmm mo sow Eoommum mo mwmumoo oomsom .mfimumoum mg“ Apes CH woman on Ummflpmmfio hammomusm qmumo mum memmmoum sowwfl>mamu mpcmHoHflflo so mamaouwafioo H>.®mm vw. owomoa oo. wHomm vv.om Hmoamfi mwa Hmuoa oma mmsouo menses m mmsouw QQQSuom huaawnmnoum ..0aumm_um...mmumuwm.nmwz mwnmsmm mo_ssm EOUmmHh m0 mwmnmmo meadow .wuwwu voom 3H hHHoSmD who SQHUHH£D um Umfiflm mHMHUHwEEOO QOfimfl>mHmB 00 I c- . t 5.3: A- .--l .(m cm” mclmm F - hUHHHDMQOMfl OflUQm ah ”D 11.1.!" T." llii ’ l I ..l. I- :4. «nu-NV.F af.ldllahnr.nV crlyfflllfl. my?! MU ‘J|.,‘.l\ .mHUM .NHUH image 109 seventy=seven percent of the advertiser reSpondents agreed with the itemo Hypothesis 4&2 states: ACT and_government respondents Will expreSS'the "feeling'that'therE‘18‘something'Wrong'WiEh ‘alloWingpperformerS‘tO'sell products on Childrens television shows. 'InduStry'respondents'Will'not express‘thisfe'e’l'i‘ngo Hypothesis 4e2 was strongly supported° Fortywone percent of the respondents from the industry samples felt there was nothing wrong with allowing performers to sell products on children°s televisiono Ninetyaeight percent of the ACT respondents and eighty-one percent of the government respondents did not agreeo Hypothesis 4w3 states: ACT and government respondents will egpreSS'the feeling that advertisers purposely dingise'Chil= dren”s television commercials to blend in with the program materialo IndustrygrespondentS‘Will'nOt agreeo This hypothesis was strongly supported. Ninety- one percent of the ACT reSpondents and sixtyweight percent of the government respondents agreed with the statemento Over sixty-five percent of the respondents from the two industry samples did not agree. Hypothesis 4&4 states: All four respondent groups will express the belief that there are too many‘commercials on‘Children”s television. However. the ACT and government .respondents will be more likely to egpress'strong agreement with the statement "There are'tOO'many commercials on shows children‘watch" than the industry respondentso 110 Hypothesis 4-4 was strongly supported. More than fifty percent of all four respondent groups felt that there are too many commercials on children’s television. There were significant differences? however, in the strength of their agreement. Ninetywthree percent of the ACT respondents and fifty percent of the government re- spondents marked “strongly agree“ on the item° Only twelve percent of the agency respondents and none of the advertiser respondents did the same. All of the ACT respondents, ninetymsix percent of the government respond-I= ents, and fifty percent of the agency and advertiser respondents expressed agreement with the item. Hypothesis 4=5 statesg ACT and government respondents will express‘the belief that television'commercials aimed at chil- ‘dren are'usuglly'in‘bad'taste. Industry respond- ents will not‘agreeo Hypothesis 4&5 was strongly supportedo Not one of the ACT respondents and only fourteen percent of the government respondents felt that commercials aimed at children are usually in good taste. Seventy—four percent of the agency respondents and seventy-nine percent of the advertiser respondents? however, felt that they are. Not one of the ACT respondents and only fourteen percent of the government respondents felt that advertisers on chil— drenVS programs make a sincere effort to present their 111 products truthfully. Eighty—four percent of the agency respondents and ninetwaour percent of the advertiser respondents felt that they doo The study findings pertaining to the techniques used in commercials directed at children are summarized in Table 4-80 ow. mwé am 00. . mm. moiv Nv nun 00. mm. #:9839700 . . EU .3 H mo m mm uni no. Hmmwunofiuw N u o N. H PO m mm \flUCmmfi mCHmflpHGNVUAN on M : 90¢ MoMHquEN monomm immune 33353.5 , mzmmz zmmEmm mozmdmmfio mo mozsonmHonm mmeMmHo mHmGOH mo ownmd T um _ Hmmmfimu sflmunosDL . omumm mammouum Emma mmsmm mHmHuHDE smocse /I/ . a VI .1379 . \ 2 .Hmbhwusfi oocooflmcoo mm. m 09.35 /. . , «v1 \ B / \ r 0 u usmsomwflo waysmofimflnmflm pom mum. 0:3” %/ \ a aoa seam 93 .mn cosoomwmpcs msmofi 025 E2. Mommas/w \ \. ML wow ¢\ ‘ mzmmz “Home mo onssmHmamHn , \ ..- ..om Mi . . . - H l m .. ....ov Homfluuwstd II \ . T + u- + . qi .. a I. . . .om V D V. a c a WWW mu m ucmssu.o>owp. u .. wow 3 1 .. M A w MMw p a i won W N. 9 90¢. :9 * .L. U a a 4 wmow S 1. o £ 9 a. x .soums soupaflso msonm so mHMflonEEoo 58E oou mum 9338 Mona Hogans/H. ucmswumsm NZMMDHHmU .Hfl QEEUMMHQ mQflHUmszOU ZH DEBHEMHAH mm Qflbomm WMDOHZHAOEB 84mg mama "HM—”MAME ll3 hm. mo.m am 000 004 00. #Smfifihmbow mv. mm.a mv sun 00. oo. Bum om- mm.m vm III mm. Momfluum>o¢ mm. ow.m on Inn >0com< msflwfluum>cd .U.m x s 80¢ meHuHm>©¢ hocmmd Apmmune emaflmuuozev mzams zmmsemm mozmmmmm a mo mozmonHonm moummmfim mmum< hamsonum moummmflo sflcpsmocb mwumd mamcouum fl A \\ \\ 1 sea Aumma omsmm mamfipasz smossov \. 1 .Hm>nmusw woswtflmsoo mm. m msflms mom pawquMfiU mausMOfiMHQmHm nos mum mafia \ moswm¢ \\ 4 com oEmm map an pouoomsopss mcmofi 03p has . /, \\ \\ \\ - a J a K\ \ l1 / 0\OO¢ mzmmz msomo mo onepmHmemHm . \\ , \\ nmmanuo>c./ .\ H uni: m . \ . 1 mom r L . I 1 . . . \\ /H “'NIII < . 1 .1 _ . \IA .Mqlf \ . l wow W moo W W. 90¢ , \ psmEsMo>oo ‘ \ 1| 9 .. L m mwm . won m A u. 4 ..om e s u e 1 1 .oomHuHo>Um uoswoum may mo ousuowm osnu m psowohm mHMHoHoEEoo cosmfl>oaou masmuoafiso umoz "mua M09552 ucmfimumum Uwsflfluflovfllwlv mqmmfi 4 l l mm. NH.H NV HN.H mm.m . vm ®H.H mmum mo m2¢m2 Aumoe mmcmm wfimfiuasz smossov .Hm>HopsH moswtflmsoo mm. m omens “QonMMHU hHHCMUMMHsmflm uoq who msfia mean was >9 wouoomnoccs msmofi 03p ham mdeE mbomw mo ZOHBDmHMBmHQ m _ .Jllli ~~ LOV 7‘” l iuemuxera Kouefiv I xesrqxeApv .nsoSw soamfl>ofiou wbsohcaflao so muoswonm Hfiwm ou cwzoaam on pHDOSm mHoEHomsom 000 Inn 00. 00° nun mm. Rom nomfluso>©¢ moswmm “umwuua wwaflmuuossc psoesuo>oo 60¢ Homflpum>wm hoqmmfl msflmfluum>w< zmmfiBmm mUZWmmmmHQ m0 mozaoHMHZUHm owHwafiQ oonm wamsonpm wouwmmfim aflmuuoosb owumd hHmQOHpm rl I . _ I“ _ l _/ l/ . I ‘0 !‘ \ \. ~ \ . . \\, 1 w .—/ / \x \\ W0G0m¢ OOH u. xx \\ i\.nw\ Inw\mu|u\ . mom u/. . \ \\ ./\\ - mom _ I \ . / .xnt //\ swmmmmmmw< - wow . n\ . \ ucossuo>ow - mom . . . x . \ J woo . x . \ .. a.mOm. \ n \ MN“ Bum 4 wow .\ '\ x "oanfi Monssz pqmsmumum cwsqfluqooxxmuv mqmws 115 mm. vaom am 00. oo. oo. ucmssnm>ow mm. om.H ms an: 00. 00. 904 mm. mm.m vm nun mm. Homflunm>U¢ mm. vn.m mm nun monomm msflmfluuo>pm .U.m x s 90¢ Homflpum>c4 hosmmm Apmmuna mmaflmuuozev mz¢m2 zmmzamm muzmmmmmHQ mo WUZ¢UHmszHm oommwmfio ooum¢ hamsouum mmMmeHQ sflmnnmosb moumm mamzouum ‘1 - 1 \i . Ramos mmcmm mamflpasz swossmv /,/, II:.II \\. I .Hmbuopsw mosmpfimcoo mm. m msfims , . xx -.II.. aoa usouommao mauGMOflMHsmHm nos ohm mafia ,, //ATIIIJNFI \A\ - wow .. usmscum>ow . ofiwm osu ma pwuoomsopss msmofi 03p has , /// \Mv /, \\ I. // \. /AWI|JNFI \\ J mom mzmmz mbomw m0 ZOHBDmHmBMHQ I / 1V monomd / \uvn\. /, \\ x wow H I m ,, \\\ / \ - . T « ..- fl 1 p u J” ..\N .IMIV /\ .om V my v. W. 50¢. momfiusogm \ wow m m m m s ..2. 1 o 1 m A u. . e S .4 now u e 1 1 .oummu room as mHHMSms mum smuoafino um tofiwm mHMflouoEEoo GOHmH>mHmB “Hana Hmnfisz ucmfimumum meCHusOUIumlv mqmfia 116 mm. h®.m Hm Ho. 06. OO. usossuo>ow mm. Hm.v ms all 00. oo. Hum @H.H Hv.m vm nu: ma. HmmHuHo>o¢ mH.H Hv.m on Ian mosmmm msHmHuHo>o¢ Bum HmMHUHo>U¢ mosmmm 0 vs 0 0) Ix c: Rummage cmHHmuuosec mzHmHsH ooswUHmsoo mm. m muss wow psmHoMMHU mHusmoHMHsmHm Hos mum osHH wom oEMm ogp an omuoomumpss mammfi osu mam // ,1\\. xx \ \\\»Junaom wow mZflmz mbomw m0 ZOHBDmHmBmHQ H ' m .-. 41 wow _ . . 1 _ c w HomH Hm> gmmnh‘a A q! — V. u S - V on. Ufi “wk? >00 ’/.\\ woo V5 0 3 x won Am a .. 3 w. . ... 3 m I.R e S u e 1 1 .mfimumOHm on“ SHHS SH UsmHQ . 05500 ”NHnH Honssz usoaoumum ............................ wwnflfluflovllmlv MHMGB 117 If}!!! HQOECHmNVOU Bod meHHHm>o¢ omsmfl mosomd msHmHHHo>o¢ omHm¢ mHmcouum hm. mv.m Hm oo. oo. 00. mm. mm.H mv as: oo. 00. mm. mm.v «m can HH. on. mo.v on nun .o.w x s 50¢ meHun>o¢ hocwmm prmpue cwHHMUIOSBV mzmmfi zmmzfimm mozmmmmmHo mo MUZHUHmszHm omsmmmHo mHmsonum oonmmHn sHmuuoosD a / u I . . l. I o s , . HummB omsmm onHUHDZ cm a no I /1T\meusoficuw>oo .\ .Hm>uwusH mosmonsoo mm. m msHms , ,1/ \ a a \ ...M.M...m 2w.mmw.m..mm..m .m. ,, / x \ML. .H I Em flu Q U o u m / // \u..\\ honomH mzwmz .596 so onBmHmHmHo ... \\ \\ .LHJ\\\\\ H II m 80¢- Till“ K - u A . \Jlli V D V V O o 6 p L A a A H w m m K 3 T. e s u e 1 1 usommum ou unommo onwoch m meE QOHmH>oHoH m.soHUHH£o so muomHuHo>om um 14"! 02 HomHuuo>U¢ . ‘1" @0H wow wom wow wow .mHHSHQHSHH HOSWOHQ HHwau WmHnH $852 uqmsmumnm owDfiHunOUulwlv mHm¢B 118 HN mm. ow.H NV no. mm.v Hm ow. mm.m mo .©.w x c oo. oo. oo. HsmEcHw>oo an: oo. oo. Boa In: OH. HoprHw>o< an: honmmm mCHmHun>o< Bum HmmeHm>o¢ zocwmd Apmmune HmHHmu-oaev m2Hmp:H wosoUHmsoo mm. m msHms HQoHoMMHU NHHCMOHMHCme Ho: mum wQHH oemm 0:» an oouoomhoocs msme 03H and mZflmE mbomw m0 ZOHBDmHmBmHQ JestheApv. l LOV;[ quemuxenosc Aouefiv. OHHQDQ oxu umns ooH>0Hm on umwm HHmap msHmuH onoom room me mummHun>om “no: wwhmmmHQ mHmcouum ooummeQ SHmunUQD _ / / a I ’ /. / /\ H x ,a. / \\ A \ a \\ . \ . «my I n \ \ p \ W ‘\ \ usofidnmboo oosm< mHmsouum wwsm< Hosomd \ \ n \\ Arllumrl ummHuum>c<- wom I woo . won g wow .wusms WoNflH Hmnfidz ucmfiwgmum cmquucoouumuv mqmss 119 The Products Advertised on Children”s TelevisiOn The fifth general hypothesis is: There are significant differences in the Verbal- ized attitudeS'Of‘the'responqg t groups in'regard to the type of prOducts that should be advertised on children°s television. Only one item on the survey specifically related to this issue. The item read: “There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children"s television programs.“ Not one member of the ACT or government samples expressed agreement with the statement. Over forty percent of the industry respondents, howevery did agree. The survey data strongly supported the hypothesis that signifi- cant differences existed between all but the agency and advertiser groups on this issue. The test results relating to this hypothesis are summarized in Table 4~9. \J Hm oo. oo. oo. usmEus>ow mm. bHoH ms 111 00. oo. Bum mH.H mo.m vm 1|: mm. HmmHuHm>o¢ wN.H OH.m on 111 hosmms msHmHuHm>oa .o.m x c 90¢ meHuHo>o¢ Nodowa AHmmulB.owHHMHIOBBV mZfimz zmmzfimm mozmmmmmHo mo MOZfionHZOHm oonmeQ moms?N kaGOHHm memMmHQ sHmHHwOQD woumd mHmQOHHm T _ _ . _ .v/ _ \\ N \\ _ Aumwa omsmm mHmHHHsz :mossov % //. \\\ \\ \\ J wOH .Hm>HstH mosoonsoo mm. m msHms // N \ kW\\ANMSomm .\\\ MW HQmHmMMHU mHusmoHMHcmHm Hos mum osHH .. //.JPA\\ \J.u II.// I/ \\ wow 11 meow mg“ kg UmHoomHmUQD mcme 03H mam . J x \\\x .MMHILI /J\ . wom . \ \ . \ HomHuHobom mzmms moomo mo oneomHmamHo .. /' - Q5. LIN! - wow H o m . \ uquGHo>oo wom _ n a \ I T1111. m “a _ 1114 , \\ w . . s u we W m. V «W .. \\A N L A P m 80¢ 1 wow A . x m e o a x m WK .\ . ..om W T.B : ....» a GOHmH>oHou m.smHoHH£o so mHOHQmu GHEmuH> msHmHun>©m :uHs msous mnguos mH mHmra .mfimumoym ”mnH Hoofisz usoEmumum mZOHMH>MHMB w.ZMMQHHmU ZO QmmHBMH>Q< mm QHDOfim mEUDQOMm m0 WAVE Hafiz mlv MHmflB 121 Proposals Regarding ChildrenUS TeleVision'Advertising The sixth general hypothesis is: There are significant differences in the verbal- ized attitudes Of the respondent groups 'in 'regard'tO'the'mgjor‘proposalS'made'regarding gfiVertiSing'on'childrepls‘televisiOn. Five items on the survey centered upon specific proposals regarding advertising on children's television. Analysis of variance tests between the means of the four respondent groups on each item strongly supported the sixth general hypothesis. The null hypothesis was rem jected at the .01 level in all five tests. The results of the analysis of variance tests are summarized in Table 4‘10.- Hypothesis 6&1 states: ACT respondents will expreSs the feeling that all‘commerciaLS‘ggpuld'be‘eiiminated'rrom childrenVE:television'programs. ‘lndustry respOndents Will'not'agree. Hypothesis 6H1 was strongly supported. Eighty: nine percent of the ACT respondents favored banning commercials from children“s televison programming. Ninetyufour percent of the agency respondents and ninety- Seven percent of the advertiser respondents disagreed. Thirty=two percent of the government respondents favored banning commercials. thirty=six percent were opposed to the idea. Thirty=one percent of the government respond» ents marked ”uncertain“ on the item. 122 mMofiwN 00H H.090? HVNoH m®.mON 00H WQUOHU Cflflfldg oo. om.mH mm.mH ms.wm m mmdouo Gmwszm hUHHHmeOHm OHHMM om. .mmuwflwm_cmm2_. mmuwlwm HO 85m Eoommnm MO mmmumwa moudom .mfimumoum m.GmMoHH£o MHHHHSU mosssHm on :Hmusmu unmoomosm SOHmemHou; m Homsomm oHsonm mupmsosH msHmHHHm>om $39 .hHIH mm.mvH hoH Hmuoa mm. mm.mmH voH mmsouo GHQHHB oo. 0m.¢ Hm.m mo.OH m mmdouo qmmzuwm mHHHHnmnoum. 0Humm,.m mmumsvm 2mm: mommsmw no How Eooooum Ho mmwumoo moHsom .msHEEmHmoum QOHmeonu m.soHoHH£o mo wuHHmsw may m>oumEH mHon UHsos AoEHH ofiww may Hm Emsmoum ofimm osu sou 0H mxuosuos mHoE no N msHuuHfismmv mummoHsEHm .VHnH vh.omH OBH HMHOE oooH omoooH hoH wQSOHo QHSHHB oo. HH.m mo.m Hm.wm m museum ammsnmm muHHHflonum OHumm..m moHMSWm zoo: mohmswm mo Esm Eopmmsm mo wmmumoo monsom .ommmmofi mDHmmHuHmbom map mo HommEH map memmH wHusmoHMHCmHm UHSOS Emumoum m Houmm Ho whomon mHMHOHoEEoo :msHflossm: .maH ZOHmH>MHmB m.meoHHmo ZO OZHmHBmm>Q¢ wZHQmHUmm mHfimoQOm MOHHE OB UZHZHflBmmm MEMBH ZO mBmMB MUZflHm¢> m0 mHmNHflzm m0 MMdEZDm OHflv MHmfifi J123 mo.mnm osH Hmuoa Hm. es.mmH noH masons cHauHs oo. HH.mm Ho.me ma.mmH m masons smoapmm wuHHHanoum .OHpmm .m...mwsmgwm.cmmz...memsvm.mo.ESm socmmum mo monsoon mousom own an mH 30HHom op mH pass umnu mSHumum oOHuoc m an ownmowum on oHsonm sonH>oHou m.cmH©HHno so wHMHoumEEoo HHH hmommv onH HMHOB om. mm.mm an mmsosw GHQHHK oo. om.mmH om.mHH mm.mmm m mmsouo cmmzumm MMHHHQMQOHA OHUMm..h...mmHmmvm.cmm2...mmhmmww.mo Esm Boommsm Ho mmmnmwn monsom .hHmumefioo vmccon ma GHSOHm mEMHmOHm £OHMH>OHOH macmthHSO Q0 mGHmHuH0>©¢ . NIH.- nu 1n. 1“ nflngAHHAIVlHFH 0 dwu 5! I LH Hi nix“ ”gym Ah cg: flh cudfld wa RJ 0 dud/Ali) EDUIJ fl...“ A u 0 In. rluv r.v NH FJHHVAJ ll 1.... 1 . . u .vNIH NNIH 124 Hypothesis 6H2 states: ACT and government res Ondents will faVOr'an 'induStrstponsorgg“"TeleVTsion'BroadcaSt'center" to'finance‘guality'Childrenls'programs. Industry respondentS'Will'be‘againSt'the'idea. This hypothesis was strongly supported. Tmtests between the means of the various groups indicated a sig~ nificant difference in the mean scores of the industry respondents and the ACT and government respondents. Over sixty percent of the industry respondents completing the survey were opposed to the idea. Fifty—seven percent of the ACT respondents and thirtywsix percent of the govern- ment respondents agreed with the idea. Fifty percent of the government respondents and thirty percent of the ACT respondents marked ”uncertain" on the item. Hypothesis 6H3 states: All fbur respondent groups will expreSS'the feelm ihg‘that'simnlcasts 'errmitti g th'or'more networks‘to run the sameyprogramj'Will'not'help improve the Quality of childrggls‘televisiOnypro- rams. There will be significant differences. gowever. in the strength of their diSagreement. Hypothesis 6=3 was not supported. The findings indicated that many respondents from the ACT and govern“ ment samples were not familiar with the simulcast proposal. Over sixty=five percent of both groups marked "uncertain" on the item. Many respondents added marginal comments to this particular item on their questionnaires. For example. one ACT respondent wrote: “I don"t understand 125 how the simulcast proposal would work. Would commercial channels be permitted to use PBSVS Sesame Street?" Several respondents felt the wording of the question was vague or misleading. However. the findings of the study strongly sup- ported the hypothesis that the industry respondents differ significantly from the ACT and government respondents in their attitudes towards this proposal. Fifty-one percent of the agency respondents and seventyuone percent of the advertiser respondents expressed disagreement with the item. Hypothesis 6=4 states: ACT and government respondgnts will faVOr‘the proposal that comggrcialS'on'childrenVS'tele= vision should’beqpreceded'by'a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. Industry respondents will be against the idea. This hypothesis was strongly supported. Eightym one percent of the ACT respondents and fifty=four percent of the government respondents favored the idea. Over seventy percent of the respondents from the industry samples were against the idea. Thirty=six percent of the government respondents marked u”uncertain“ on the item. Hypothesis 6=5 states: 126 This hypothesis was not supported. Thirtywtwo percent of the ACT respondents. fifty percent of the government respondents. and over twenty percent of the industry respondents expressed uncertainty on the item. Of those respondents with an opinion. the majority of all four samples agreed that m’bunching" commercials would significantly lessen the impact of the advertiser“s mes— sage. An examination of the Tetests between the mean Scores of the respondent groups indicates significant differences between the agency and advertiser samples. between the industry and ACT samples. and between the government and industry samples. The findings of the study regarding the current proposals made on the subject are summarized in Table 4-11. CONCLUSION The survey findings regarding the first six general hypotheses and seventeen specific hypotheses were presented in this chapter. All of the general hypotheses were strongly supported. That is. the statistical tests used in testing these hypotheses were significant at the .01 level. Only three of the specific hypotheses were not supported. In the next chapter the hypotheses regarding the co=orientation portion of the study are presented. 1111I1111111I11111111111111111111111111111 Hm. mH.m HN ow. 00. mm. psmnauowmw . . 11: oo. o . WM.H MMJW WM 11.. mo. HmmHuHmEum so . H H@ . m on .111 wosmmm msHmeHo>o< . mo . m N 2 90m HomHuno>om hosomfl 13315 eoHHBuosE mzams zmmssmm mozmmmmch mo mozmonHonm oonmeo .. owumm . .mHmsospm oonmmmHo . chuHoodD . oon< ._ mHmsoHum ~Hl.IJJ/ . , . . H . \ \ / I I 0.4-! l ' u I .. . ... \ \ ‘0 1 e04; c 1 / / . .udeHsttfl. . x \ ..OH 7 3mg. mmsmm mHmeHsz 25255 It» 1.x” 1 P/i - \ x \ «12.. .HMPHmHsH cocoonsoo mm. m wsHmD I I A I ' ...; / \ x \\ sow psmsommHHt mHHQHOHMHcmeMHOG mum wsHH /.1 I / I // \x \ .. wom mfimw 9.3 an concommomvss mcmofi 03» has. 1MII|W 11111 fl- 1.. , \\-/\\AMIJN11 .woe mzHHmHE mDomw mo ZOHBDmHmBmHQ ucoEc,Hm>OO/. \ \. 59554 H m /\1 -wom _ _ v.9 V .w . .woo . m H .... _ L e u e ..Won 1 o z m r m“ wow 3 s u e 1 1 9.3 commoH \HHHGMOHMHCmHm tHDOS Emmmosm m Houmm Ho whomon mHHHOHmEEOU ..manossmg .memmms w.HomHuHo>om 23 mo pocmEH ”muH “wassz uqosmumum mBUmmem "HEB ZO MOSH mHflmomOMnH Ma ..HO mEOm BMH> NQDBm mmB ZH mmDOmw mmB OD 30m HHHW MHmZNB 128 om. omoN HN vb. mm.N Hv mm. vN.N vm Ho.H mm.N mo .©.m x s mo. Hoo 90¢ meHHHw>U¢ hosmm¢ A nmwnue $331035 mo. 00. wv. usmssnw>oo 80¢ HomHuHo>c¢ wocmm¢ msHmHHHm>o¢ mZ¢mS ZMMEBmm WUZWMMMhHQ m0 WUZ¢UHMHZOHm Aumwe omsmm oHQHuHDS smossov .Hm>HchH ooswUHmsoo mm. m msHms stmemHo kHHCMOHMHCmHm Hos ohm osHH oEMm osu >9 oomoomnooss msme osu hs¢ mZ¢HE Abomw ho ZOHBDmHMBmHQ ll .m - u» I ‘h u - Viv adv pro 03 A8 A.m Bu 8 r . .. m H H I 1. oEmm can Hm swhmoum wfimm map ssu 0H mMH onmmmHa LHmsouum wmsmmeQ I I 1 . sHmuHoosD woum¢ . oon¢ mHmsOHum o\° O m :_ o\° 0 Ln .QOHwH>onu m smHoHHQU Ho %UHHmsw map w>0HmEH meg oHsoz AmEHp 03pm: oHoE Ho m msHHHHEHoQV mummoHsfiHm .anH Hmofisz unofimpmum omDCHHQOUIIHHIV MHm¢B 129 th. . vvmom Hm mHo 009 Ho0 ucwaagm>ow thH vm.m NV til con 000 90¢ mm. NHPN vm 5mm mHo ummHuhw>©¢ vNuH mvom mm nun mocwmm qumeHw>wm uwym .m : 90¢ meHpr>U¢ mocmm< ; . Emwuue 8335035 m2¢m2 zmmSBmm MOZWMMMMHD m0 WUZ¢UHMHZOHw wmumMmHo wwumm mHmcoupm wwnmmeQ CHmuMwocp mwhmfl hquoupm . II .I _ _. . \\B \ I‘llvil/lrrli \\ \A WOH y / \ \ x a Apmmh wmcmm meHuHSE amocnov / /. \\ \\ w .Hm>uwu:H mocmemaoo mmw m mchD / \ 00m #cmeMMHU mHHCMOHMHEmHm pom mum mQHH hrmmWthI I\ - wom mEMm mg“ kg Umhoomamwcs mammfi 03» and ‘ Hum ‘\ x wow \ mzmmz Abomw m0 ZOHHDmHmBmHQ MmeuHm>U< /(\a APidMWI H llII IIIJ m . ucwficuw>ow . wom I T - finial] . 9 we w ,w m m m m a L Hon 1 o 1 u. ,A m $8 5 e a u x 4 omfimumoym mDQwHUHHSU mpHHmsw wochHw ou ahwuzwu pmmomeHm QOHmH>meeg m Homcomm UHDoam myumswaH mchHuum>©d 0&3 whHaH Honfifiz pcmfiwHMUm ...H . ..V . , UmanucoouflHHlv mqmfie mo.H . VHbm . Hm . . oo. 00¢. 000 unchHm>oo on. quv Nv min. oo0 oo0 90¢ mm.» mH.H vm rum 2.0 meHuwwkwcm mm. 0TH on a.m.”, aocwmfi mQHmHuuw>U¢ .U .m ,N a mom umeugwfié hocmmfl Smauua 3331035 mzmmz zmmzemm mozmmmmmHa mo mozmonHzBm wwummeo wwumm mHmnouum wwummea GHmuumonp owumm mquouflm lip I . , I’l\|1|ul I Ill #5 w Agmma mmcmm mHmHuHsE Qwocse \ \ [III ulll I I \ \r l .Hm>u..wp:H wocmemcoo mm. m mQHms IV \ \ \ \ pcmwwwmflo hHucmanMquHm uoc wum waHH \\ \ , x wEMm 9.3 3 Umhoomhwwsn mzmwfi 03p 53 l: I 4 .JK \\ J / ~ ucmfiqymxwow / \ mzwmz mDomw mo ZOHBDmHmBmHQ / ‘ H, m / \ HI! 5 a . / H _ an I H a - lJl'l / \ W m w W #1», \ A e A ..m EGAN // \ a u a < x o x J 1 K m . I. Hmmequwm s a ‘ a u J .4 wow wow .>kumeEoo @9225 an UHDoam mfiwnmonm GOHmH>wku wacwHUHHno so qumeHmSg wmmuH .3852 qufimpmgm @wDGHHQOUHIHHHv mgmflH pamfianm>ow hm. swam Hm Ho“ oo. 000 Hm. Hm.v Nv ass oo. 000 90¢ om. moom vm nan omo waHuHm>©< oo.H VN.N on new hoqmm< maHmHuum>U¢ .©.m x a 90¢ meHuHm>Um hocmm< Nummuue wwHHmuuozav ngmz zmmaemm mozmmmmmHn mo moz map mo wasps: may no mmsmomm sowumadmon Hafioomm mmsfisvmu msfimflpumbpm sOHmfl>mHmu m.soMpHH£U mm.mea nms Hopes mm. mH.mmH omH mmsoso assume oo. om.m sv.v mv.ma m masons zmmaumm hpflflwmmmoum owumm .m.. mmHMDwm.cmmS mmHMDWm mo 85m Howmmum mo mmmhmoa moHoom .ommmmmfi w.uomflunm>pm was mo pommfiw mm“ omwmma hausmowmwsmfim pasoz summoum m houmm no wuomog mamaonmafioo zmaflnossmz mm.mma mma sauce mm. Hm.mma oma masons snaps: oo. Hm.m mm.v ms.wa m masons ammzumm huHHHQmQOMm . owpmm «m mmnmnvm_smwz . wmumsmw mo 55m Sowmwhm mo mmmummn monoom .sOHmfi>0Ho# m.smHUHH£o no mumanwu cwfimufl> mqflmfluum>6m suflz msonz msfimuos ma muons mm.mmm mmH HmuOB mm.H em.nom oms masons swaps: oo. ma.m mm.m mm.vm m mmfiouw smwaumm mpflaflnmnonm oeumm .m mmumowm sum: mmumomm mo 55m Sommmum mo mmmnmmo mousom .mo>Home£u mummflummbpm ha Umumasmon on pasosm amspawao on nameoumsfioo ZOHBHmOm MMOBEHZ m0 mflBfiEHBmm ADOMG ZO mBmmB MUZ m0 mHqu¢Z< MO NMfiSSDm OHflm mqmflfi 151 m.:mnwafino mo 00.05H mma Hmuoa HH.H ma.mma oms mesons qflgufiz mm. mm.H mm.H wH.v m mmdouw soGSpmm mafiawnmnoum. .owumm..m. nonunWm smoz. mwumswm mo sow Socomnm mo mmmumon oomsom .muospoum Hflmgu HHom Op pom: umsn Mos» .mpfix usonm pmsHmocoo haamms pom mum cosmfl>wawp m.cmupaflno so mummflpum>pm umoz vv.vma mmH Hapoa mm. mm.mma oma masons eflannz mm. mm. mm. H@.H m masonw qwm3pmm mpHHHmwaoum OHumm .m mouwsvm cam: wmuwswm mo 85m Eocwwnm mo mmoumoa mousom .pm am wH Boaaom 0p wfi pap: pump assumum mowpos m hm powwomnm on panoam soamfiboaop m.soupaflno so mamwoumsaoo HH< vm.moa mmH HMpoa mo.H Hm.HmH oma masons snaps: ma. mhoH mm.H mmom m mmdouw swoSuom suwaahmmonm. .ofiumm..m...mmumsww.nmm2...mwumsvm.mo sum EOUmmHm mo mmmummm wousom .mamwonmsfioo m.soHuHH£o mama wboumfifl . .U mo on: map msflpummmu wwcwampflsm Hmuoflmum ma.oma mmH Hmuoa oo.H Ho.mvH oms masons assess Hm. ma. ma. mm. m masono sowsuwm MpHHHmmmoum. .ofiumm..m_._mwnmavm_ammz .mmuwsmm.mo saw Edmomum mo wmmumwo mousom .uswsuum>om man an pmumHDmmu on pasoam cwupaflno 0p mamaoumsaoo mm.mma mma Hmnoe mm. sm.mma omH masons annufls mm. Hm. ma. mm. m mmdouw smmzuom mafiannmnoum ownmm..m .mmumswu.cmms .mwnmswm mo sum Eocmmhh mo mmmumon moudom .mqwmfluum>pm GOHmw>meu . m QOflumfloomwm GUMHu m£B 152 TABLE 5-11 RESPONDENT ESTIMATES OF THE ATTITUDES OF NETWORK RESPONDENTS 2=l. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers them- selves. H p w s .22 h w G o H H o o m CUI> !> El 2‘2 8 2 Strongly I I u . . I , Strongly Disagree 17 2 3' 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 3.04 1.26 Advertiser estimate of Network position 3.39 1.15 ACT estimate of Network position 4.12 1.01 Government estimate of Network position 3.75 1.00 There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children“s television programs. H-H m s .2 0 >1 . E o u u s o w m > > B 61 p o o Strongly , .‘ , f3 ‘1}? If Strongly Disagree i 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 3.26 1.05 Advertiser estimate of Network position 3.52 .93 ACT estimate of Network position 4.02 .88 3.63 .81 Government estimate of Network position 153 TABLE 5~11—~Continued 2:4. "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would signifi- cantly lessen the impact of the advertiser”s message. u H s w "’33 >54.) 0 n H c w w gagsg stint Strongly , J , _ , ‘f Strongly Disagree 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 3.46 1.03 Advertiser estimate of Network position 4.00 .82 ACT estimate of Network position 3.98 .88 Government estimate of Network position 3.75 .86 ChildrenVs television advertising requires special regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. u u a m w w vr-l 5 m: a: a <1) B > o > U 0 but st} (.9 ,4} ‘11 Strongly 1 L n .l A I 5 '1 Strongly Disagree if 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 3.69 1.03 Advertiser estimate of Network position 3.77 .99 ACT estimate of Network position 2.39 1.00 Government estimate of Network position 2.94 1.18 154 TABLE 5—11-UContinued 2-5. The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children“s television advertising. u H r: 3 H 5‘3 0) $3» > Hahn 8232‘“? Strongly L, . 4“ , . pJ_Strong1y Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 2.24 1.08 Advertiser estimate of Network position 2.23 .85 ACT estimate of Network position 2.12 .90 Government estimate of Network position 1.88 .62 2=6. Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. up mo .3 w m+JE o nu a mo [-4 G) {> > L)mTJO Strongly , fc‘nlfiP , , Strongly Disagree 147 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 1.81 1.03 Advertiser estimate of Network position 1.90 .94 ACT estimate of Network position 1.68 .96 Government estimate of Network position 1.94 1.00 155 TABLE 5-1l—wContinued 2'7 o Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. w U H a $ 0 «.4 E p a m H m o . 2 >5 U U 8 m Strongly 1 1 f“ . ‘5. .‘5 . . Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 3.40 .98 Advertiser estimate of Network position 3.13 1.12 ACT estimate of Network position 2.85 1.06 Government estimate of Network position 3.20 .63 All commercials on children’s television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. u n a o m m E “"‘ va>fl MC)¥JO a)¢ o: > > <1) owroox Strongly J .0. f1“ - . . . Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 Agree Standard Mean Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 2.46 .92 Advertiser estimate of Network position 2.29 .90 ACT estimate of Network position 2.22 .82 Government estimate of Network position 2.19 .98 156 TABLE 5—ll-~Continued Most advertisers on children's television are not really con— cerned about kids; they just want to sell their products. HM so mm 53 s “H o 9:: . a 82 2 2* Strongly n A. t .- J l _L Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard. Mean "Deviation Agency estimate of Network position 2.48 1.09 Advertiser estimate of Network position 2.06 .89 ACT estimate of Network position 2.29 1.08 Government estimate of Network position 2.00 .81 157 Though no statistical technique was used to test this hypothesis because of the small size of the sub- samples, an examination of the data seems to suggest support for this hypothesis. In the co—orientation section of the survey, the respondents were asked to estimate the position of others regarding major issues concerning children"s television advertising. Respondents were asked to declare how much they knew about other respondent groups. For example, industry respondents were asked, “How much have you heard or read about Action for Children”s Television (ACT)?" Three responses were possible: "quite a bit", "some", or "nothing at all". A comparison of those that knew "quite a bit" with those that knew "some" or "nothing at all" was made on the available data. This included an analysis of agency, advertiser, and government respondents" perceptions of ACT respondents" positions on the nine co- orientation items and ACT and government respondents” perceptions of the advertising agency respondents" posi= tions on the same nine items. Out of forty-five possible cases, the "knowledgeable" respondents came closer to predicting the position of the actual group in fifty-eight percent of the cases. In most cases, the average deviation of the "knowledgeable" respondents from the actual position of the 158 group was less than the deviation of the "less knowledge- able" respondents. For example, the average deviation of the "knowledgeable“ advertiser respondents in estimat- ing the position of the ACT sample was .28.1 The "less knowledgeable" advertiser respondents deviated from the ACT sample score an average of .32 points per item. The average deviation of the "knowledgeable" ACT respondents in estimating the position of the agency sample was .63. ‘The "less knowledgeable” ACT respondents deviated from the actual position of the agency sample by an average of .77 points per item. Tables 5u12 and 5m13 contain statistics pertaining to this hypothesis. The study findings pertaining to the agency, advertiser, and government respondents' estimates of the ACT position are sumarized in Table 5=12. The study findings pertaining to the government respondents” esti- mates of the agency position are summarized in Table 5~13. 1The scales used throughout the survey had five points, ranging from "strongly agree", through "agree", "uncertain", and "disagree", to "strongly disagree". The maximum deviation possible on such a scale is 4.0. 159 TABLE 5=12 RESPONDENT ACCURACY IN ASSESSING THE ATTITUDES OF ACT RESPONDENTS 2~1. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers theme selves. a o sad.p o.u c mJH o ‘H m E >+u 0 05-40454 s w o o > B > own 0 o d’fl fl o Strongly pp “ v'. y L_ , Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 Agree Standard Level of. Mean Deviation ‘Deviation"Confidence ACT position 1.71 ‘1.22 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 1.29 .77 +.42 (no knowledge) 1.60 .75 +.ll (combined) 1.40 .77 +.31 .15 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 1.70 1.25 +.01 (no knowledge 1.35 1.00 +.36 (combined) 1.48 1.09 +.23 .48 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge 1.88 1.13 =.l7 (no knowledge) 1.86 1.07 ~.15 (combined) 1.87 1.06 =-l6 .60 .160 TABLE 5312--Continued There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on chil= dren's television programs. & Agency ion ACT p051t overnment E dvertiser Strongly Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence ACT position 1.17 .38 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 1.21 .70 —.04 (no knowledge) 1.10 .31 +.07 (combined) 1.17 .60 .00 .90 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 1.80 1.03 =.63 (no knowledge) 1.00 .00 +.17 (combined) 1.30 .72 ~.13 °30 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 1.00 .00 +.17 (no knowledge) 1.57 .79 =.40 (combined) 1.27 .59 _.10 .41 161 TABLE 5~12=-Continued 2-3. "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would signifi- cantly lessen the impact of the advertiservs message. s o --| 4.) m U) now (1)043 m w -HBE #0 >1 MEN 0 w w s > > <1) t o m Strongly | 1 ‘54? in Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence ACT position 2.95 1.06 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 3.24 1.44 —.29 (no knowledge) 2.90 1.33 +.05 (combined) 3.12 1.40 —.17 .70 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 2.70 1.34 +.25 (no knowledge) 3.06 1.64 =.11 (combined) 2.93 1.52 +.02 .76 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 3.13 1.13 ‘.18 (no knowledge) 2.86 1.22 +.09 (combined) 3.00 1.13 1.05 .95 162 TABLE 5—12~~Continued 2-4. Children's television advertising requires special regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. s o 4H .p m u n m 8338 E H c o B» n u 00 o m do was; 863‘!) Strongly ll . t 1 'u i $14,5tr0ngly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation’ DeviatiOn' confidence ACT position 4.81 .46 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.97 .16 +.16 (no knowledge) 4.60 .94 =.21 (Combined) 4.85 .59 +.04 .80 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.20 1.23 ~.61 (no knowledge) 4.94 .24 +.13 (combined) 4.67 .83 «.14 .32 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.75 .46 «.06 (no knowledge) 4.14 1.46 =.67 (combined) 4.47 1.06 “.34 .08 TABLE 5~12——Continued 2—5. The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children"s television advertising. : 0 W4 4.) "H H+Jm 5388 ...{E +J B> HHUO 88% roo m Strongly 1_111 I u l $211? I Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence ACT position 4.57 .55 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.68 .62 +.ll (no knowledge) 4.40 .94 —.17 (combined) . 4.59 .75 +.02 .97 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 3.80 .92 1.77 (no knowledge) 4.53 .62 =.O4 (combined) 4.26 .81 “.31 .04 GOVernment estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.50 .54 =.O7 (no knowledge) 4.14 1.07 «.43 4.33 .82 -.24 .17 (combined) 164 TABLE 5-12—-Continued 2-6. Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. c 0 ‘Fl 4.: 'H u.p m o c o m o Q1 H E 4J >1 8 n n o O o o c "3 «>38 8 «to st Strongly 1 1 1 i1 .1 . 1 Strongly DiSagree 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of ‘ Mean Deviation DeviatiOn Confidence ACT position 3.88 1.19 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.73 .65 +.85 (no knowledge) 4.65 .49 +.77 (combined) 4.70 .60 +.82 .00 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.10 1.20 +.22 (no knowledge) 4.35 .86 +.47 (combined) 4.26 .98 +.38 .16 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.75 .71 +.87 (no knowledge) 3.86 .90 ~.02 (combined) 4.33 .90 +.45 .18 165 TABLE 5-12--Continued 2—7. Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. c o 4H 4.) u-A n s w o w 0 fl E a an H E o u o o s m >‘C 8 2‘2 Strongly . 1 1 .,i 1 .. 1 Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence ACT position 3.52 1.07 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.08 1.18 +.56 (no knowledge) 4.55 .61 +1.03 (combined) 4.25 1.03 +.73 .OO Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.20 .92 +.68 (no knowledge) 4.42 .87 +.9O (combined) 4.33 .89 +.81 .00 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 3.50 1.60 -.02 (no knowledge) 3.43 .98 ~.09 (combined) 3.47 1.30 -.05 166 TABLE 5—12——Continued 2—8. All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. c o H 4.) u H'H s m m (D U) 0 a .1 01 o m n #190 n gt): > >51”) 8 :2 2‘ Strongly 1 1 1 . 114i. 1,3tr0ngly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence ACT position 4.21 .81 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.19 .92 -.02 (no knowledge) 4.45 .69 +.24 (combined) 4.29 .85 +.O8 .54 Advertiser estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 3.80 1.03 —.41 (no knowledge) 4.42 .80 +.21 (combined) 4.19 .92 —.02 .99 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 3.88 1.25 —.33 (no knowledge) 3.86 1.22 —.35 (combined) 3.87 1.19 -.34 .26 167 TABLE 5-12--Continued 2-9. Most advertisers on children's television are not really concerned about kids; they just want to sell their products. % o c o m '41 :2 o o H .1.) u H-H c m m 0.2 o a. 0+ H n B o m U > :> s: 8 t Strongly 1 1 1 . . 5L 1 Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence ACT position 4.67 .72 Agency estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.61 .82 —.06 (no knowledge) 4.40 .68 —.27 (combined) 4.53 .78 -.14 .85 Advertiser estimate of ACT positiOn (w/knowledge) 4.00 1.05 «.67 (no knowledge) 4.82 .39 +.15 (combined) 4.52 .80 =.15 .94 Government estimate of ACT position (w/knowledge) 4.63 .52 -.04 (no knowledge) 4.14 1.07 —.53 4.40 .83 =.27 .74 (combined) 168 TABLE 5-13 RESPONDENT ACCURACY IN ASSESSING THE ATTITUDES OF AGENCY RESPONDENTS Commercials to children should be re gulated by advertisers them= selves. c o -a p -H U) 8. 4.) a c o o C E m c 51” t >54 0 U Strongly 1 1 1 i 5 9 f J Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidenfe Agency position 3.44 >1.29 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 4.69 .54 +1.25 (no knowledge) 4.73 .46 +1.29 (combined) 4.74 .44 +1.30 .00 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 4.67 .50 +1.23 (no knowledge) 4.50 1.08 +1.06 (combined) 4.58 .84 +1.14 .00 TABLE 5-13 -—Continued 2-2. There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on chil- drens television programs. c o -H u -H U) 0 Q p c 5 o 1: E a 1 fl > E 0 U U ¢ Strongly , J ,i 1 . L, n Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mgan Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 3.10 1.26 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 4.41 .95 +1.31 (no knowledge) 4.47 .83 +1.37 (combined) 4.43 .74 +1.33 .00 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 4.11 .93 +1.01 (no knowledge) 4.30 1.06 +1.20 (combined) 4.21 .98 +1.11 .00 170 TABLE 5-13--Continued 2-3, "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would signifi— cantly lessen the impact of the advertiser's message. c o -r-1 .1.) -r-i U) o 011.1 o Sim 1: E o H one KG > E-I o O Strongly . 1 . ' 191-g ~ 1 Strongly Disagree 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard — - ”1 Level of H 'Mean“‘DeviatiOn Deviation 'Confidence Agency position ‘ ' 3.61 """ 1.04 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 4.17 .76 +.56 (no knowledge) 4.27 1.22 +.66 (combined) 4.21 .94 +.6O .00 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 4.00 .71 +.39 (no knowledge) 3.40 1.43 «.21 (combined) 3.68 1.16 +.O7 .OO 171 TABLE 5-13——Continued 2-4. Children's television advertising requires special regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. C" o -1-1 .p -H U) 1; 8. o E >1 2 o 11 a“; B o 8 2? 1 Fl} (9 Strongly 1_ .1 . 1 J, . . Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 3.27 1.22 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 2.07 1.16 -l.20 (no knowledge) 1.80 1.15 -1.47 (combined) 1.91 1.25 +1.36 .00 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 3.00 1.00 - .27 (no knowledge) 2.70 1.25 = .57 (combined) 2.84 1.19 - .43 .17 172 TABLE 5-13--Continued 2—5. The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children's television advertising. : o -H 4.) -H w u o :1 91 m 5 >1 0 H c 3.11. 88“ Strongly 1 -. ,i ‘ 1 _ Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 2.10 1.04 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.76 .83 +.34 (no knowledge) 2.00 .93 +.1O (combined) 1.79 .80 +.3l .08 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.56 .53 +.54 (no knowledge) 1.80 1.03 +.3O (combined) 1.68 .82 +.42 .11 TABLE 5-13--Continued Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. c o -H 4.1 -H m 0 4J0; 2 “2’8 QC H w a $2“ 8 8‘ Strongly 1 - ..i 1 1 L A Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of AMgan Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 1.76 1.07 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.52 .83 +.24 (no knowledge) 1.13 .35 +.63 (combined) 1.35 .69 +.41 .02 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.56 .73 +.20 (no knowledge) 1.80 1.14 =.04 (combined) 1.68 .95 +.08 .79 174 TABLE S—l3—-Continued 2-7. Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. q o -H .1.) -H m o 4-’ 0-1 s (1) >1 5 O s H o [—4 3 2‘ o o ' 1:: t9 Strongly I J L A J] I l 1 Strongly Disagree 177 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 2.74 1.19 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 2.72 1.30 +.02 (no knowledge) 2.07 .80 +.67 (combined) 2.47 1.18 +.27 .25 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 2.67 1.12 +.07 (no knowledge) 2.50 1.08 +.24 (combined) 2.58 1.07 +.l6 175 TABLE 5—13--Continued 2-8. All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. c o H .p w 0') vii c mm 50 a no mm B >12 0 o Strongly I $ IQL J I J Strongly Disagree 2 3 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 2.24 1.00 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.93 °80 +.3l (no knowledge) 1.80 .41 +.44 (Combined) 1.84 .61 +.4O °Ol Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 2 22 °83 +.02 (no knowledge) 2.20 1.14 +.04 (combined) 2.21 .98 +.O3 .90 176 TABLE 5—13S~Continued 2—9. Most advertisers on children’s television are not really concerned about kids; they just want to sell their products. a o ‘H 4.) ~H (I) v o G 94 m E >~r o H a m w 88 2‘ (9:11 Strongly 1 . .I i- 1 ( , Strongly Disagree 1‘ 5 4 5 Agree Standard Level of Mean Deviation Deviation Confidence Agency position 2.41 1.16 ACT estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.93 1.13 +.48 (no knowledge) 2.13 1.25 +.28 (combined) 1.95 1.13 +.46 °O4 Government estimate of Agency position (w/knowledge) 1.17 .71 +1.24 (no knowledge) 1.80 1.03 +.61 (combined) 1.74 .87 +.67 .02 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH GENERAL SUMMARY OF THE STUDY Much has been written and said about the effects of television advertising on children. From time to time, the opinions of the general public have been gathered on certain aspects of the problem. Prior to this study, however, no comprehensive investigation of the attitudes of individuals actually involved in the creation, production, regulation, and evaluation of children“s television advertising had ever been undertaken. These people are the best sources of information on the issues involved with children's tele- vision advertising. They are the ones most likely to be influenced by and to influence legislation in the area. And they are, in many cases, the expert opinion leaders of others on the subject. The actual study centered on the attitudes of five specific groups: spokesmen for Action for Children's Tele- vision; the presidents and top executive officers of adver— tising agencies creating and producing children's television commercials; top executives in companies advertising heavily 177 178 on children's television programs; members of the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, and key members of Congress; and members of the major net- work review boards.1 A mail questionnaire was used as the major research instrument. The questionnaire was divided into two major sections. The first section contained a number of Likert— type attitudinal items designed to test the variance within and mean difference between the responses of the surveyed groups on major issues regarding children's television advertising. The second section of the questionnaire was designed to measure three relationships between the various respondent groups: the extent of cognitive overlap, or similarity in attitudes of the major respondent groups; the perceived cognitive overlap or congruency among the various groups on issues relating to children's television advertising--that is, how close one respondent group per— ceived the attitudes and beliefs of another group to be to their own attitudes and beliefs regarding advertising to children; and the accuracy of the various respondent groups in estimating the position of other respondent groups on issues involving children's television advertising. 1Because of the small number of executives actually involved with the network review boards and the low number of retunns from this sample, the network review board sample was not included in the statistical analyses. 179 A SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS Six general hypotheses and twenty—two research hypotheses were included in the study. All the general hypotheses and the first seventeen research hypotheses con— cerned the following topics: (1) the need for regulation of children's television advertising; (2) the method of regulating children's television advertising; (3) the effects of television commercials on children; (4) the techniques used in commercials aired on children's tele— vision; and (6) major proposals regarding the future of children's television advertising. The five remaining research hypotheses concerned the ability of the indi- viduals directly involved with children's television advertising to interact effectively on the issues involved. The major study findings are summarized below: Members of the industry, government, and Action for Chil- dren's Television (ACT) samples agreed that advertising directed at children requires special attention and regula— tion because of the nature of the Viewing audience. Members of the ACT and government samples felt that more regulation was needed and that the job should not be left up to the industry. The industry respondents, however, felt that the existing self-regulatory framework was sufficient to take 180 care of the problem and should be given more chance to work° There were definite differences in how the various groups viewed the effects of television advertising on children. The majority of both industry samples felt that children's television advertising helps to develop a child's ability to make good consumer decisions. The majority of the ACT and government samples strongly disagreed. Similar differ— ences were evident on such questions as: Does advertising lead to an increase in parent-child conflict? Do commer- cials arouse anxieties and feelings of insecurity in children? Is there a connection between commercials for pharmaceuticals and the nation's rising drug usage problem among children? The TechniquggiUsed in AdVertising to Children. Several of the statements included in the survey concerned various aspects of the National Association of Broadcasters Television Code. The NAB Television Code specifically pro— hibits program hosts or primary cartoon characters from delivering messages within or adjacent to the program which features such hosts or cartoon characters.1 The majority lSection X-4 of the Television Code states: "Children' s program hosts or primary cartoon characters shall not be utilized to deliver commercials messages with- in or adjacent to the programs which feature such hosts or II" J‘ 181 of the industry, government, and ACT respondents agreed with this provision of the code. As of January 1, 1973, the NAB Television Code per— mitted no more than twelve minutes of non-program material in any sixty minutes of children's weekend programming.l Also, as of that date, the number of program interruptions in children's weekend programs could not exceed two within any thirty minute program or four within any sixty minute program.2 The majority of the respondents included in the study felt that this provision of the code was not strong enough. All of the ACT respondents, ninety-six percent of the government respondents, and fifty percent of the industry respondents agreed with the statement: "There are too many commercials on shows children watch." The way the statement is worded, however, does not make it clear whether the respondents objected to the number of commercials being aired on children's programs, the number of commercial interrup— tions on children's programs, or the amount of time devoted to commercials on children's television. .1" cartoon characters. This provision shall also apply to lead— ins to commercials when such lead—ins contain sell copy or imply endorsements of the product by the program hoSt or primary cartoon character." 1Children's weekend programming time is defined as that period of time between the hours of 7:00 AM and 2:00 PM E on Saturday and Sunday. See Section XIV-2c of the Tele— vision Code. 2See Section XIV~3d of the Television Code. J‘— 182 The Truthfulness and Taste of Children'S'Television Commercials. There was a definite division in attitude between the industry respondents and the ACT and government respondents regarding the truthfulness and taste of com- mercials directed at children. Not one of the ACT respond- ents and less than twenty percent of the government respondents felt that children's television commercials present a true picture of the products advertised. Nearly seventy percent of the industry respondents felt that they do. Not one of the ACT respondents and only fourteen per— cent of the government respondents felt that television commercials aimed at children are usually in good taste. Seventy-four percent of the agency respondents and seventy- nine percent of the advertiser respondents felt that they are. Over ninety percent of the ACT respondents and sixty- eight percent of the government respondents felt that chil- dren's television commercials are purposely disguised to blend in with the programs. Over sixty-five percent of the industry respondents felt that they are not. The Advertisers on Children's Television. Many of i the ACT and government respondents expressed particularly strong opinions about those in the advertising industry buying and producing commercials directed at children. Over seventy percent of both respondent groups felt that adver- l tisers are not really concerned about children; they just ‘ .-. -.. .' ..|".I. “ ...-I _. 3 .,_\.. p _ .. '; ,, _. l'.‘ l '. n. . . . . ..\ .._- . . . 183 want to sell their products. Less than five percent of the ACT respondents and less than forty percent of the government respondents agreed with the statement: "Most advertisers are good people trying their best to provide what the public wants." Over eighty percent of the ACT respondents and over seventy percent of the government respondents expressed the feeling that children's television would be better if it were not controlled by "advertising dollars." Advertising_Vitamins on Children's TelevisiOn. None of the ACT or government respondents felt that vitamin companies should advertise on children's television, and nearly half of both respondent groups felt there is a definite connection between commercials for pharmaceuticals and the nation's rising drug usage problem among young people. Over forty percent of the industry respondents agreed that vitamin companies should not advertise on children's programs; however, less than twenty percent of them felt there was a direct connection between pharmaceuti- cal advertising and the drug usage problem. Recent Proposals Regarding Children's TelevisiOn and Children's Television Advertising. One survey item concerned the use of simulcasts (permitting two or more networks to air the same program) to improve the quality of children's television. The idea behind the proposal was My. f..— n 184 that the networks would not be forced into putting their best programs into competing time periods in order to achieve high ratings and also that fewer programs would mean that the networks could devote more time and money to so—called "quality programs." Among those expressing an opinion of the simulcast proposal, the majority of all four respondent groups felt that simulcasts would not significantly help the quality of children's television. A number of critics have proposed that commercials on children's programs be "bunched" at the beginning or end of a program or, as is done in many countries of the world, "bunched" during a particular period of the day. Those in the industry have complained that this proposal would significantly decrease the effect of the commercial message. The four samples were asked if they thought "bunching" would lessen the effect of the advertiser's message. The majority of each respondent group expressing an opinion on the item agreed with the industry respondents. Nearly ninety percent of the ACT respondents favored banning commercials from children's television. Over ninety percent of the industry respondents opposed the idea. The government respondents were almost equally divided on the issue.1 1Forty percent of the government respondents marked "uncertain" on this item. 185 Over eighty percent of the ACT respondents and nearly fifty percent of the government respondents favored the proposal that commercials on children's television be preceded by a notice stating that what was to follow was an ad.1 Over seventy percent of the industry reSpondents were opposed to the idea. Many industry respondents commented that they thought the proposal would have little, if any, effect on children, and would be a waste of time. IMPLICATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH In recent years, government and business spokesmen have advocated a dialogue between key government, industry, and consumer groups to reduce friction and advance the general good. Yet, such a dialogue never happens. Rather, what passes for dialogue in form is only a sequence of monologues in fact, wherein each spokesman merely grants "equal time" to others and pretends to listen while actually preparing his own set of comments.1 The findings of this study indicate that the lack of effective interaction between government, industry, and 1See Raymond A. Bauer and Stephen A. Greyser, "Thinking Ahead: The Dialogue That Never Happens," Harvard Business Review, Novembeerecember 1967, 2—12, 186—190. Also see Scott Ward, "Kids"s TV—Marketers on Hot Seat," Harvard Business Review, July-August 1972, 16—28. 186 consumer spokesmen, at least regarding children's television advertising, is not due to a lack of understanding. The various groups included in the study do understand each other's positions on most issues remarkably well. The findings indicate the critical need for industry spokesmen to establish an effective dialogue with government representatives and consumer spokesmen, particularly spokes- men for Action for Children's Television, if they hope to continue operating with the relative freedom they now enjoy. On almost every issue in the survey, the government respond— ents were on the side of the ACT respondents and not the side of the industry-—a fact that has serious implications regard- ing present public opinion and potential legislation on the subject. Although the study data supported most of the research hypotheses, the significant differences in attitude between the surveyed groups and the small amount of variance in attitude within the surveyed groups is probably a more significant finding than the fact that the hypotheses were supported. The difference in attitudes between the industry respondents and the ACT and government respondents is so large that no publicity campaign or goodwill effort on the part of the industry is likely to have much effect on either group—~at least not in the immediate future. 187 How can effective interaction take place? The people participating in the study indicated several key factors: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) thoughtful business and government leaders and consumer spokesmen willing to listen to opposing points of view; individuals who will take the time to consider and to understand (even if they do not agree with) each others' premises and assumptions; those who will engage in dialogue oriented to fact finding rather than fault finding; those who will address themselves to solving the problems of the real, rather than the presumed, public; more and better research on all aspects of the subject. Most respondents agreed that more research on the effects of television on the child is needed. Because of the tremendous problems encountered in conducting research on the effects of a complex stimulus such as television, however, I feel more research into other areas may be more fruitful at the present time.1 One area in which very little is known concerns children's programming and advertising in other areas of the world. Although a number of studies have been conducted on broadcasting systems in other countries, more research into the costs, benefits, and problems of such systems is needed .................... ' 1Some of the major problems encountered in conduct— ing reliable and valid research in the area were discussed in Chapter II. 188 before viable alternatives to our present system of tele— vision broadcasting can be discussed.1 A second area in which more research is needed is in the area of attitudes. This study demonstrated that Likert-type scales and mail questionnaires gag be used to measure the attitudes of top executives, senators, congress- men, and consumer spokesmen on complex issues. However, more work in the area is needed. Critical groups were not included in the present study--groups that will have a major impact on the future of our broadcast system. For example, a variety of groups are involved on the federal, state, and local levels in drafting and approving ..................... 1Some of the more recent examples of such studies are: David Fleiss and Lillian Ambrosino, An International Comparison of Children'S‘Television‘Programming_(Washington, D.C.: National Citizen's Committee for Broadcasting, July 1971); D. Shinar, "Structure and Content of Television Broad— casting in Isreal," Television and Social Behavior:“Media Content and Control, edited by G. A. Comstock and E. A. Rubin— stein (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), pp. 493—532; J. D. Halloran and P. Croll, "Television Pro- grams in Great Britain," Television and Social Behavior: Media Content and Control, edited by G. A. Comstock and E. A. Rubinstein (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), pp. 415-492; P. Dahlgren, "Television in the Sociali— zation Process: Structures and Programming on the Swedish Broadcasting Corporation," Television and Social Behavior: Media Content and Control, edited by G. A. Comstock and E. A. Rubinstein (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), pp. 533-546; A. Toogood, "New Zealand Broadcasting: A Monopoly in Action," Journal of Broadcasting, 1969, 14, 13-24. 189 new legislation on the subject of children and television. This study concentrated only on the attitudes of a select sample of federal employees. More research is needed into the attitudes and opinions of other government regulators and politicians. How do such people feel about children's television? Is children's television an area of immediate concern? What is known about research on the subject? Action for Children's Television is only one of many consumer groups lobbying for public and governmental support for proposals regarding children's television advertising. Only ACT spokesmen were included in this study. Research into the attitudes of spokesmen for such groups as the Council on Children, Media, and Merchandising and the Con— sumers Union would be useful. Research is needed into the attitudes of industry executives selling children's products but not advertising on children's television and industry executives not selling products aimed at the child market. Neither group was included in the present study, yet both play a vital role in establishing and enforcing industry self—regulation pro— cedures. There is also a need for longitudinal attitude data. I I . 0 e Such research could answer such questions as. Has the imag Of executives involved with children's television advertising changed for the better or worse? What new proposals have 190 been made on the subject of children's television advertis— ing? How do key individuals in the creation, production, regulation, and evaluation process View such proposals? Are there still vast differences in the attitudes of the various interest groups? Is there any new research on the subject of children and television? How much do key indi— viduals know about the findings? What new techniques are being used in commercials on children's television? Which techniques are seen as good and which are seen as bad? Etc. APPENDICES '——-—_;.‘... ......w. . APPENDIX A COVER LETTERS AND INTERVIEW GUIDE This appendix contains a representative sample of the cover letters used in the study and a copy of the personal inter- view guide. Included are: Agency President Cover Letter Initial Industry Cover Letter Initial ACT Cover Letter Follow~up Industry Cover Letter Follow-up ACT Cover Letter Interview Guide 191 192 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL or BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION EAST LANSING - MICHIGAN - 48824 DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING AND TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION February 1, 1973 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Dear Mr. XXXXXX: Several members of the faculty of the Colleges of Business and Communication at Michigan State University are in the process of studying the subject of children's television advertising. The study is partially funded by a research grant from the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. A major portion of the overall study deals with two areas of direct concern to your agency. The first concerns the tele- vision advertising creative process. The second comprises the issues involved. Much has been written in recent months concerning the people and tasks involved in creating advertising for child markets. Yet, little is known about the actual process. In this study we plan to examine in detail how large advertising agencies create, produce, research and evaluate television commercials aimed at the young market. is a result of ineffective communication between broad- casters, researchers and critics. In this study we hope to discover how key agency personnel feel about the current issues facing the advertising world--particularly with regard to advertising to Children. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX plays a major role in the creation of network television advertising campaigns and has long been involved in advertising to the child market. We feel, therefore, that interviews with key XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX personnel will be vital to obtain a realis— . tic look at the agency side of the picture--a side that has i been long ignored. ' Much of the current controversy regarding advertising issues 3 I 193 February 1, 1973 Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Page 2 In a few days one of our researchers, Mr. James D. Culley, will be in the New York area interviewing agency personnel for this study. Would you be willing to furnish us with the names and titles of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX personnel (researchers, account executives, media buyers, etc.) currently involved in creating, producing and research- ing commercials for the child market so that Mr. Culley might arrange to talk to them? A form is enclosed in a self— addressed envelope for this purpose. Personnel working on such accounts as XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXIand XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX are of particular interest to us. You may be assured that all interview data will be held in strictest confidence. The names of persons, organizations, actual job titles and specific brand names will be disguised or deleted in the final research report. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in supporting this research project. Yours sincerely, William Lazer Professor of Marketing and Transportation WL:sas Enclosures 194 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ° 48824 DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING AND TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION June 12, 1973 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Dear XXXXXXXXXX: What do advertisers, television critics, network executives, and government regulators think about television commercials directed at children? We really don't know. But your answers on the enclosed questionnaire will help clear up many of the misconceptions that we believe exist. The survey is part of a study sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Similar ques— tionnaires have been sent to a select sample of key people in the advertising field, in government, and to critics of the advertising process. Portions of the survey results will be included in my doctoral dissertation. Your response to the survey items will be held in strict confidence. Only aggregate responses will be in— cluded in the final report. (We have coded each question- naire to aid us in compiling and analyzing the data.) ‘ Please take a few minutes of your time to complete , the survey and mail it back in the enclosed envelope. 1 If you would like a copy of the summary reports, just enclose ' a note with your survey. I will be happy to furnish you with one. I Yours sincerely, James D. Culley Study Director (517-355-6010) JDC:cs Enclosure 195 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION EAST LANSING - MICHIGAN . 48824 DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING AND TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION June 22, 1973 What do advertisers, television critics, network executives, and government regulators think about television commercials directed at children? We really don't know. But your answers on the enclosed questionnaire will help clear up many of the misconceptions that we believe exist. Your response to the survey items will be held in strict confidence. Action for Children's Television (ACT) is distributing this particular survey for us. Only ACT will know if you respond to the survey or not. (The code number on the questionnaire will be used by ACT for compiling such data.) The survey is part of a study of the effects Of advertising on children funded by the U.S. Department of Health, Educa— tion, and Welfare. Similar questions have been sent to other members of consumer groups, as well as key government Officials, advertisers, and members of the major networks. Please take a few minutes of your time to complete the survey and mail it back in the enclosed envelope. If you would like a copy Of the summary report, please drop a note to ACT. I will furnish them with copies as soon as they are available. ‘ Yours sincerely, James D. Culley Study Director (517-355-6010) JDC:sas Enclosure 196 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ’ 48824 DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING AND ‘ TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION July 16, 1973 Four weeks ago Action for Children's Television mailed you a copy of a questionnaire entitled MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY SURVEY OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS ADVERTISING. Similar question- naires were sent to 20 members Of the United States Senate, 30 members of the House of Representatives, top executives in 30 Of our country's leading corporations, 25 Of the nation's largest advertising agencies, a select sample Of key network executives, and commissioners of the Federal Trade and Federal Communication Commissions. The initial returns were exceptional. However, I still hope to hear from everyone sampled. Won't you take the 15 minutes the survey requires and help me gather data on a subject of Vital concern to all those interested in our present system of broadcast advertising? I'm enclosing a second-copy of the survey for your convenience. Please be assured that I am only interested in the aggregate opinions of the various groups involved. Your responses Will be aggregated with those of 50 or more ACT spokesmen I and women in computing the "Opinions of Action for Children 8 Television" for the final report and for my dissertation. May I count on your help? Yours sincerely, James D. Culley (Telephone: 517=355~6010) JDC/sm ' . t please P.S. If ou would like a copy of the summary repor , drop a noie to ACT. I will furnish them With copies as soon as they are available. 197 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION EAST LANSING ° MICHIGAN ' 48824 DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING AND TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION July 16, 1973 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX Dear XXXXXXXXXX: Four Weeks ago I sent you a copy of a questionnaire entitled MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY SURVEY OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS.ADVER- TISING. Similar questionnaires were sent to 20 members Of the United States Senate, 30 members of the House of Represen— tatives, top executives in 30 of our countries.leading corporations, 25 Of the nations largest advertising agencies, and a select sample of key network executives, members of the F.C.C. and F.T.C., and spokesmen for consumer interest groups. The initial returns were exceptional. However, I hope to hear from all those sampled. Won't you take the 15 minutes the survey requires and help me gather data on a subject of Vital concern to all those interested in our present system Of broadcast advertising? I'm enclosing a second copy Of the survey with this letter for your convenience. Please be assured that I am only interested in the aggregate opinions of the various groups involved. Your responses will be aggregated with those of 50 or more other respondents in computing the "opinions of those in the advert131ng indus— try" for the final report and for my dissertation. ‘ May I count on your help? Yours sincerely, James D. Culley (Telephone: 517—355—6010) P.S. If you would like to receive a copy Of the summary report and haven't already written for one, please drop me a note. I will happily furnish you With one. 198 INTERVIEW GUIDE Survey Of'Key‘Advertising;Agency‘Personnel I am a member of a team of researchers from the Department Of Marketing and the Department of Communication at Michigan State University. The research team is studying the subject of children's television advertising under a grant from the U.S. Department of Health, Education and welfare. In this study we plan to examine in detail how large adver- tising agencies create, produce, research and evaluate tele— vision commercials aimed at the young market. In addition, we hope to determine how key agency personnel, such as your— self, feel about certain issues recently raised regarding the subject Of advertising to children. You may be assured that all data gathered in this interview will be held in strictest confidence. If you have no Objection, I will tape our interview. I assure you that only members of the research team will have access to the information on the tape. ............... BACKGROUND DATA . . ............................... Tape Number: Date Of Interview: Agency: Respondent's Name: Please begin by telling me a little about your background. Specifically, (1) How longhave you been with this agency? (2) What are your present duties? (3) What proportion (%) Of your time is devoted to work on accounts advertising to children? I“... 199 CREATION, PRODUCTION AND'RESEARCH'PROCESSES'-T'Case'StudY" One goal Of our research is to prepare a number Of in-depth descriptive studies of the creation, production, research and evaluation behind specific commercials aimed at the young market. Could you select a recent commercial that you are familiar with that is designed to appeal to the child market, and describe the steps involved in getting that commercial on the air? (PROBES) (1) Where did the idea originate? (2) How did your agency Organize to prepare the commercial? (3) How many key agency people were involved in the process? Did they work full or part time on the account? What were their major tasks? (4) What research was done for the commercial? Was the com— mercial pretested? post tested? (5) What does a commercial of this type cost? (6) How was the commercial's media strategy determined? (7) Who produced the commercial? Where? (8) Who made the final decision to air the commercial? (9) How long did the entire process take? ' What are the names of other key agency people involved in Preparing this commercial? A CREATION, PRODUCTION AND RESEARCH PROCESSES'TT°Genera1 A second goal of this study is to examine how the process of creating, producing, researching and evaluating commercials for child markets differs from that Of other markets. Specifically: 200 (1) How do the steps in the process differ... (2) How do the duties and backgrounds of the people involved " differ. O 0 (3) How does the amount and type of research differ... (4) How does the evaluation procedure differ... (PROBE: It is necessary to clear certain commercials for children with the networks before they can be aired. What effect ,does this have on how the agency prepares commercials for the_child market?) Is there economic pressure not to change once a commercial has gone so far." (5) How do the costs of commercials for child markets differ... 'GENERAL RESEARCH ...'Research'Pprsonnel'Only """""""" (1) Do you normally pretest your commercials before they are aired? Could you describe the type Of pretest you con- duct for a commercial aimed at the child market? (2) What research services outside your agency (Gallup & Robinson, Nielsen, Simmons, Starch) are used in evaluating children's ads? How are they used? (3) Do you test commercials for children on'mOthers Of chil— dren as well as children? (4) Does your agency engage in any on-going basic research on children? (PROBE: DO you conduct any theoretical studies Of consumer learning or basic strategies for persuading : children?) i (5) How does basic research get fed into the creation and production process in your agency? (6) How do you feel about releasing agengy research informa- tion on a specific commercial to the public after a campaign has stopped being used? GENERAL CLEARANCES & GUIDELINEgéj ' --------- (1) What clearances must be obtained for commercials aimed at 1 children? (PROBE: How does this vary by product type? by client?) 201 (2)9Cfiildren's advertising guidelines have been drawn up by . 'various trade associations, networks and government agencies. Which of these guidelines are you familiar with? (3) How did you learn about these guidelines? (4) Where do problems arise regarding the use of such guide- lines? .......... "EFEECTS’ON’CHILDREN‘... ReSearCherS'& Creative People'Only" (1) Do you think children perceiVe commercials differently than adults? (PROBE: Can they differentiate the commer- cial message from the rest of the program? Are they more susceptible to certain techniques ... Which ones?) (2) What techniques are the most effective in reaching the young market? (PROBE: Animation? Music? Fast action?) (3) What good effects do commercials have on children? For example,_do you think TV ads help the child to be a better consumer? Why? (4) What possible harmful effects might certain commercials have on the child? (PROBE: DO you think commercials cause increated cynacism? A desire for unnecessary products? Parent-child conflict? Unhappiness when the child's parents won't buy what is advertised?) AISSUES .-. _ .......... Has Federal Government imposed any special constraints on children's TV advertising? (1) How do you feel about increased government regulation of childrenfs television ... Why? (2) It has been suggested that commercials be banned com— pletely from children's shows. How do you feel about this proposal ... Why? (..— (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 202 Various guidelines state that'disclaimers.such as "batteries not included" must be presented in certain cases. How do you feel about the use of disclaimers? (PROBE RESEARCHERS ONLY: What effect do you think most disclaimers actually have on children? DO you think stricter regulations regarding the use of disclaimers would be more effective?) It has been suggested that commercials be bunched together before and after a show rather than.dispersed throughout a show. How do you feel about this proposal? (PROBE RESEARCHERS ONLY: What effect would this pro- posal have on the impact Of the commercial?) It has been proposed that commercials on children's shows be proceeded by a notiCe stating that what follows is a paid commercial. What do you think about this proposal? (PROBE RESEARCHERS ONLY: What effect would such a proposal have on the impact of the commercial?) It has been prOposed that the federal government and industry set—up a children's Television'BroadcaSt center to finance quality children's programs. The center would be financed through a mandatory tithe on national tele— vision advertisers and only institutional credits would be permitted on such programs. What do you think of this proposal? How do you feel about setting up a codeboard to establish standards specifically for children's television and television commercials? What is (your agency) doing in regard to the nutritional labeling guidelines recently proposed by the government 1 for children's food products? What effect do you think ” the increased emphasis on nutritional labeling will have on food advertising? How much do you know about nutri- 1. tional labeling? ' “ pRESPONDENT INFORMATION (l) (2) In an average week, how many hours do you usually watch television? Have you watched any children's programs this year? Which ones? 203 (3) What is your present marital status? DO you.have any children? What are their ages? Do you impose any special viewing constraints on your own children? (4) What is your educational background? (5) Age: (sight code) (6) Race: (sight code) ADD I T I ONAL ICOWGENTS ........................................ Is there anything else you would like the public and govern— ment to understand concerning the subject of children's television advertising? APPENDIX B FIRMS INCLUDED IN THE INDUSTRY SAMPLE 204 205 The Advertiser Sample1 ............... .................. ..................................... Executives with the twenty—nine corporations listed below - were mailed copies of the final research instrument. The number in parentheses indicates how many individuals within the company were contacted- .. . .. .................. (1) AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS CORPORATION (3) (2) BORDEN, INC. FOODS DIVISION (3) (3) BRISTOL-MYERS COMPANY (2) * (4) FISHER-PRICE TOYS (2) (5) GAF CORPORATION (2) (6) GENERAL FOODS CORPORATION (4) (7) GENERAL MILLS, INC. (7) (8) HASBRO INDUSTRIES, INC. (3) (9) HUNT-WESSON FOODS, INC. (3) (10) IDEAL TOY CORPORATION (5) (11) KEEBLER COMPANY (2) (12) KELLOGG COMPANY (5) (13) KENNER PRODUCTS (3) (14) LIBBY, McNEIL & LIBBY (2) (15) LOUIS MARX & CO., INC. (1) (16) McDONALD's CORPORATION (3) (17) MARS INCORPORATED (3) (18) MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY (3) (19) MILES LABORATORIES (2) (20) MATTEL TOYS (3) (21) MILTON BRADLEY COMPANY (2) (22) NABISCO, INC. (2) (23) THE NESTLE COMPANY, INC. (3) *(24) PEPSICO, INC. (3) (25) PLOUGH INC. (2) (26) THE QUAKER OATS COMPANY (3) continued 206 (27) REMCO INDUSTRIES, INC. (2) K28) SEVEN-UP COMPANY (3) (29) SHASTA BEVERAGES (2) ...... .............................. 1Corporations whose names are preceded by an asterik (*) Were included in the sample but not in the data analysis. Such firms were not advertising on children's TV at the time the survey was taken. Executives with the twenty-four advertising agencies listed below were mailed copies of the final research instrument. 207 .................... The number in parentheses indicates how many individuals within each agency were contacted. An asterick before the agency name indicates that executives within the agency participated in the preliminary interviews as well as the final attitude survey. Beneath each agency name is an example Of the type Of chil— dren' 5 advertising accounts the agency held at the time the survey was made. *(1) ADCOM, INC., Chicago (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) *(6) *(7) (8) (9) (10) -Cap'n Crunch, Quisp, Quake and other presweetened _Quaker cereals BATTEN, BARTON, DURSTINE & OSBORN, INC., New York -Burger King Drive—in Restaurants, Campbell Curly .Noodle Soup BENTON & BOWLES, INC., New York (2) -Post breakfast cereals, Hasbro Industries CAMPBELL MITHUN, INC., Minneapolis (2) -Schaper Manufacturing Co. Bath (toys) CARSON/ROBERTS DIV. OF OGILVY & MATHER, Los Angeles -Mattel Inc. (toys) CLINTON E. FRANK, INC., Chicago (8) -Curtiss candies CUNNINGHAM S WALSH, INC., New York (10) —Jiffy Pop Popcorn DANCER-FITZGERALD-SAMPLE, INC., New York -Beechnut Life Savers, General Mills cereals DANIEL S CHARLES, INC., New York (1) -GAF Viewmaster DOYLE, DANE, BERNBACH, INC., New York -Quaker Oats non presweetened cereals (2) (4) (9) (toys), Mr. Bubble Bubble- (4) (ll) *(12) (l3) (14) (15) *(16) *(17) *(18) (19) *(20) *(21) *(22) (23) (24) 208 FOOTE, CONE & BELDING COMMUNICATIONS, INC., New York (8) ~FritO Brand Corn Chips, Kraft Caramels GILBERT, GRACE & STARK, INC., New York C9) ~Maypo cereals GREY ADVERTISING, INC-, NeW-York (1) —Aurora Products (toys), KooleAid,lJIF Peanut Butter HOEFER, DIETERICH & BROWN, INC., San Francisco (5) —Shasta Beverages HUMPHREY, BROWNING, MacDOUGALL, INC., Boston (3) ~Parker Brothers (toys) J. WALTER THOMPSON COMPANY, INC., Chicago (2) —Aunt Jemima Pancake Mixes (3) KENYON & ECKHARDT ADVERTISING,INC., Chicago —Libbyland Frozen Children's.Dinners LEO BURNETT CO., INC.,_Chicago (12) -Kellogg cereals,Nestle'sQuik, Phillsbury children's drink mixes LEONARD M. SIVE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Cincinnati (3) -Kenner Products Co. (toys) NEEDHAM, HARPER S STEERS,_INC., Chicago (3) —MdDonald's Drivewin Restaurants OGILVY & MATHER, INC., New York (5) ~Hershey Chocolates ) I TED BATES S COMPANY, INC., New York (3) ‘ -M&M/Mars, Louis Marx.& CO. (tOys), ITT Continental I Baking WILLIAM ESTY COMPANY, INC., New York (4) -Hawaiian Punch, Nabisco cereals, cookies, snacks and crackers YOUNG S RUBICAN INTERNATIONAL, INC., Nevaork'—(3) -Jello,Chef Boy—Ar—Dee prepared foods,_Tang,. Milton Bradley (toys) APPENDIX C DISCRIMINATORY POWER RANKINGS OF OPINION STATEMENTS USED IN PRE-TEST The preliminary research instrument used in the pre—test Of this study was composed of the 96 Likert-type statements listed in this appendix. The statements were randomly assigned to a position on the pre—test questionnaire. In this appendix, the statements are listed in descending order based on their discriminatory power ranking. The procedure for calculating this ranking is outlined in Chapter III. Statements bearing an asterisk (*) were selected for inclu- sion in the final research instrument. If the statement is followed by a similarly worded statement in brackets, the bracketed version is how the statement appeared in the final questionnaire. 209 10° 11. 12. 13. 14. *1.60 *1.60 *1.47 *1.47 *1.47 *1.47 210 Many television commercials insult.people's intelligence by talking down to them. The federal government should have more to say in ghat techniques are used in advertising to chil— ren. Much of today's television advertising is an insult to the basic dignity of man. Advertising encourages product improvement. Most television advertising is boring and repeti— tious. Advertising aids the consumer in buying more easily and efficiently. Television commercials aimed at children are usually in good taste. The quality Of television programming would be better if it were not controlled by advertising dollars. Little improvement has been made in improving television programming or shortening the commer— cial message time. Advertising on children's television programs should be banned completely. Most business firms make a sincere effort to adjust consumer complaints fairly. . . (Most advertisers are good people trying their best to provide what the public wants.) Television commercials are a major reason for the increase in parent—child conflict we see today. (Television commercials lead to an increase in parent=child conflict.) Advertising contributes to developing a child's ability to make good consumer decisions. . (Advertising helps develop a child's ability to make good consumer decisions.) Businessmen use advertising to make people buy things they do not want. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28° *1.20 *1.20 211 Advertising seldom persuades people to buy things they should not buy. In general, commercials do not present a true picture of the product advertised. (Most children's television commercials present a true picture of the product advertised.) Television advertisements present a true picture of the product advertised. The primary function of commercials is to inform people about products. The majority of companies try to be trutthl and fair in their advertising. (Most advertisers on children's television make a sincere effort to present their product truth— fully.) Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. The information needed to become a well—informed consumer is readily available to most people. Generally, self-regulation for business can be effective. Americans have benefited from television program— ming that advertising dollars made poss1b1e. Advertising has helped raise our standard of living. 1 Television advertising to children should be more . regulated than it already is. The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children 5 television advertising. Television commercials seem to be getting worse all the time. Some products should not be allowed to advertise on television. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37° 38. 39. 40. 41. 1.20 *1.13 *1.13 1.07 1.07 212 A:good deal of advertising devotes scarce re- ‘sources to the consumprion and production Of frivolous goods. There is a connection between commercials for over-the-counter pharmaceuticals and the nation's rising drug usage among children. (There is a connection between commercials for pharmaceuticals and the nation's rising drug usage among young people.) Television advertising requires special govern- mental regulation because of the nature Of the television medium. (Children's television advertising requires special regulation because Of the nature of the Viewing audience.) Over the years most advertising agencies have steadily "cleaned house" and attempted to raise their moral standards. Commercials are a fair price to pay for the entertainment children receive. Advertising keeps the price of products down. Most advertising diverts demand from one producer to another without any real benefit to the economy as a Whole. Advertising represents a tremendous waste of resources. Advertising serves a useful purpose because it informs the public of differences and improvements in products. Advertising results in poorer products for the public. The business community if given a free hand, would ruthlessly exploit and destroy our natural resources. Some advertising is fun to watch. The federal government definitely should pass extensive new laws to help consumers get fair deals for their money. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 1.07 *1.00 *1.00 1.00 .93 .93 * .87 .87 213 I frequently find myself welcoming a commercial break. It is up to the parents to regulate children's television Viewing behavior. Performers should be allowed to sell products on children's television shows. Advertising is Often criticized when, in fact, the product is bad, not the advertising. In general, advertising results in lower prices. The government should regulate the advertising, sales and marketing activities of manufacturers. Advertising Often leads people to buy things they do not need or can not afford. Advertising helps you make up your mind on what products to buy. Our economy would be better off if advertising money were spent in other areas. Advertising is a fair price to pay for mass media entertainment. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers themselves. I dislike the advertising for some brands—-so much so that I will not buy those brands. Advertising for some products should not be allowed on television. (mast children understand what commercials on chil— drenfls shows are trying to do. I am in favor of an industry sponsored Television Broadcast Center to finance quality children's programs. (The advertising industry should sponsor a "Television Broadcast Center" to finance quality children's programs.) 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. * .87 .87 .87 .87 .80 .80 .80 .73 .73 .73 .73 .73 .67 214 I sometimes enjoy television commercials more than the Shows they appear on. Some television commercials are amusing, I look forward tO seeing them. Though some commercials exaggerate, most adults are able to figure out the truth about products before they are bought. The products that are advertised the most are usually the best products. Advertising often persuades people to buy things they do not need. (Commercials Often persuade children to want things they do not really need.) Over the past 5 years, television commercials have become more truthful, more‘believable. Advertisers pay for shows so they are entitled to television'time. Stricter guidelines regarding the use of dis— claimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's Commercials. There are too many commercials on shows children watch. Television commercials Often arouse anxieties and feelings of insecurity in children. ___...1Ifi—.-e Advertising serves a useful purpose because it informs the public of new products.- There is little that can be done about television commercials unless a commercial is blatently deceptive or illegal. Most television commercials are prepared by corporate businessmen and adventising agencies untrained or uninterested in that particular market segment. (Mest advertisers on children's television are not really concerned about kids, they just want to sell their products.) 215 70. .67 Advertisers have no greater understanding about how children perceive than anyone else. 71. .67 Many of the mistakes consumers make in buying products are the result of their own carelessness or ignorance. I dislike long movies on television without the 72. .60 breaks that commercials provide. Advertising iS'a necessary part of our economic 73. .60 ‘ - system. Television creates jobs by creating demand for 74. .60 products. 75. ..60 Advertising has broadened the horizons of the less educated segments Of the population. Advertising creates jobs by creating demand for 76. .50 products. 77. .50 Advertisers yield immense power in determining the basic value pattern of society. 78. .47 Most advertisers try deliberately to make it difficult to separate commercial messages and the story on many children's programs by using cuts instead of fades and by using the show character to advertise the product. 79. .40 Advertising is often made the scapegoat for vari— ous other features of modern life. The machinery for self-regulation within the advertising industry, although late in coming, is 800 040 now established and it ought to be given a chance to work. I do not object to children's advertising’per‘Se: 81-0 040 what I object to is some of the techniques they use. Children are smarter than television advertisers 820 027 give them credit for being. I usually can tell before purchasing when the 830 .27 claim made in an advertisement or commercial is misleading. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. .27 .27 020 920 .20 .20 .13 .13 .13 .07 .07 .07 .00 216 It is unfair to blame the networks for the "televisicanasteland," since they are trying their best to provide what the public wants. I am ashamed to watch products like girdles and brassieres when they are advertised on television. "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would significantly lesson the impact of the advertiser's message. The primary function of advertising is to per— suade people to buy products. Unadvertised brands are generally not as high quality as nationally advertised brands. Most television advertisers have no greater under— standing about how children perceive than anyone else. Simulcasts (permitting 2 or more of the networks to run the same program at the same time) would help improve the quality of children's television programming. A notice stating that what was to follow was an advertisement would have little, if any, effect on the impact of commercials aimed at children. (All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad.) Information consumers really need about products is rarely on the label or instructions. Commercials often make children want the thing advertised. Advertising is more effective in influencing the consumer than was the case 10 years ago. The shortcomings of advertising are no greater than those of big business in general. Commercials on children's teleVision programs are often disguised to blend in with the programs. (Commercials on children's television programs are Often purposely disguised to blend in with the programs.) APPENDIX D SURVEY INSTRUMENT 217 , 218 Questionnaire Number [::]:::I MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY SURVEY OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS ADVERTISING J. Culley, Department of Marketing Eppley Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mfichigan 48823 The following pages contain a series of statements concerning adverw ‘tising, television, government, and consumers. The purpose Of this survey is to find out how you feel about each statement. PLEASE READ EACH ITEM BELOW CAREFULLY AND CIRCLE THE RESPONSE THAT BEST EXPRESSES YOUR FEELING ABOUT THE STATEMENT. Wherever possible, let your own personal experience determine your answer. .If in doubt, circle the response that most closely corresponds to your present feeling about the statement. 1. Television advertising to children should be more regulated than it already is. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 2. Advertising helps develop a child's ability to make good consumer decisions. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 3. The quality of children's television would be better if it were not controlled by advertising dollars. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 4. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers theme selves. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 5. There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children's television Programs. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 10. ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. 219 There are too many commercials on shows children watch. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Commercials often persuade children to want things they do not really need. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Most children's television commercials present a true picture Of the product advertised. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would significantly lessen the impact of the advertiser's message. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Performers should be allowed to sell products on children's tele— vision shows. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Television commercials aimed at children are usually in good taste. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Commercials on children's television programs are Often purposely disguised to blend in with the programs. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Most children understand what commercials on children's shows are trying to do. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Simulcasts (permitting 2 or more networks to run the same program at the same time) would help improve the quality of children's tele~ vision programming. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Children's television advertising requires special regulation be— cause Of the nature Of the viewing audience. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree .o‘ _W_—' l6. l7. l8. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 220 The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children's television advertising. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree The advertising industry should sponsor a “Television Broadcast Center" to finance quality children's programs. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Most advertisers on children's television make a sincere effort to present their product truthfully. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree New regulations should restrict the techniques used in advertising toys. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Advertising on children's television programs should be banned completely. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Television commercials lead to an increase in parent—child conflict. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Television commercials often arouse anxieties and feelings of insecurity in children. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree _‘ ...- 26. 27. 28. 29. 221 Most advertisers are good people trying their best to provide what the public wants. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Most advertisers on childrenfs television are not really concerned about kids, they just want to sell their products. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree It is up to the parents to regulate children's television viewing behavior. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree There is a connection between commercials for pharmaceuticals and the nation's rising drug usage among young people. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree key people, such as yourself, feel about children's television advertis— ing. Opinions of OTHER PARTIES involved with the subject. On the next three pages, PLEASE INDICATE HOW YOU THINK THE PARTY LISTED AT THE TOP OF EACH PAGE WOULD RESPOND TO THE STATEMENTS LISTED. The responses you made above will give us valuable insights on how In the next section we hope to measure how you perceive the "TELEVISION'NETWORK CONTINUITY BOARDS Each of the three major networks has a special group Of people assigned to review all commercials before they are put on the air. Please circle the response that you belieVe most clearly reflects the VIEWS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE NETWORK CONTINUITY BOARDS. 1. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers themselves. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 2. There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children's television programs. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 3. "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would significantly lessen the impact Of the advertiser's message. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 4. Children's television advertising requires special regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 5. The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children's television advertising. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 6. Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 7. Stricter guidelines regarding the use Of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 8. All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 9. Most advertisers on children's television are not really concerned about kids, they just want to sell their products. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree How much have you been exposed to the views of the television network continuity boards? Quite a bit Some Very little .5 ...-L 223 CHILDREN'S ADVERTISING EXECUTIVES Please circle the response that you believe most closely.reflects the views of ADVERTISING AGENCY EXECUTIVES involved in creating, producing, and researching commercials for children's television. 1. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers themselves. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children's television programs. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would significantly lessen the impact of the advertiser's message. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Children's television advertising requires special regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children's television advertising. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Most advertisers on children's television are not really concerned about kids, they just want to sell their products. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree How much have you been exposed to the views of executives involved in buying, creating, researching, or evaluating commercials for children? Quite a bit Some Very little .n- - 224 CHILDREN'S ADVERTISING CRITICS How much have you heard or read about Action for Children's Television (ACT)? Quite a bit Some Nothing at all Please skip to the next page of the survey if you know nothing at all about ACT. Please circle the response that you believe most closely reflects the VIEWS OF CRITICS OF CHILDREN'S TELEVISION ADVERTISING, such as those expressed by Action for Children's Television (ACT). 1. Commercials to children should be regulated by advertisers themselves. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 2. There is nothing wrong with advertising vitamin tablets on children's television programs. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 3. "Bunching" commercials before or after a program would significantly lessen the impact of the advertiser's message. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Children‘s television advertising requires special regulation because of the nature of the viewing audience. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree The trade association guidelines in use today have done little to improve the quality of children's television advertising. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Commercials to children should be regulated by the government. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Stricter guidelines regarding the use of disclaimers (such as batteries not included) would improve many children's commercials. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree All commercials on children's television should be preceded by a notice stating that what is to follow is an ad. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Most advertisers on children's television are not really concerned about kids, they just want to sell their product. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 225 Under the two concepts below are short lists of adjectives that have been used in discussing the concept. Please put a check mark (#5 in the position that best indicates the direction and intensity of YOUR feeling toward the concept. For example, the first concept listed is "CHILDREN'S TELEVISION ADVERTISING." If you feel that children's television advertis- ing is generally good but your feelings are not very strong, you might mark: Good : s z / 3 z z : : Bad Please answer every item. If you are not sure how an adjective relates to the concept in question, put a check mark in the center space. CHILDREN'S TELEVISION ADVERTISING 1. Good : : 2 : : : : : Bad 2. Honest : 2 z z ‘ :‘ :"' §"' : Dishonest 3. Valuable : z 2 : ‘2' : " ': " : Worthless 4. Truthful : . . z : : " s : Misleading 5. Useless : : z z : : : ‘ 2 Useful SELF-REGULATION IN ADVERTISING 6. Untimely : : z z : : : ' 2 Timely 7. Successful : z : a : : ‘ = ‘ 2 Unsuccessful 8. Good . : z 2 : : " :"' : Bad 9. Foolish : : : z z " 2"' : Wise 10. Workable 2 . z : ~ : ’ 2 ‘ : Unworkable 11. Please check the block that corresponds to your age. 15—19 E] 30=34 I: 45-49 C] 60-64 C] 20—24 [1 35=39 [j 50=54 [3 65-69 C] 25-29 C] 40=44 [:I 55—59 D ’12. Please check the blank that corresponds to your marital status. Now Never married [:1 Widow E] Divorced D Separated [I married [j 13. Please check the block that corresponds to the highest grade level you have achieved. Some elementary school [:1 same college [:J Elementary school graduate [3 College graduate [3 Some high school [:1 Post graduate work [3 High school graduate E] THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION IN THIS SURVEY. PLEASE USE THE ENCLOSED STAMPED ENVELOPE IN RETURNING THE SURVEY TO US. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY M... SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Atkin, Charles K.; Murray, John P.; and Nayman, Ogus B., eds. Television‘and'Social‘Behavior:“An‘Ann0tated Bibliography‘of'Research'Focusing‘on'TeleVISion‘s Impact on Children. Rockville, Maryland: National Institute of Mental Health, Public Health Service, 1971. Baldwin, Thomas F., and Lewis, Colby. "Violence in Tele- vision: the Industry Looks at Itself." 'Television ' and Social BehaviOr: ‘Media, COntent'and'ContrOl. Edited by G. A. Comstock and E. A. Rubinstein. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 290=373. Backman, Jules. Advertising and Competition. New York: New York University Press, 1967. Barnouw, E. A. History of Broadcasting in the United States, Vol. III—~from 1953:‘The'Image Empire. New York: Oxford University Press, 1972. Bauer, Raymond A. "The Communicator and His Audience." People, Society and Mass Communications. Edited by L. A. Dexter and D. M. White. New York: Free Press, 1964. Bauer, Raymond A., and Greyser, Stephen A. Advertising in 'America: The Consumer View. Boston:..Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1968. Belson, William Albert. The Impact of Television: ‘Methods and Findings in Program ResearCh. Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books, 1967. Bishop, F. P0 The Ethics of Advertising. London: Robert Hale, 1949. Blatt, Joan; Spencer, Lyle; and Ward, Scott. "A Cognitive Developmental Study of Children's Reactions to Tele~ vision Advertising." ‘Television in'DayetoeDay‘Life: PatternS‘Of’Use. Edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Cometock, and J. P. Murray. Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1972, pp. 452-467. 226 227 Bogart, Leo. 'The Age of Television: A'Study'of‘viewing ‘ HabitS’and‘theilmpactppf'Television'on‘AmeriEan'Life. 2nd ed., rev. New York: F. Unger PUblishing Co., 1958. Borden, Neil Hopper. The EConomic Effects of'AdVertising. Chicago: R. D. Irwin, Inc., 1942. Brown, Les. Television: The Business Behind the'ng. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich, 1971. Canter, Muriel G. The Hollywood'TV Producer:"HiS'Work'and His Audience. New York: Basic Books, 1971. Chu, Godwin C., and Schramm, Wilbur. ‘Learning From Tele— vision:‘ What the Research’says. Washington, D.C.: National Association of Educational Broadcasters, 1967. Dizard, John. "Fear of Advertising." 'The Role of Advertis— ing. Edited by C. H. Sandage and Vernon Fryburger. Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1960. Dizard, W. P. Television: A World View. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1966. Efron, Edith, and Hickey, Neil. TV and Your Child: ‘In Search of an Answer. New York: Triangle Publications, 1969. ‘/Feshbach, Seymour, and Singer, Robert D. ‘Television'and Aggression: An Experimental Field Study. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1971. Fleiss, David, and Ambrosino, Lillian. An International Comparison of Children's Television Programming. washington, D.C.: National Citizen's Committee for Broadcasting, July 1971. Garret, Thomas M., S. J. An Introduction to Some Ethical Problems of Modern American AdVertising. Rome: The Gregorian University Press, 1961. Garry, Ralph; Rainsberry, F. B.; and Winick, Charles. For the Young Viewer: Television Programming fOr Children ... at the Local'Level.. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1962. Pleasantville, New York: Printers' Ink Books, 1957. K. 228 Gerbner, G. “The Structure and Process of Television Program Content Regulation in the United States." ‘TelevisiOn ‘and'Social Behavior:"Medi ‘Content and Control. Edited by G. A. Comstock and E. A. Rubinstein. Washington, D.C.: 'Government Printing Office, 1971, pp. 386-414. Goulart, Ron. The Assault on Childhood. Los Angeles: Sherbourne Press, 1969. Halloran, James D. Attitude Formation and'Change. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1967. Halloran, James D., ed. 'The Effects of TelevisiOn. England: Panther Books, 1970. Halloran, J. D., and Elliot, P. R. C. ‘Television'for‘Children ‘ and Young People. Geneva: -European Broadcasting Union, 1970. ..... '. ... . . . . ~ . . Harlan, Ellison. The Glass Teat: 'ESSays of Opinion on the “Subject of TelevisiOn. New York: Ace PubliSHing, 1969. Head, Sidney W. Broadcasting_in America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972. Hepner, Harry W."Modern‘Advertising:‘XPracticeS'and- 'Principles, 3d ed. .New York: McGraw-HiIl, 1956. Herrman, Robert 0., ed. 'The'Consumer‘Behavior'of'Children "and Teenagers:' An Annotated Bibliography.. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1969. Himmelweit, Hilde; Oppenheim, A. N.; and Vince, Pamela. Television and the Child: 'A MEmpiricalfiStUQY'of the Effects of Television on the Young. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1958. Howard, John A., and Hulbert, James. 'Advertising;and'the Public Interest. Chicago: Crain Communications, 1973. Jennings, R. Programming and AdVertising Praetices in Tele— vision DireCted'at Children. .Boston: Action for Children's.TelevISion, 1970. Johnson, Nicholas. 'How to Talleack'to Your Television. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1967. 229 J Liebert, RObert M.; Neale, John M.: and Davidson, Emily S. ‘The Early Window V‘Effec s bf Television“ n Children -.Vandmrouth. New York:“ Pergamon Press, 1973. LoSciuto, L. A. "A Nationa1“Inventoryxof‘Television Viewing Behavior." ‘ Television" in“ Bayard-Day“ Life: 6 Patterns HEEELHEEo Edited by E» A. Rubinstein; G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray. Washington, D.C.:. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 33-86. Lyle, Jack, and Hoffman, Heidi. "Explorations in Patterns of Television Viewing In? Preschool—age Children." Television in Day-to-DayLLife: Patterns of Use. Edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock,.and J. P. Murray. Washington, D.C.: 'Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 257-273. Mayer, Martin. About Television. New York: Harper and Row, 1972. Maccoby, Eleanor E. "The Effects of TV on Children.“ "The Science of Human Communications. Edited by Wilbur Schramm._ New York:‘ Basic Books, 1963. McNeal, James U. "An Exploratory Study of the Consumer Behavior of Children." 'Dimensions of‘Consumer'BehaviOr. New York: Appleton-Centurthroft , 1965. Mehling, Harold. The Great Time-Killer. Cleveland: World Publishing, 1962. Meinke, R. C. Barriers to Entry:‘ A Case Stugy'Of'the'Break- fast Cereal Industry. tLincoln: University of Nebraska, 1965. ’ Morris, Norman S. Television's Child. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1971. Murray, J. P. "Television in Inner~City Homes: Viewing Behavior of Young Boys." Televisionlin'Day:toeDay Life: Patterns of Use.” Edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 345-394. Myers, John G. Social ISSues in Advertising. New York: American Association of Advertising Agencies, 1971. National Association of Broadcasters Code Authority. ' BroadCast‘SelfeRegulation:fl'working'Manual. New York: Natianal Association of Broadcasters (updated peri— odically). _._.__.—-——F* ‘I My ' 230 Pease, Otis. 'ThehResponsibilitieSfioprmericaniAdvert”sing:.. 'PrivateLControlmandtPublieflInfluence,il920e1940.. New Haven,.Conn.:. Yale UfiiVersity Press, 1958. Piaget, Jean. ‘The Child's Conception of.the‘World. .Totawa, N.J.: .Littlefield, Adams and Co., 1965. Robinson, John. "Toward Defining the Functions of Television." Television inznayetoebay;Life:"PatternS‘OT‘Use. . Edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray. .Washington, D.C.: 'Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 583-603. Roper, Burns. A Ten-Year View of Public Attitudes Toward TelevisiongandxOtheriMassiMediar;.1959é1968.-r- New York: .Television Information Office, 1969. ‘/Sarson, Evelyn, ed. ‘Action'for‘Children‘S'Television:"The ‘ First National symposium on the EffeCt'on‘Chilaren'of TeleVisioinngramming‘and"Advertising.--New.York: Avon Books, 1969. Schiller, Herbert D. Mass CommUnications and American Empire.. New York: .Kelley, 1969.. Schramm, Wilbur, ed. The Effects of Television on Children. ' and-Adolescents- .Paris: The.United.Nationquduca-r tional, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 1964. Schramm, Wilbur; Lyle, Jack; and Parker, Edwin. ”Television ‘in the Lives of our Children. pStanford:‘ Stanford Hniversity Press, 1961. . Shayon, Robert Lewis. Television and Our Children. .New.York: Longman, Green and Co., 1951. Skornia, Harry J. Television and Society: ‘An‘InqueSt'and. Agenda for Improvement. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965. V/Stein, Aletha, and Friedrich, Lynette. "Television Content and Young Children's Behavior." ‘Television‘and'Social Learning. Edited by J. P. Murray, E. A. Rubinstein, and G. A. Comstock. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 202-317. Steiner, Gary. The People LOok at Television:"AIStudy'of Audience.Attitudes.. Neszork: Alfred A. Knopf, 1963. . _.__,_. d .. 231 V[(Stevenson, Harold W. "Television and the Behavior of Pre— school Children." Television and Social Learning. Edited by J. P. Murray, E. A. Rubinstein, and G. A. Comstock. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 346—371. V/Sunderlin, Sylvia, ed. Children and TV: TeleviSion'S‘Impact on the Child. Washington, D.C.: Association for Childhood Education International, 1967. - ./ Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior. 'Television'and'Growing;Up:T‘The Impact of Televised ViolenCe. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972. Swartz, Edward M. Toys that Don't Care. Boston: Gambit, 1971. Ward, Scott; Levinson, David; and Wackman, Daniel. ."Children's Attention to Television Advertising." 'Television in Day-to-Day Life: "PatternS‘of'USe. Edited by E. A. Rubinstein: G. A. Comstock, and J. P... Murray. washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 491—515. Ward, Scott; Reale, Greg; and Levinson, David. “Children's Perceptions, Explanations, and Judgments of Television Advertising: A Further Exploration." ‘Television in Dayrto-Day Life: Patterns of Use. Edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 468-490. Weiss, E. B. "Advertising's Crisis of Confidence." Consumerism's Search for the Consumer Interest. Edited by David A. Aaker, and George 8. Day. New York: Free Press, 1971. Wells, William D. "Children as Consumers." On Knowing the Consumer. Edited by J. W. Newman. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1966, pp. 138-145. Wertham, Fredric. Seduction of the Innocent. New York: Rinehart, 1954. Wright, John 5.; Warner, Daniel S.; and Winter, Willis L., Jr. AdVertising. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971. .M.’ 232 ARTICLES Abel, John. "Television and Children: A Selective.Bib1i- ography of Use and Effects."' ‘Journal'of'BroadcaSting, 13 (1969), 101—105. Abrams, Mark. “Child Audiences for Television in Great Britain." Journalism‘Quarterly, 33 (1956), 35-41. "ACT Draws Meager Support." 'Broadcasting, March 22, 1971, p. 53. Asai, Keizabure. "Social Tasks of Advertising: .Attitudes of Consumers and Businessmen in Japan and America." Keio Business Review, 9 (1970), 33-57. Atkin, Charles. "The Surgeon General's Research Program on Television and Social Behavior: A Review of Empirical Findings." Journal of Broadcasting, 16 (1972), 1-14. Atkin, Kenward L. "Federal Regulation of Broadcast Adver- tising,“ Journal of BroadCasting, 3 (1959), 326-340. Atwood, L. Erwin. "Perception of Television Program Pref- erences Among Teenagers and Their Parents." “Journal of Broadcasting, 12 (1968), 377-388. Barrow, Rascoe L. "Antitrust and the Regulated Industry: Prdmoting Competition in Broadcasting." ‘Duke Law Journal (1964), 282 ff. Bauer,'Raymond A., and Greyser, Stephen A. "The Dialogue That Never Happens." Harvard'BUSineSS'Review, November—December, 1967, pp. 2—4. Baxter, William S. "The Mass Media and Young People." Journal of Broadcasting, 5 (1961), 49-58. Berey, Lewis A., and Pollay, Richard W. "The Influencing Role of the Child in Family Decision Making." Journal of.Marketing ReSearCh, 5 (February, 1968), 1,. 70-29 Blalock, Joyce. "Televison and Advertising." ‘Federal Bar ‘/B Journal, 28.(Autumn, 1968), 341 ff. runbaugh, F. N. "What Effects Does TV Advertising Have on Children?" ‘Educational DigeSt, 19 (1954), 32—33. 233 Burch, Dean.. ?The Chairman Speaks About Children's TV." TeleViSion Quarterly, 9 (Summer, 1970), 59—64. V; . , "Canada Sets Five Broadcast Rules for Kids' Vitamins." 'AdvertiSing Age, May 29, 1972, p. 21. Carter, Richard F. "Communication and Affective.Re1ations." Journalism Quarterly, 42(1965), 203-212. V/"Cereal Critic Presents Advertising Code." ‘FbOd'Processing, 32 (April, 1971), 67. Chaffee, Steven; McLeod, Jack; and Atkin, Charles. *"Parental Influences on Adolescent-Media Use." ~American BehaviOral scientiSt, 14 (1971), 323—340. Cheng, A. "Drug Abuse, Drug Culture, Drug Advertising." Food Drug CoSmetics Law Journal, 26 (October, 1971) 482-486.. v” . "Children's Ads: Self Concept Themes Need More Regulation, Authors Say." 'AdvertiSing;Age, March 12, 1973, p. 1. Choate, Robert B., Jr. "The Sugar-Coated Children's Hour or Refrigerator Roulette." ‘The'NatiOn, 214 (1972), 146-148. ”Christopher, Maurine. "Debate Over What Definition ofga Kid TV Show Stymies Reform Efforts." 'Advertising'Age,. February 7, 1972, p. 20. . "Kids View Commercials Aplenty: CBS Runs Most, BAR Data Indicate." ‘Advertising Age, March 1, 1971, p. 50. . "3 Vitamin Makers Leave Children's TV." Advertising Age, July 24, 1972, p. 2. Cohen, Dorothy. "Surrogate Indicators and Deception in Advertising." JoUrnal'of marketing, 36 (July, 1972), 10—15 0 "The Advertiser's Influence in TV Program— Ch St 1e E. 0 en’ an y 405 ff. ming." Law and the Social order.(1970), "Consumer Law- Standing- School Children Denied.Standing to Sue for False Advertising Under‘Sectiong43(a)uof.the Lanham Act." 'New York University Law ReView, 38. (October, 1971), 807 ff. 234 Culkin, John M., ed. "New Directions in Children's Tele— ViSion." "Television;gnarterly,.9 (Summer, 1970), 5—76. "Debating Advertising and Children's TV." 'Broadcasting, October 25, 1971, p. 43. "Developments--Deceptive Advertising." 'Harvard Law Review, 80 (1961), 1005-1163. Efron, Edith. "The Children's Crusade that Failed (3 part series)." TV Guide, April 7, 14, and 21, 1973. Ekelund, Robert B., Jr., and Gramm, William P.’ "Advertising and Concentration:‘ Some New Evidence." ”Antitrust Bulletin, 15 (Summer, 1970), 243 ff. Engman, Lewis A. "Address Before the Young Lawyersl Section of the American Bar Association, August 6, 1972." FTC News, August 6, 1973. Ferkan, J. P. "Aim Toy Ads at Adults, Not Kids,zParentiGroup Says: Adman Dubious." “Advertising'Age, August 17, 1970, p. 12. "Did They Jump or Were They Pushed? Toy.Makers Move Into Non-Kiddie TV." 'Advertising‘Age, September 6, 1971, p. 3. Gompertz, Kenneth. "Bibliography of Articles About Broad- casting in Law Periodicals, 1956-1968." 'Federal'COm- munications Bar Journal, 23 (1969), 83 ff. Greenberg, Bradley S. "The Effects of Communicator Incom— patability on Children's Judgments of TeleV1Sion Programs." 'Journal‘oleroadcasting, 8 (1964), 157—171. . ."Television for Children: Dimensions ofCommuni— cator and Audience Perception." 'AV Communication Review, 13 (1965), 385-396. "Advertising:‘ Attacks and Counters." G h A. reyser, Step en $22—40 Harvard Business Review, March-April, 1972, pp "Irritation in Advertising." 'Journal of 'ing Research, 13 (February, 1973), 3-10. Greyser, Stephen A., and Bauer, Raymond A. "Americans.and Advertising: Thirty Years of Public Opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 30 (1966), 69—74. 235 Greyser, Stephen A., and Reece, Bennie B. "Businessmen Look Hard at Advertising." Harvard Business Review, May- June, 1971, pp. 18—20. Halloran, J. D., and Elliot, P. R. C. "European Broadcasters and Children's Television." Television Quarterly, 9 (Summer, 1970), 65-70. Heinemann, George. "Looking at Children's Television: A Self—Interview." Television Quarterly, 9 (Spring, 1970), 19-25. Hess, Robert D., and Goldman, Harriet. "Parents' View of the Effects of Television on Their Children." 'Child Development, 33 (1962), 411-426. Johnson, Nicholas. "Just How Good is British Television." Television Quarterly, 9 (FaiIT 1970), 13—34. Jones, Mary Gardiner. "The Cultural and Social Impact of Advertising on American Society." Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 8 (August, 1970), 65 ff. "Kay Study Shows Moms Unaware of What Kids See." 'Advertising Age, November 1, 1971, p. 159. "Kids Programming Needs Surgery, Not Bandaids, ABC Affiliates Told." Advertising Age, May 17, 1971, p. 59. Klapper, Joseph T. "Mass Communications Research: An Old Road Resurveyed." Public Opinion Quarterly, 27 (1963), 515-527. Kohlberg, L. "The Development of Moral Character and Moral Ideology." Child DevelOpment, 1 (1964), 415-424. Krugman, Herbert E. "A Comparison of Physical and VerbalJl {I Responses to Television Commercials." 'Public Opinion Quarterly, 30 (1966), 586-596. "Inquiry Into Children's Programming——A Call Ea Lee’ RObert (December, 1971), for Action?" Notre Dame LaWyer, 47 230 ff. "Morality (?) of Advertising." 'HarVard LeVitt, Theodore. 1970' pp. 84-92. Business Review, July-August, Leevinger, L. "Attack on Advertising and the Goals of Regu— lating." The Conference Board Record, 10 (January, 1973), 23-8. 236 Loomis, Carol L. "Those Throbbing Headaches on Madison Avenue." Fortune, February, 1972, pp. 102-6. McNeal, James U. "The Child Consumersz' A New Market." Journal of Retailing, 45.(l969), 15-22. "Madison Avenue's Response to Its Critics." ‘Business week, June 10, 1972, pp. 46-54. "Mounting Attacks on Counterads." BroadcaSting, February 21’ 1972' ppo 14-160 "More Heat on Television for Children (FTC Inquiry)." Broadcasting, March 12, 1973, p. 32. "Moves Toward Reform in Children's TV." ‘Broadcasting, OCtOber 4, 1971, ppo 34-60 Munn, Mark. "The Effect on Parental Buying Habits of Children Exposed to Children's Television Programs." 'Journal of Broadcasting, 2 (1958), 253-258. Pitofsky, R. "FTC View of Advertising." 'The'ConferenCe Board Record, 10 (January, 1973), 29-31. "Recheck Figures, Banks Advises Critics of Kid TV." Advertising Age, November 8, 1971, p. 18. "Round it Goes About Children's Shows." ‘Broadcasting, June 28, 1971, p. 18. "Sarson Examines Bank's Criticism of ACT's Facts." Advertising Age, December 27, 1973, p. 3. Scanlon, Paul D. "FTC and FCC, and 'Counter-Ad' Controversy: An Invitation to "Let's You and Him.Fight?'“.. . Antitrust Law and Economics Review, 5 (Fall, 1971), 43 ff. . "Oligopoly and 'Deceptive' Advertising; .The .- Cereal Industry Affair." 'Antitrust LaW'and Economics Review, 3 (Spring, 1970), 99 ff. Shayon, R. L. "Media Mystification." Saturday Review, October 17, 1970, p. 51. . "The Kidvid Ghetto." Saturday Review, June 20, 1970, p. 21. Shelby, Maurice E., Jr. "Children's Programming Trends on Network Television." Journal of Broadcasting, 8 (1964), 247-256. "Study is Aimed at Legality of Puffery in Ads." Editor and Publisher, 105 (November 25, 1972), p. 28. Stumphauger, Jerome S., and Bishop, Barbara R. "Saturday Morning TV Cartoons: A Simple Apparatus for the Reinforcement of Behavior in Children." ”Developmental Psychology, 1 (1969), 763-764. Tannenbaum, Percy H., and Greenberg, Bradley S. "Mass Communications." Annual Review of‘Psychology, 19 (1968), 351-386. Tebbel, John. "Network Television's Uncertain Future." Saturday Review, Nobember 14, 1970, p. 69. "The Industry Gets a Controversial Watchdog." ‘Business Week, May 12, 1973, pp. 130—133. "TV and the Tyke: FCC Starts Push for Some Answers." Broadcasting, September 11, 1972, pp. 44—45. "TV's Effect on Kids Unknown, FTC Told." Advertising Age, November 15, 1971, p. 1. "TV's Saturday Goldmine." Business Week, August 2, 1969, ppo 96-980 Thain, Gerald J. "Consumer Protection: Advertisingh—the.FTC Response." Business Law, 27 (April, 1972, 81 ff. Thompson, Glenn W. "Children's Acceptance of Television Advertising and the Relation.of TeleVieWing to School , Achievement." Journal of Educational'Research, 58 i (1964), 171-174. "Vitamin Makers Drop Commercials Aimed at Young." Broadcasting, July 24, 1972, pp. 21—22. Ward, Scott. "Children's Reactions to Commercials." ”Journal of Advertising Research (April, 1972), 37—45. . "Kids' TV: Marketers on Hot Seat." 'Harvard Business Review, Ju1y~August, 1972, pp. 16—28. 238 Ward, Scott, and Wackman, Daniel. "Family and Media Influ— ences on Adolescent Consumer Behavior." ‘American Behavioral Scientist, 14 (1971), 415—428. Wells, William D. "Communicating with Children." 'Journal'of Advertising Research (June, 1965), 2-14. Woodhouse, Peter. “Control of Television Advertising in Great Britain." Food'Drug COSmetiCS‘LaW'Journal, 26 (August, 1971), 328 ff. Zunich, Michael. "Teen-agers' Influence on Personal and Family Purchases." Journal of'Home EConomiCS, 58 (1966), 483-484. mm