| Authors . | Key findings relevant to RQ2: What are children’s and young people’s awareness of and attitudes towards the digital marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages? . |
|---|---|
| Acton et al. (2023) | Awareness of DFM:- Adolescents aged 13–17 were more likely than children aged 10–12 to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p < 0.001).- Girls were more likely to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p = 0.009), while boys were more likely to see it in video games (p < 0.001).- Minority ethnicities, including Indigenous youth, and respondents with lower-income adequacy reported more exposure than White and higher-income respondents, respectively.- Participants identified use of cartoon characters, free toys/products, and celebrity endorsements as marketing techniques that they were exposed to. |
| Amson et al. (2024) | Awareness of DFM:- Predatory Marketing Practices: Participants noticed targeted ads after searching or buying products.- Boys followed food companies based on product enjoyment; girls reported seeking information on new products and deals.- Both genders liked or commented on food posts to express positive experiences.- Girls identified a wider range of marketing techniques, such as colour and humour, and were more aware of the influence of social media influencers on their purchasing decisions; boys were less aware of these techniques. |
| Ares et al. (2023) | Recall/recognition of DFM:- Adolescents exposed to a burger advertisement (58%) on YouTube were more likely to recall the ad compared to those exposed to a salad (36%) or non-food ad (40%).- Brand recognition: The burger ad also led to marginally higher brand recognition, especially among female participants.Attitudes towards DFM:- The impact of food advertisements on brand attitudes and food choices was less clear, but male sex (p = 0.063) and frequency of burger consumption (p = 0.099) were marginally significant factors. |
| Ares et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM:- All adolescents reported seeing advertisements on social media or websites ‘all the time’, however, many said they did not pay attention to it.- Food was one of the most prevalent categories: it was spontaneously mentioned in 29 interviews.- Fast food, junk food and food-ordering websites were advertised frequently (e.g. YaPedido).- Participants recalled frequently seeing influencers, celebrities and peers promoting food and beverages including energy drinks.Attitudes towards DFM:- Memorable and appealing aspects of food advertising online included: enticing images, use of colour, use of catchy music, big portions, novelty, emotive associations, price promos and celebrities.- Opinions on advertising varied and included: annoying, intrusive, informative, catchy, tempting, disgusting and deceitful.- Participants said ads could induce cravings, but that did not always mean they actually consumed what was advertised.- Views were mixed on whether or not choices were influenced by ads; some did acknowledge their food choices were sometimes influenced by the ads they saw online and by social media influencers.- DFM was regarded as effective advertising as adolescents felt social media is more relevant to their lives than TV.- Participants noted differences between platforms; Instagram was seen as more accessible to individuals and small business; YouTube was seen as accessible only to larger corporations.- Participants proposed strategies to reduce the effect of digital marketing on their food choices, including both regulatory approaches to reduce exposure to digital marketing of unhealthy foods and behaviour change communication. |
| Baldwin et al. (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 23% watch food brand YouTube videos. - 12.5% have seen favourite food brands advertised on social media. - 2% have shared food brand videos on social media. - 6% have used food brand hashtags on any social media. - 30% liked a sugar-sweetened beverage brand on Facebook. - 26% liked a fast food brand on Facebook. - 23% liked a confectionery brand on Facebook. - 15% liked a salty snack brand. - 9% liked a juice brand on Facebook. - 13% entered a food brand competition on Facebook. Recall/recognition of DFM: - 189 food brands were named in free text field. - The most frequently named liked brands were Coca Cola (23%), McDonalds (17%), KFC (14%), Cadbury (11%) and Pringles (10%). |
| Bragg et al. (2021) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants had difficulty identifying Instagram posts as ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Instagram ads were rated more highly than traditional ads in terms of trendiness, artistic appeal and likeability. |
| Carters-White et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people were sceptical of the concept of self-regulation of online advertising and many had unfavourable views of the food industry. |
| Coates et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred influencer marketing to pop-ups, which were perceived to interrupt media content. - Participants reported watching YouTubers with whom they identify, and share interests. - Participants believed that YouTubers would likely only promote products relevant to their interests. - Other perceived benefits of influencer marketing included learning new recipes or gaining ideas and opportunities things. - Attitudes towards influencer marketing were contingent on the child’s familiarity and perceived (parasocial) relationship with the YouTuber (i.e. influencers known to and liked by children were deemed trustworthy and sincere). - Children reported feeling able to resist influencer marketing of high fat, sugar and salt products. |
| Demers-Potvin et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Self-reported exposure to DFM for unhealthy food/drinks on websites or social media ranged from 27% (UK) to 60% (Chile); and 10–17% reported exposure to DFM in video or computer games. |
| Elliot and Truman (2024) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were the platforms where teens encountered most food advertising. - Fast food (25%), beverages (29%) and candy/chocolate (19%) comprised the majority of the sample. Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the most influential persuasive technique (power) across all platforms (24–27%), followed by special offers (10–15%), themes (11–14%) and humour (9–13%). |
| Elliott et al., (2023) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were identified as the primary channels for teen-targeted food marketing; over three quarters of the ads were found on these platforms. - The majority of ads targeted at teens were for branded beverages, fast food and candy/chocolate, comprising 72% of the total advertisements. Attitudes towards DFM: - The most effective techniques (power) for attracting teens’ attention were visual style, special offers and themes (e.g. trendy, sports, holidays/seasons, LGBTIQIA+). - Older teenagers (ages 15–17) were more likely to report multiple power indicators per ad (p = 0.006). |
| Elliot et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the tag most frequently selected by participants, followed by animated character and theme. - Younger teens more likely to select animated character and less likely to select language. - Theme, humour, celebrity, special offer, music, language and teen actor are more likely to be identified in the marketing examples categorized as teen-targeted. |
| Evans et al. (2023) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Adolescents reported recalling food marketing on popular livestreaming platforms such as Twitch, YouTube Gaming and Facebook Gaming. - Attitudes towards unhealthy foods mediate the relationship between the recall of unhealthy food marketing and the purchasing behaviour of adolescents (i.e. higher recall of marketed foods was associated with more positive attitudes to unhealthy foods. This in turn was associated with greater purchase of marketed foods). |
| Fleming-Milici and Harris (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 70% of adolescents reported engaging with any food/beverage brands on social media. - Racial minority adolescents were more likely than White adolescents to engage with brands. - 54% reported engaging with brands of fast food, 50% with sugary drinks, 46% with candy and 45% with snacks (45%), 7% reported engaging with all other categories of food/beverage brands. |
| Folkvord et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Food and beverage products were the most common advertised products in vlogs; 112 food/beverage brands were recognized. - 75% of children reported they gained brand awareness. Attitudes towards DFM: - Over 60% of the children agree it is stupid and wrong to advertise; 30% and 40% agree it is okay or good for vloggers to advertise. - 80% of the children believed that other children would buy brands or products seen in the vlogs. - Half of the children believed that vloggers show brands and products to influence their viewers. - Over 70% of the children believed that vloggers get paid for using brands and products in their vlogs. - More than half of the children had bought or asked their parents to buy products shown in the vlogs. |
| Gascoyne et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Over half (55%) of students (n = 8708) reported seeing a food or drink advertisement on social media at least weekly in the past month, with a quarter (25%) exposed daily or almost daily. - A fifth of students reported liking or sharing food or drink posts. - Reported Exposure to a food or drink advertisement on social media at least once in the last week, and liking or sharing a food or drink post at least once in the last month was associated with a high intake of unhealthy drinks. - Frequency of engagement was associated with likelihood of a high intake of unhealthy food and drink. |
| Gilmour et al. (2020) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Participants reported healthy foods were rarely advertised. - Advertising of fast foods/unhealthy foods was characterized as persuasive, effective and tempting. - Participants did not believe that social media influenced their attitudes towards or consumption of brands advertised. |
| Hammond and Reid (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 44% reported seeing ads for energy drinks online/internet. - 40% reported seeing such ads on social media. - Older respondents were more likely to report exposure to energy drink ads online and through social media, although exposure remained high among younger age groups (e.g. 52% of 18–19 year olds and 45% of 20–24 year olds reported seeing ads on social media compared with 28% of 12–14 year olds and 33% of 15–17 year olds). |
| Holmberg et al., (2019) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Advertisements and posts of unhealthy food and drink (e.g. energy drinks) on social media were described as tempting. |
| Jonatan et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported being frequently exposed to food advertising through social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Whatsapp. |
| Moradi Latreyi et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 14% reported being exposed to junk food advertising online. - 51% reported seeing advertising from more than one source. - 37%, 33% and 15% reported being exposed ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘very often’ respectively. |
| Lutfeali et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred food ads on Instagram that featured many versus few likes. - Participants were more willing to engage with Instagram food ads when the ads had many likes. - The presence of positive comments did not affect participants ad preferences, suggesting ‘likes’ are a more powerful influence than comments. |
| Mehta et al. (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children had limited awareness of product placement in advergames. Attitudes towards DFM: - Children thought marketing had potential to contribute to family conflict by making children crave foods their parents would be reluctant to buy for them. - Children expressed some concern about implicit persuasion through marketing in advergames. |
| Molenaar et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Ads for unhealthy foods were recalled more frequently than ads for healthy foods. - Some participants said they used ad-blocking services, however they were still exposed to advertising online. - Ads were seen passively in social media feeds; Facebook and YouTube were the social media platforms most associated with seeing ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Frequency and repetition were considered annoying, but effective in catching attention. - Promotions that were visually appealing, made the food look delicious, and used ‘happy’ or bright colours were mentioned commonly. - Promotional strategies that were effective included competitions or opportunities to win something; jokes, wit, slogans and jingles; promotion by celebrities and influencers. - Participants reported noticing discounts, affordable deals, special offers. budget/affordability were salient factors in purchasing behaviours - Some participants felt that constantly seeing ads for junk food hindered their ability to make healthful choices. - Ads on Instagram were described as more persuasive and covert, as they ‘blend in with the feed nicely’ and are accompanied with ‘amazing shots of food’. - Ads were described as a temptation, however some believed they could ‘tune’ out the effects. |
| Murphy et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants rated peers with unhealthy food posts in their social media news feeds most positively and users with healthy food posts least positively. - Participants looked at unhealthy and non-food ads for longer than they did at healthy food ads. - Participants attitude to peers were significantly lower where social media profiles contained company-sponsored posts compared to peer or celebrity posts. - Participants reported they were significantly less likely to share healthy advertising posts than unhealthy and non-food posts. Recall/recognition of DFM: - The mean free recall rate for unhealthy brands (1.75) was nearly five times that for healthy brands (0.36). - The mean number of unhealthy brands recognized (7.53) was double that for healthy brands (3.87). |
| Newman and Oates (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children were aware of/had recognition of advertising online, but lacked understanding of it as a marketing practice. |
| Norman et al. (2020) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Significant increase in brand recognition and recall by children (n = 154) in both experimental conditions (TV only and TV and advergame). Attitudes towards DFM: - Brands were perceived more favourably across all three attitude ratings (cool, exciting, fun). - A greater proportion of children who played the advergames and the TV advertisement perceived a person who would eat Brand A to be very or a little cool (36% vs 19%, p < 0.001). - Anti-adult themes, fun and humour, and parent pleasing were noted techniques in the most recognized and favoured advertisements. |
| Pollack et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Energy drinks were the product type most noticed on Twitch (62%). - 8 of the top 10 brands were for fast food or food delivery (e.g. McDonalds, Burger King, Chipotle). Attitudes towards DFM: - A greater proportion of respondents felt annoyed by advertisements on YouTube (65%) vs Twitch (40%). - More respondents agreed that advertisements served to support content creators on Twitch (79%) compared to YouTube (54%). - 60% of respondents felt there was too much advertising on YouTube (60%), while 68% of respondents felt there was just enough advertising on Twitch. - 14% of participants recalled craving a product after seeing it advertised on Twitch; a higher proportion (19%) of paying users reported craving a product compared to non-paying (12%). - There was a significant difference in the number of participants reporting consuming candy on Twitch to YouTube (75% vs 57%). |
| Qutteina et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Non-core foods made up the majority (67%) of the images (n = 607) shared by participants. - Female participants were significantly more likely to share images from Instagram and Snapchat; male participants were significantly more likely to share YouTube and FB images. - Almost half the images were of branded food products (n = 289; 47%). |
| Qutteina et al., (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Exposure to food messages was measured on a five point scale ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘very often’. - Median exposure to core foods was 2.58; to non-core foods was 4.08; and to branded non-core food posts was 5. - Participants reported significantly higher exposure to non-core food messages than core food messages (H(70) = 315.94, p < 0.000), and significantly higher exposure to branded non-core foods compared with overall core food messages (H(18) = 131.00, p < 0.000). |
| Ragelienė and Grønhøj (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported seeing ads for and photos of snack or junk food frequently on social media. - The frequency of food products seen on social media ads was positively linked with the willingness to consume these products (r = 0.440, p < 0.01). Attitudes towards DFM: - Children reported that food seen on social media was attractive and they were willing to try it. |
| Smith et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants were most aware of the advertising when it was embedded in the interface of the game. - Children were not significantly aware of the advertisement in the banner ad or advergame, but were significantly aware of the rewarded game (p = 0.001). Attitudes towards DFM: - Attitudes toward the perception of fun (p = 0.06) and taste (p = 0.21) of the test brand were not influenced by the type of advertising used. - Children who were exposed to the rewarded video advertising chose the test brand significantly more than children in the other three conditions (p < 0.002). - Attitudes to the game were mostly positive, scoring 4/5. - Choice of the test brand snack (not self-reported) was significantly influenced by the rewarded video advertising condition (compared with control, banner advertising, and advergame conditions). |
| Sutinen et al. (2024) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people expressed a preference for subtle marketing strategies that ‘blends well in the content’. - Content that is light, fun, humorous and entertaining or games, challenges, humour and skits (playful content) were considered engaging. - Adolescents preferred to follow influencers and content creators with the same interests as themselves. - Participants were aware of the commercial nature of social media content, and have pragmatic views on influencer marketing; many expressed recognition of its necessity for content creation despite expressing some critical perspectives. - Young people acknowledged being influenced to buy products via social media influencers. |
| Thaichon and Quach (2016) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants reported that social media was effective in showing them things they liked and were interested in, including advertising. Attitudes towards DFM: - Some participants found ads annoying. - Food on social media was reported to be visually appealing. - Peer pressure: children liked and shared things their friends liked and shared. - Staying ‘on trend’ was important to young people and this included knowing about new food trends. - Participants reported that food ads influenced their food choices. - Fast food was associated with fun and socialization; ads that depicted this resonated with young people. |
| Van der Bend et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Of 35 participants, n = 4 noticed ads never or rarely; n = 17 noticed ads sometimes; n = 12 noticed ads often; n = 1 noticed ads always; thus, 60% adolescents missed ads sometimes, often or always. - n = 16 neither liked nor disliked social media posts promoting food; n = 17 liked them moderately or very much; n = 2 disliked them moderately or very much. Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants were more likely to recall branded food products; recall of unbranded food products tended to be dominated by non-core foods high in fat or sugar. Attitudes towards DFM: - Food promotions on Instagram were considered the most appealing, followed by Youtube, Snapchat, Pinterest and TikTok. - Reasons for dis/liking posts based largely on visual appeal, entertainment and temptation. - Power of ads: high visual quality, appealing, aesthetic, vibrant, eye-catching, refreshing, satisfying, genuine (i.e. not fake) were popular; short video formats and funny content were preferred; traditional pop-up adverts were disliked. |
| Yang et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - 75% reported seeing energy drink advertisements online in the past year. - Boys scored higher on the advertising effect scale compared to girls (1.58 vs 1.44) thus were more likely to express a willingness to try an energy drink because of product placement in an online game. |
| Authors . | Key findings relevant to RQ2: What are children’s and young people’s awareness of and attitudes towards the digital marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages? . |
|---|---|
| Acton et al. (2023) | Awareness of DFM:- Adolescents aged 13–17 were more likely than children aged 10–12 to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p < 0.001).- Girls were more likely to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p = 0.009), while boys were more likely to see it in video games (p < 0.001).- Minority ethnicities, including Indigenous youth, and respondents with lower-income adequacy reported more exposure than White and higher-income respondents, respectively.- Participants identified use of cartoon characters, free toys/products, and celebrity endorsements as marketing techniques that they were exposed to. |
| Amson et al. (2024) | Awareness of DFM:- Predatory Marketing Practices: Participants noticed targeted ads after searching or buying products.- Boys followed food companies based on product enjoyment; girls reported seeking information on new products and deals.- Both genders liked or commented on food posts to express positive experiences.- Girls identified a wider range of marketing techniques, such as colour and humour, and were more aware of the influence of social media influencers on their purchasing decisions; boys were less aware of these techniques. |
| Ares et al. (2023) | Recall/recognition of DFM:- Adolescents exposed to a burger advertisement (58%) on YouTube were more likely to recall the ad compared to those exposed to a salad (36%) or non-food ad (40%).- Brand recognition: The burger ad also led to marginally higher brand recognition, especially among female participants.Attitudes towards DFM:- The impact of food advertisements on brand attitudes and food choices was less clear, but male sex (p = 0.063) and frequency of burger consumption (p = 0.099) were marginally significant factors. |
| Ares et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM:- All adolescents reported seeing advertisements on social media or websites ‘all the time’, however, many said they did not pay attention to it.- Food was one of the most prevalent categories: it was spontaneously mentioned in 29 interviews.- Fast food, junk food and food-ordering websites were advertised frequently (e.g. YaPedido).- Participants recalled frequently seeing influencers, celebrities and peers promoting food and beverages including energy drinks.Attitudes towards DFM:- Memorable and appealing aspects of food advertising online included: enticing images, use of colour, use of catchy music, big portions, novelty, emotive associations, price promos and celebrities.- Opinions on advertising varied and included: annoying, intrusive, informative, catchy, tempting, disgusting and deceitful.- Participants said ads could induce cravings, but that did not always mean they actually consumed what was advertised.- Views were mixed on whether or not choices were influenced by ads; some did acknowledge their food choices were sometimes influenced by the ads they saw online and by social media influencers.- DFM was regarded as effective advertising as adolescents felt social media is more relevant to their lives than TV.- Participants noted differences between platforms; Instagram was seen as more accessible to individuals and small business; YouTube was seen as accessible only to larger corporations.- Participants proposed strategies to reduce the effect of digital marketing on their food choices, including both regulatory approaches to reduce exposure to digital marketing of unhealthy foods and behaviour change communication. |
| Baldwin et al. (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 23% watch food brand YouTube videos. - 12.5% have seen favourite food brands advertised on social media. - 2% have shared food brand videos on social media. - 6% have used food brand hashtags on any social media. - 30% liked a sugar-sweetened beverage brand on Facebook. - 26% liked a fast food brand on Facebook. - 23% liked a confectionery brand on Facebook. - 15% liked a salty snack brand. - 9% liked a juice brand on Facebook. - 13% entered a food brand competition on Facebook. Recall/recognition of DFM: - 189 food brands were named in free text field. - The most frequently named liked brands were Coca Cola (23%), McDonalds (17%), KFC (14%), Cadbury (11%) and Pringles (10%). |
| Bragg et al. (2021) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants had difficulty identifying Instagram posts as ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Instagram ads were rated more highly than traditional ads in terms of trendiness, artistic appeal and likeability. |
| Carters-White et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people were sceptical of the concept of self-regulation of online advertising and many had unfavourable views of the food industry. |
| Coates et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred influencer marketing to pop-ups, which were perceived to interrupt media content. - Participants reported watching YouTubers with whom they identify, and share interests. - Participants believed that YouTubers would likely only promote products relevant to their interests. - Other perceived benefits of influencer marketing included learning new recipes or gaining ideas and opportunities things. - Attitudes towards influencer marketing were contingent on the child’s familiarity and perceived (parasocial) relationship with the YouTuber (i.e. influencers known to and liked by children were deemed trustworthy and sincere). - Children reported feeling able to resist influencer marketing of high fat, sugar and salt products. |
| Demers-Potvin et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Self-reported exposure to DFM for unhealthy food/drinks on websites or social media ranged from 27% (UK) to 60% (Chile); and 10–17% reported exposure to DFM in video or computer games. |
| Elliot and Truman (2024) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were the platforms where teens encountered most food advertising. - Fast food (25%), beverages (29%) and candy/chocolate (19%) comprised the majority of the sample. Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the most influential persuasive technique (power) across all platforms (24–27%), followed by special offers (10–15%), themes (11–14%) and humour (9–13%). |
| Elliott et al., (2023) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were identified as the primary channels for teen-targeted food marketing; over three quarters of the ads were found on these platforms. - The majority of ads targeted at teens were for branded beverages, fast food and candy/chocolate, comprising 72% of the total advertisements. Attitudes towards DFM: - The most effective techniques (power) for attracting teens’ attention were visual style, special offers and themes (e.g. trendy, sports, holidays/seasons, LGBTIQIA+). - Older teenagers (ages 15–17) were more likely to report multiple power indicators per ad (p = 0.006). |
| Elliot et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the tag most frequently selected by participants, followed by animated character and theme. - Younger teens more likely to select animated character and less likely to select language. - Theme, humour, celebrity, special offer, music, language and teen actor are more likely to be identified in the marketing examples categorized as teen-targeted. |
| Evans et al. (2023) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Adolescents reported recalling food marketing on popular livestreaming platforms such as Twitch, YouTube Gaming and Facebook Gaming. - Attitudes towards unhealthy foods mediate the relationship between the recall of unhealthy food marketing and the purchasing behaviour of adolescents (i.e. higher recall of marketed foods was associated with more positive attitudes to unhealthy foods. This in turn was associated with greater purchase of marketed foods). |
| Fleming-Milici and Harris (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 70% of adolescents reported engaging with any food/beverage brands on social media. - Racial minority adolescents were more likely than White adolescents to engage with brands. - 54% reported engaging with brands of fast food, 50% with sugary drinks, 46% with candy and 45% with snacks (45%), 7% reported engaging with all other categories of food/beverage brands. |
| Folkvord et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Food and beverage products were the most common advertised products in vlogs; 112 food/beverage brands were recognized. - 75% of children reported they gained brand awareness. Attitudes towards DFM: - Over 60% of the children agree it is stupid and wrong to advertise; 30% and 40% agree it is okay or good for vloggers to advertise. - 80% of the children believed that other children would buy brands or products seen in the vlogs. - Half of the children believed that vloggers show brands and products to influence their viewers. - Over 70% of the children believed that vloggers get paid for using brands and products in their vlogs. - More than half of the children had bought or asked their parents to buy products shown in the vlogs. |
| Gascoyne et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Over half (55%) of students (n = 8708) reported seeing a food or drink advertisement on social media at least weekly in the past month, with a quarter (25%) exposed daily or almost daily. - A fifth of students reported liking or sharing food or drink posts. - Reported Exposure to a food or drink advertisement on social media at least once in the last week, and liking or sharing a food or drink post at least once in the last month was associated with a high intake of unhealthy drinks. - Frequency of engagement was associated with likelihood of a high intake of unhealthy food and drink. |
| Gilmour et al. (2020) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Participants reported healthy foods were rarely advertised. - Advertising of fast foods/unhealthy foods was characterized as persuasive, effective and tempting. - Participants did not believe that social media influenced their attitudes towards or consumption of brands advertised. |
| Hammond and Reid (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 44% reported seeing ads for energy drinks online/internet. - 40% reported seeing such ads on social media. - Older respondents were more likely to report exposure to energy drink ads online and through social media, although exposure remained high among younger age groups (e.g. 52% of 18–19 year olds and 45% of 20–24 year olds reported seeing ads on social media compared with 28% of 12–14 year olds and 33% of 15–17 year olds). |
| Holmberg et al., (2019) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Advertisements and posts of unhealthy food and drink (e.g. energy drinks) on social media were described as tempting. |
| Jonatan et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported being frequently exposed to food advertising through social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Whatsapp. |
| Moradi Latreyi et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 14% reported being exposed to junk food advertising online. - 51% reported seeing advertising from more than one source. - 37%, 33% and 15% reported being exposed ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘very often’ respectively. |
| Lutfeali et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred food ads on Instagram that featured many versus few likes. - Participants were more willing to engage with Instagram food ads when the ads had many likes. - The presence of positive comments did not affect participants ad preferences, suggesting ‘likes’ are a more powerful influence than comments. |
| Mehta et al. (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children had limited awareness of product placement in advergames. Attitudes towards DFM: - Children thought marketing had potential to contribute to family conflict by making children crave foods their parents would be reluctant to buy for them. - Children expressed some concern about implicit persuasion through marketing in advergames. |
| Molenaar et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Ads for unhealthy foods were recalled more frequently than ads for healthy foods. - Some participants said they used ad-blocking services, however they were still exposed to advertising online. - Ads were seen passively in social media feeds; Facebook and YouTube were the social media platforms most associated with seeing ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Frequency and repetition were considered annoying, but effective in catching attention. - Promotions that were visually appealing, made the food look delicious, and used ‘happy’ or bright colours were mentioned commonly. - Promotional strategies that were effective included competitions or opportunities to win something; jokes, wit, slogans and jingles; promotion by celebrities and influencers. - Participants reported noticing discounts, affordable deals, special offers. budget/affordability were salient factors in purchasing behaviours - Some participants felt that constantly seeing ads for junk food hindered their ability to make healthful choices. - Ads on Instagram were described as more persuasive and covert, as they ‘blend in with the feed nicely’ and are accompanied with ‘amazing shots of food’. - Ads were described as a temptation, however some believed they could ‘tune’ out the effects. |
| Murphy et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants rated peers with unhealthy food posts in their social media news feeds most positively and users with healthy food posts least positively. - Participants looked at unhealthy and non-food ads for longer than they did at healthy food ads. - Participants attitude to peers were significantly lower where social media profiles contained company-sponsored posts compared to peer or celebrity posts. - Participants reported they were significantly less likely to share healthy advertising posts than unhealthy and non-food posts. Recall/recognition of DFM: - The mean free recall rate for unhealthy brands (1.75) was nearly five times that for healthy brands (0.36). - The mean number of unhealthy brands recognized (7.53) was double that for healthy brands (3.87). |
| Newman and Oates (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children were aware of/had recognition of advertising online, but lacked understanding of it as a marketing practice. |
| Norman et al. (2020) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Significant increase in brand recognition and recall by children (n = 154) in both experimental conditions (TV only and TV and advergame). Attitudes towards DFM: - Brands were perceived more favourably across all three attitude ratings (cool, exciting, fun). - A greater proportion of children who played the advergames and the TV advertisement perceived a person who would eat Brand A to be very or a little cool (36% vs 19%, p < 0.001). - Anti-adult themes, fun and humour, and parent pleasing were noted techniques in the most recognized and favoured advertisements. |
| Pollack et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Energy drinks were the product type most noticed on Twitch (62%). - 8 of the top 10 brands were for fast food or food delivery (e.g. McDonalds, Burger King, Chipotle). Attitudes towards DFM: - A greater proportion of respondents felt annoyed by advertisements on YouTube (65%) vs Twitch (40%). - More respondents agreed that advertisements served to support content creators on Twitch (79%) compared to YouTube (54%). - 60% of respondents felt there was too much advertising on YouTube (60%), while 68% of respondents felt there was just enough advertising on Twitch. - 14% of participants recalled craving a product after seeing it advertised on Twitch; a higher proportion (19%) of paying users reported craving a product compared to non-paying (12%). - There was a significant difference in the number of participants reporting consuming candy on Twitch to YouTube (75% vs 57%). |
| Qutteina et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Non-core foods made up the majority (67%) of the images (n = 607) shared by participants. - Female participants were significantly more likely to share images from Instagram and Snapchat; male participants were significantly more likely to share YouTube and FB images. - Almost half the images were of branded food products (n = 289; 47%). |
| Qutteina et al., (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Exposure to food messages was measured on a five point scale ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘very often’. - Median exposure to core foods was 2.58; to non-core foods was 4.08; and to branded non-core food posts was 5. - Participants reported significantly higher exposure to non-core food messages than core food messages (H(70) = 315.94, p < 0.000), and significantly higher exposure to branded non-core foods compared with overall core food messages (H(18) = 131.00, p < 0.000). |
| Ragelienė and Grønhøj (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported seeing ads for and photos of snack or junk food frequently on social media. - The frequency of food products seen on social media ads was positively linked with the willingness to consume these products (r = 0.440, p < 0.01). Attitudes towards DFM: - Children reported that food seen on social media was attractive and they were willing to try it. |
| Smith et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants were most aware of the advertising when it was embedded in the interface of the game. - Children were not significantly aware of the advertisement in the banner ad or advergame, but were significantly aware of the rewarded game (p = 0.001). Attitudes towards DFM: - Attitudes toward the perception of fun (p = 0.06) and taste (p = 0.21) of the test brand were not influenced by the type of advertising used. - Children who were exposed to the rewarded video advertising chose the test brand significantly more than children in the other three conditions (p < 0.002). - Attitudes to the game were mostly positive, scoring 4/5. - Choice of the test brand snack (not self-reported) was significantly influenced by the rewarded video advertising condition (compared with control, banner advertising, and advergame conditions). |
| Sutinen et al. (2024) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people expressed a preference for subtle marketing strategies that ‘blends well in the content’. - Content that is light, fun, humorous and entertaining or games, challenges, humour and skits (playful content) were considered engaging. - Adolescents preferred to follow influencers and content creators with the same interests as themselves. - Participants were aware of the commercial nature of social media content, and have pragmatic views on influencer marketing; many expressed recognition of its necessity for content creation despite expressing some critical perspectives. - Young people acknowledged being influenced to buy products via social media influencers. |
| Thaichon and Quach (2016) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants reported that social media was effective in showing them things they liked and were interested in, including advertising. Attitudes towards DFM: - Some participants found ads annoying. - Food on social media was reported to be visually appealing. - Peer pressure: children liked and shared things their friends liked and shared. - Staying ‘on trend’ was important to young people and this included knowing about new food trends. - Participants reported that food ads influenced their food choices. - Fast food was associated with fun and socialization; ads that depicted this resonated with young people. |
| Van der Bend et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Of 35 participants, n = 4 noticed ads never or rarely; n = 17 noticed ads sometimes; n = 12 noticed ads often; n = 1 noticed ads always; thus, 60% adolescents missed ads sometimes, often or always. - n = 16 neither liked nor disliked social media posts promoting food; n = 17 liked them moderately or very much; n = 2 disliked them moderately or very much. Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants were more likely to recall branded food products; recall of unbranded food products tended to be dominated by non-core foods high in fat or sugar. Attitudes towards DFM: - Food promotions on Instagram were considered the most appealing, followed by Youtube, Snapchat, Pinterest and TikTok. - Reasons for dis/liking posts based largely on visual appeal, entertainment and temptation. - Power of ads: high visual quality, appealing, aesthetic, vibrant, eye-catching, refreshing, satisfying, genuine (i.e. not fake) were popular; short video formats and funny content were preferred; traditional pop-up adverts were disliked. |
| Yang et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - 75% reported seeing energy drink advertisements online in the past year. - Boys scored higher on the advertising effect scale compared to girls (1.58 vs 1.44) thus were more likely to express a willingness to try an energy drink because of product placement in an online game. |
| Authors . | Key findings relevant to RQ2: What are children’s and young people’s awareness of and attitudes towards the digital marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages? . |
|---|---|
| Acton et al. (2023) | Awareness of DFM:- Adolescents aged 13–17 were more likely than children aged 10–12 to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p < 0.001).- Girls were more likely to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p = 0.009), while boys were more likely to see it in video games (p < 0.001).- Minority ethnicities, including Indigenous youth, and respondents with lower-income adequacy reported more exposure than White and higher-income respondents, respectively.- Participants identified use of cartoon characters, free toys/products, and celebrity endorsements as marketing techniques that they were exposed to. |
| Amson et al. (2024) | Awareness of DFM:- Predatory Marketing Practices: Participants noticed targeted ads after searching or buying products.- Boys followed food companies based on product enjoyment; girls reported seeking information on new products and deals.- Both genders liked or commented on food posts to express positive experiences.- Girls identified a wider range of marketing techniques, such as colour and humour, and were more aware of the influence of social media influencers on their purchasing decisions; boys were less aware of these techniques. |
| Ares et al. (2023) | Recall/recognition of DFM:- Adolescents exposed to a burger advertisement (58%) on YouTube were more likely to recall the ad compared to those exposed to a salad (36%) or non-food ad (40%).- Brand recognition: The burger ad also led to marginally higher brand recognition, especially among female participants.Attitudes towards DFM:- The impact of food advertisements on brand attitudes and food choices was less clear, but male sex (p = 0.063) and frequency of burger consumption (p = 0.099) were marginally significant factors. |
| Ares et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM:- All adolescents reported seeing advertisements on social media or websites ‘all the time’, however, many said they did not pay attention to it.- Food was one of the most prevalent categories: it was spontaneously mentioned in 29 interviews.- Fast food, junk food and food-ordering websites were advertised frequently (e.g. YaPedido).- Participants recalled frequently seeing influencers, celebrities and peers promoting food and beverages including energy drinks.Attitudes towards DFM:- Memorable and appealing aspects of food advertising online included: enticing images, use of colour, use of catchy music, big portions, novelty, emotive associations, price promos and celebrities.- Opinions on advertising varied and included: annoying, intrusive, informative, catchy, tempting, disgusting and deceitful.- Participants said ads could induce cravings, but that did not always mean they actually consumed what was advertised.- Views were mixed on whether or not choices were influenced by ads; some did acknowledge their food choices were sometimes influenced by the ads they saw online and by social media influencers.- DFM was regarded as effective advertising as adolescents felt social media is more relevant to their lives than TV.- Participants noted differences between platforms; Instagram was seen as more accessible to individuals and small business; YouTube was seen as accessible only to larger corporations.- Participants proposed strategies to reduce the effect of digital marketing on their food choices, including both regulatory approaches to reduce exposure to digital marketing of unhealthy foods and behaviour change communication. |
| Baldwin et al. (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 23% watch food brand YouTube videos. - 12.5% have seen favourite food brands advertised on social media. - 2% have shared food brand videos on social media. - 6% have used food brand hashtags on any social media. - 30% liked a sugar-sweetened beverage brand on Facebook. - 26% liked a fast food brand on Facebook. - 23% liked a confectionery brand on Facebook. - 15% liked a salty snack brand. - 9% liked a juice brand on Facebook. - 13% entered a food brand competition on Facebook. Recall/recognition of DFM: - 189 food brands were named in free text field. - The most frequently named liked brands were Coca Cola (23%), McDonalds (17%), KFC (14%), Cadbury (11%) and Pringles (10%). |
| Bragg et al. (2021) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants had difficulty identifying Instagram posts as ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Instagram ads were rated more highly than traditional ads in terms of trendiness, artistic appeal and likeability. |
| Carters-White et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people were sceptical of the concept of self-regulation of online advertising and many had unfavourable views of the food industry. |
| Coates et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred influencer marketing to pop-ups, which were perceived to interrupt media content. - Participants reported watching YouTubers with whom they identify, and share interests. - Participants believed that YouTubers would likely only promote products relevant to their interests. - Other perceived benefits of influencer marketing included learning new recipes or gaining ideas and opportunities things. - Attitudes towards influencer marketing were contingent on the child’s familiarity and perceived (parasocial) relationship with the YouTuber (i.e. influencers known to and liked by children were deemed trustworthy and sincere). - Children reported feeling able to resist influencer marketing of high fat, sugar and salt products. |
| Demers-Potvin et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Self-reported exposure to DFM for unhealthy food/drinks on websites or social media ranged from 27% (UK) to 60% (Chile); and 10–17% reported exposure to DFM in video or computer games. |
| Elliot and Truman (2024) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were the platforms where teens encountered most food advertising. - Fast food (25%), beverages (29%) and candy/chocolate (19%) comprised the majority of the sample. Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the most influential persuasive technique (power) across all platforms (24–27%), followed by special offers (10–15%), themes (11–14%) and humour (9–13%). |
| Elliott et al., (2023) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were identified as the primary channels for teen-targeted food marketing; over three quarters of the ads were found on these platforms. - The majority of ads targeted at teens were for branded beverages, fast food and candy/chocolate, comprising 72% of the total advertisements. Attitudes towards DFM: - The most effective techniques (power) for attracting teens’ attention were visual style, special offers and themes (e.g. trendy, sports, holidays/seasons, LGBTIQIA+). - Older teenagers (ages 15–17) were more likely to report multiple power indicators per ad (p = 0.006). |
| Elliot et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the tag most frequently selected by participants, followed by animated character and theme. - Younger teens more likely to select animated character and less likely to select language. - Theme, humour, celebrity, special offer, music, language and teen actor are more likely to be identified in the marketing examples categorized as teen-targeted. |
| Evans et al. (2023) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Adolescents reported recalling food marketing on popular livestreaming platforms such as Twitch, YouTube Gaming and Facebook Gaming. - Attitudes towards unhealthy foods mediate the relationship between the recall of unhealthy food marketing and the purchasing behaviour of adolescents (i.e. higher recall of marketed foods was associated with more positive attitudes to unhealthy foods. This in turn was associated with greater purchase of marketed foods). |
| Fleming-Milici and Harris (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 70% of adolescents reported engaging with any food/beverage brands on social media. - Racial minority adolescents were more likely than White adolescents to engage with brands. - 54% reported engaging with brands of fast food, 50% with sugary drinks, 46% with candy and 45% with snacks (45%), 7% reported engaging with all other categories of food/beverage brands. |
| Folkvord et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Food and beverage products were the most common advertised products in vlogs; 112 food/beverage brands were recognized. - 75% of children reported they gained brand awareness. Attitudes towards DFM: - Over 60% of the children agree it is stupid and wrong to advertise; 30% and 40% agree it is okay or good for vloggers to advertise. - 80% of the children believed that other children would buy brands or products seen in the vlogs. - Half of the children believed that vloggers show brands and products to influence their viewers. - Over 70% of the children believed that vloggers get paid for using brands and products in their vlogs. - More than half of the children had bought or asked their parents to buy products shown in the vlogs. |
| Gascoyne et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Over half (55%) of students (n = 8708) reported seeing a food or drink advertisement on social media at least weekly in the past month, with a quarter (25%) exposed daily or almost daily. - A fifth of students reported liking or sharing food or drink posts. - Reported Exposure to a food or drink advertisement on social media at least once in the last week, and liking or sharing a food or drink post at least once in the last month was associated with a high intake of unhealthy drinks. - Frequency of engagement was associated with likelihood of a high intake of unhealthy food and drink. |
| Gilmour et al. (2020) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Participants reported healthy foods were rarely advertised. - Advertising of fast foods/unhealthy foods was characterized as persuasive, effective and tempting. - Participants did not believe that social media influenced their attitudes towards or consumption of brands advertised. |
| Hammond and Reid (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 44% reported seeing ads for energy drinks online/internet. - 40% reported seeing such ads on social media. - Older respondents were more likely to report exposure to energy drink ads online and through social media, although exposure remained high among younger age groups (e.g. 52% of 18–19 year olds and 45% of 20–24 year olds reported seeing ads on social media compared with 28% of 12–14 year olds and 33% of 15–17 year olds). |
| Holmberg et al., (2019) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Advertisements and posts of unhealthy food and drink (e.g. energy drinks) on social media were described as tempting. |
| Jonatan et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported being frequently exposed to food advertising through social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Whatsapp. |
| Moradi Latreyi et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 14% reported being exposed to junk food advertising online. - 51% reported seeing advertising from more than one source. - 37%, 33% and 15% reported being exposed ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘very often’ respectively. |
| Lutfeali et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred food ads on Instagram that featured many versus few likes. - Participants were more willing to engage with Instagram food ads when the ads had many likes. - The presence of positive comments did not affect participants ad preferences, suggesting ‘likes’ are a more powerful influence than comments. |
| Mehta et al. (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children had limited awareness of product placement in advergames. Attitudes towards DFM: - Children thought marketing had potential to contribute to family conflict by making children crave foods their parents would be reluctant to buy for them. - Children expressed some concern about implicit persuasion through marketing in advergames. |
| Molenaar et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Ads for unhealthy foods were recalled more frequently than ads for healthy foods. - Some participants said they used ad-blocking services, however they were still exposed to advertising online. - Ads were seen passively in social media feeds; Facebook and YouTube were the social media platforms most associated with seeing ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Frequency and repetition were considered annoying, but effective in catching attention. - Promotions that were visually appealing, made the food look delicious, and used ‘happy’ or bright colours were mentioned commonly. - Promotional strategies that were effective included competitions or opportunities to win something; jokes, wit, slogans and jingles; promotion by celebrities and influencers. - Participants reported noticing discounts, affordable deals, special offers. budget/affordability were salient factors in purchasing behaviours - Some participants felt that constantly seeing ads for junk food hindered their ability to make healthful choices. - Ads on Instagram were described as more persuasive and covert, as they ‘blend in with the feed nicely’ and are accompanied with ‘amazing shots of food’. - Ads were described as a temptation, however some believed they could ‘tune’ out the effects. |
| Murphy et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants rated peers with unhealthy food posts in their social media news feeds most positively and users with healthy food posts least positively. - Participants looked at unhealthy and non-food ads for longer than they did at healthy food ads. - Participants attitude to peers were significantly lower where social media profiles contained company-sponsored posts compared to peer or celebrity posts. - Participants reported they were significantly less likely to share healthy advertising posts than unhealthy and non-food posts. Recall/recognition of DFM: - The mean free recall rate for unhealthy brands (1.75) was nearly five times that for healthy brands (0.36). - The mean number of unhealthy brands recognized (7.53) was double that for healthy brands (3.87). |
| Newman and Oates (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children were aware of/had recognition of advertising online, but lacked understanding of it as a marketing practice. |
| Norman et al. (2020) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Significant increase in brand recognition and recall by children (n = 154) in both experimental conditions (TV only and TV and advergame). Attitudes towards DFM: - Brands were perceived more favourably across all three attitude ratings (cool, exciting, fun). - A greater proportion of children who played the advergames and the TV advertisement perceived a person who would eat Brand A to be very or a little cool (36% vs 19%, p < 0.001). - Anti-adult themes, fun and humour, and parent pleasing were noted techniques in the most recognized and favoured advertisements. |
| Pollack et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Energy drinks were the product type most noticed on Twitch (62%). - 8 of the top 10 brands were for fast food or food delivery (e.g. McDonalds, Burger King, Chipotle). Attitudes towards DFM: - A greater proportion of respondents felt annoyed by advertisements on YouTube (65%) vs Twitch (40%). - More respondents agreed that advertisements served to support content creators on Twitch (79%) compared to YouTube (54%). - 60% of respondents felt there was too much advertising on YouTube (60%), while 68% of respondents felt there was just enough advertising on Twitch. - 14% of participants recalled craving a product after seeing it advertised on Twitch; a higher proportion (19%) of paying users reported craving a product compared to non-paying (12%). - There was a significant difference in the number of participants reporting consuming candy on Twitch to YouTube (75% vs 57%). |
| Qutteina et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Non-core foods made up the majority (67%) of the images (n = 607) shared by participants. - Female participants were significantly more likely to share images from Instagram and Snapchat; male participants were significantly more likely to share YouTube and FB images. - Almost half the images were of branded food products (n = 289; 47%). |
| Qutteina et al., (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Exposure to food messages was measured on a five point scale ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘very often’. - Median exposure to core foods was 2.58; to non-core foods was 4.08; and to branded non-core food posts was 5. - Participants reported significantly higher exposure to non-core food messages than core food messages (H(70) = 315.94, p < 0.000), and significantly higher exposure to branded non-core foods compared with overall core food messages (H(18) = 131.00, p < 0.000). |
| Ragelienė and Grønhøj (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported seeing ads for and photos of snack or junk food frequently on social media. - The frequency of food products seen on social media ads was positively linked with the willingness to consume these products (r = 0.440, p < 0.01). Attitudes towards DFM: - Children reported that food seen on social media was attractive and they were willing to try it. |
| Smith et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants were most aware of the advertising when it was embedded in the interface of the game. - Children were not significantly aware of the advertisement in the banner ad or advergame, but were significantly aware of the rewarded game (p = 0.001). Attitudes towards DFM: - Attitudes toward the perception of fun (p = 0.06) and taste (p = 0.21) of the test brand were not influenced by the type of advertising used. - Children who were exposed to the rewarded video advertising chose the test brand significantly more than children in the other three conditions (p < 0.002). - Attitudes to the game were mostly positive, scoring 4/5. - Choice of the test brand snack (not self-reported) was significantly influenced by the rewarded video advertising condition (compared with control, banner advertising, and advergame conditions). |
| Sutinen et al. (2024) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people expressed a preference for subtle marketing strategies that ‘blends well in the content’. - Content that is light, fun, humorous and entertaining or games, challenges, humour and skits (playful content) were considered engaging. - Adolescents preferred to follow influencers and content creators with the same interests as themselves. - Participants were aware of the commercial nature of social media content, and have pragmatic views on influencer marketing; many expressed recognition of its necessity for content creation despite expressing some critical perspectives. - Young people acknowledged being influenced to buy products via social media influencers. |
| Thaichon and Quach (2016) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants reported that social media was effective in showing them things they liked and were interested in, including advertising. Attitudes towards DFM: - Some participants found ads annoying. - Food on social media was reported to be visually appealing. - Peer pressure: children liked and shared things their friends liked and shared. - Staying ‘on trend’ was important to young people and this included knowing about new food trends. - Participants reported that food ads influenced their food choices. - Fast food was associated with fun and socialization; ads that depicted this resonated with young people. |
| Van der Bend et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Of 35 participants, n = 4 noticed ads never or rarely; n = 17 noticed ads sometimes; n = 12 noticed ads often; n = 1 noticed ads always; thus, 60% adolescents missed ads sometimes, often or always. - n = 16 neither liked nor disliked social media posts promoting food; n = 17 liked them moderately or very much; n = 2 disliked them moderately or very much. Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants were more likely to recall branded food products; recall of unbranded food products tended to be dominated by non-core foods high in fat or sugar. Attitudes towards DFM: - Food promotions on Instagram were considered the most appealing, followed by Youtube, Snapchat, Pinterest and TikTok. - Reasons for dis/liking posts based largely on visual appeal, entertainment and temptation. - Power of ads: high visual quality, appealing, aesthetic, vibrant, eye-catching, refreshing, satisfying, genuine (i.e. not fake) were popular; short video formats and funny content were preferred; traditional pop-up adverts were disliked. |
| Yang et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - 75% reported seeing energy drink advertisements online in the past year. - Boys scored higher on the advertising effect scale compared to girls (1.58 vs 1.44) thus were more likely to express a willingness to try an energy drink because of product placement in an online game. |
| Authors . | Key findings relevant to RQ2: What are children’s and young people’s awareness of and attitudes towards the digital marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages? . |
|---|---|
| Acton et al. (2023) | Awareness of DFM:- Adolescents aged 13–17 were more likely than children aged 10–12 to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p < 0.001).- Girls were more likely to report seeing unhealthy food marketing online (p = 0.009), while boys were more likely to see it in video games (p < 0.001).- Minority ethnicities, including Indigenous youth, and respondents with lower-income adequacy reported more exposure than White and higher-income respondents, respectively.- Participants identified use of cartoon characters, free toys/products, and celebrity endorsements as marketing techniques that they were exposed to. |
| Amson et al. (2024) | Awareness of DFM:- Predatory Marketing Practices: Participants noticed targeted ads after searching or buying products.- Boys followed food companies based on product enjoyment; girls reported seeking information on new products and deals.- Both genders liked or commented on food posts to express positive experiences.- Girls identified a wider range of marketing techniques, such as colour and humour, and were more aware of the influence of social media influencers on their purchasing decisions; boys were less aware of these techniques. |
| Ares et al. (2023) | Recall/recognition of DFM:- Adolescents exposed to a burger advertisement (58%) on YouTube were more likely to recall the ad compared to those exposed to a salad (36%) or non-food ad (40%).- Brand recognition: The burger ad also led to marginally higher brand recognition, especially among female participants.Attitudes towards DFM:- The impact of food advertisements on brand attitudes and food choices was less clear, but male sex (p = 0.063) and frequency of burger consumption (p = 0.099) were marginally significant factors. |
| Ares et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM:- All adolescents reported seeing advertisements on social media or websites ‘all the time’, however, many said they did not pay attention to it.- Food was one of the most prevalent categories: it was spontaneously mentioned in 29 interviews.- Fast food, junk food and food-ordering websites were advertised frequently (e.g. YaPedido).- Participants recalled frequently seeing influencers, celebrities and peers promoting food and beverages including energy drinks.Attitudes towards DFM:- Memorable and appealing aspects of food advertising online included: enticing images, use of colour, use of catchy music, big portions, novelty, emotive associations, price promos and celebrities.- Opinions on advertising varied and included: annoying, intrusive, informative, catchy, tempting, disgusting and deceitful.- Participants said ads could induce cravings, but that did not always mean they actually consumed what was advertised.- Views were mixed on whether or not choices were influenced by ads; some did acknowledge their food choices were sometimes influenced by the ads they saw online and by social media influencers.- DFM was regarded as effective advertising as adolescents felt social media is more relevant to their lives than TV.- Participants noted differences between platforms; Instagram was seen as more accessible to individuals and small business; YouTube was seen as accessible only to larger corporations.- Participants proposed strategies to reduce the effect of digital marketing on their food choices, including both regulatory approaches to reduce exposure to digital marketing of unhealthy foods and behaviour change communication. |
| Baldwin et al. (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 23% watch food brand YouTube videos. - 12.5% have seen favourite food brands advertised on social media. - 2% have shared food brand videos on social media. - 6% have used food brand hashtags on any social media. - 30% liked a sugar-sweetened beverage brand on Facebook. - 26% liked a fast food brand on Facebook. - 23% liked a confectionery brand on Facebook. - 15% liked a salty snack brand. - 9% liked a juice brand on Facebook. - 13% entered a food brand competition on Facebook. Recall/recognition of DFM: - 189 food brands were named in free text field. - The most frequently named liked brands were Coca Cola (23%), McDonalds (17%), KFC (14%), Cadbury (11%) and Pringles (10%). |
| Bragg et al. (2021) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants had difficulty identifying Instagram posts as ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Instagram ads were rated more highly than traditional ads in terms of trendiness, artistic appeal and likeability. |
| Carters-White et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people were sceptical of the concept of self-regulation of online advertising and many had unfavourable views of the food industry. |
| Coates et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred influencer marketing to pop-ups, which were perceived to interrupt media content. - Participants reported watching YouTubers with whom they identify, and share interests. - Participants believed that YouTubers would likely only promote products relevant to their interests. - Other perceived benefits of influencer marketing included learning new recipes or gaining ideas and opportunities things. - Attitudes towards influencer marketing were contingent on the child’s familiarity and perceived (parasocial) relationship with the YouTuber (i.e. influencers known to and liked by children were deemed trustworthy and sincere). - Children reported feeling able to resist influencer marketing of high fat, sugar and salt products. |
| Demers-Potvin et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Self-reported exposure to DFM for unhealthy food/drinks on websites or social media ranged from 27% (UK) to 60% (Chile); and 10–17% reported exposure to DFM in video or computer games. |
| Elliot and Truman (2024) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were the platforms where teens encountered most food advertising. - Fast food (25%), beverages (29%) and candy/chocolate (19%) comprised the majority of the sample. Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the most influential persuasive technique (power) across all platforms (24–27%), followed by special offers (10–15%), themes (11–14%) and humour (9–13%). |
| Elliott et al., (2023) | Awareness of DFM: - Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube were identified as the primary channels for teen-targeted food marketing; over three quarters of the ads were found on these platforms. - The majority of ads targeted at teens were for branded beverages, fast food and candy/chocolate, comprising 72% of the total advertisements. Attitudes towards DFM: - The most effective techniques (power) for attracting teens’ attention were visual style, special offers and themes (e.g. trendy, sports, holidays/seasons, LGBTIQIA+). - Older teenagers (ages 15–17) were more likely to report multiple power indicators per ad (p = 0.006). |
| Elliot et al. (2022) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Visual style was the tag most frequently selected by participants, followed by animated character and theme. - Younger teens more likely to select animated character and less likely to select language. - Theme, humour, celebrity, special offer, music, language and teen actor are more likely to be identified in the marketing examples categorized as teen-targeted. |
| Evans et al. (2023) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Adolescents reported recalling food marketing on popular livestreaming platforms such as Twitch, YouTube Gaming and Facebook Gaming. - Attitudes towards unhealthy foods mediate the relationship between the recall of unhealthy food marketing and the purchasing behaviour of adolescents (i.e. higher recall of marketed foods was associated with more positive attitudes to unhealthy foods. This in turn was associated with greater purchase of marketed foods). |
| Fleming-Milici and Harris (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 70% of adolescents reported engaging with any food/beverage brands on social media. - Racial minority adolescents were more likely than White adolescents to engage with brands. - 54% reported engaging with brands of fast food, 50% with sugary drinks, 46% with candy and 45% with snacks (45%), 7% reported engaging with all other categories of food/beverage brands. |
| Folkvord et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Food and beverage products were the most common advertised products in vlogs; 112 food/beverage brands were recognized. - 75% of children reported they gained brand awareness. Attitudes towards DFM: - Over 60% of the children agree it is stupid and wrong to advertise; 30% and 40% agree it is okay or good for vloggers to advertise. - 80% of the children believed that other children would buy brands or products seen in the vlogs. - Half of the children believed that vloggers show brands and products to influence their viewers. - Over 70% of the children believed that vloggers get paid for using brands and products in their vlogs. - More than half of the children had bought or asked their parents to buy products shown in the vlogs. |
| Gascoyne et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Over half (55%) of students (n = 8708) reported seeing a food or drink advertisement on social media at least weekly in the past month, with a quarter (25%) exposed daily or almost daily. - A fifth of students reported liking or sharing food or drink posts. - Reported Exposure to a food or drink advertisement on social media at least once in the last week, and liking or sharing a food or drink post at least once in the last month was associated with a high intake of unhealthy drinks. - Frequency of engagement was associated with likelihood of a high intake of unhealthy food and drink. |
| Gilmour et al. (2020) | Awareness of and attitudes towards DFM: - Participants reported healthy foods were rarely advertised. - Advertising of fast foods/unhealthy foods was characterized as persuasive, effective and tempting. - Participants did not believe that social media influenced their attitudes towards or consumption of brands advertised. |
| Hammond and Reid (2018) | Awareness of DFM: - 44% reported seeing ads for energy drinks online/internet. - 40% reported seeing such ads on social media. - Older respondents were more likely to report exposure to energy drink ads online and through social media, although exposure remained high among younger age groups (e.g. 52% of 18–19 year olds and 45% of 20–24 year olds reported seeing ads on social media compared with 28% of 12–14 year olds and 33% of 15–17 year olds). |
| Holmberg et al., (2019) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Advertisements and posts of unhealthy food and drink (e.g. energy drinks) on social media were described as tempting. |
| Jonatan et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported being frequently exposed to food advertising through social media such as YouTube, Facebook and Whatsapp. |
| Moradi Latreyi et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - 14% reported being exposed to junk food advertising online. - 51% reported seeing advertising from more than one source. - 37%, 33% and 15% reported being exposed ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘very often’ respectively. |
| Lutfeali et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants preferred food ads on Instagram that featured many versus few likes. - Participants were more willing to engage with Instagram food ads when the ads had many likes. - The presence of positive comments did not affect participants ad preferences, suggesting ‘likes’ are a more powerful influence than comments. |
| Mehta et al. (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children had limited awareness of product placement in advergames. Attitudes towards DFM: - Children thought marketing had potential to contribute to family conflict by making children crave foods their parents would be reluctant to buy for them. - Children expressed some concern about implicit persuasion through marketing in advergames. |
| Molenaar et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Ads for unhealthy foods were recalled more frequently than ads for healthy foods. - Some participants said they used ad-blocking services, however they were still exposed to advertising online. - Ads were seen passively in social media feeds; Facebook and YouTube were the social media platforms most associated with seeing ads. Attitudes towards DFM: - Frequency and repetition were considered annoying, but effective in catching attention. - Promotions that were visually appealing, made the food look delicious, and used ‘happy’ or bright colours were mentioned commonly. - Promotional strategies that were effective included competitions or opportunities to win something; jokes, wit, slogans and jingles; promotion by celebrities and influencers. - Participants reported noticing discounts, affordable deals, special offers. budget/affordability were salient factors in purchasing behaviours - Some participants felt that constantly seeing ads for junk food hindered their ability to make healthful choices. - Ads on Instagram were described as more persuasive and covert, as they ‘blend in with the feed nicely’ and are accompanied with ‘amazing shots of food’. - Ads were described as a temptation, however some believed they could ‘tune’ out the effects. |
| Murphy et al. (2020) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Participants rated peers with unhealthy food posts in their social media news feeds most positively and users with healthy food posts least positively. - Participants looked at unhealthy and non-food ads for longer than they did at healthy food ads. - Participants attitude to peers were significantly lower where social media profiles contained company-sponsored posts compared to peer or celebrity posts. - Participants reported they were significantly less likely to share healthy advertising posts than unhealthy and non-food posts. Recall/recognition of DFM: - The mean free recall rate for unhealthy brands (1.75) was nearly five times that for healthy brands (0.36). - The mean number of unhealthy brands recognized (7.53) was double that for healthy brands (3.87). |
| Newman and Oates (2014) | Awareness of DFM: - Children were aware of/had recognition of advertising online, but lacked understanding of it as a marketing practice. |
| Norman et al. (2020) | Recall/recognition of DFM: - Significant increase in brand recognition and recall by children (n = 154) in both experimental conditions (TV only and TV and advergame). Attitudes towards DFM: - Brands were perceived more favourably across all three attitude ratings (cool, exciting, fun). - A greater proportion of children who played the advergames and the TV advertisement perceived a person who would eat Brand A to be very or a little cool (36% vs 19%, p < 0.001). - Anti-adult themes, fun and humour, and parent pleasing were noted techniques in the most recognized and favoured advertisements. |
| Pollack et al. (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Energy drinks were the product type most noticed on Twitch (62%). - 8 of the top 10 brands were for fast food or food delivery (e.g. McDonalds, Burger King, Chipotle). Attitudes towards DFM: - A greater proportion of respondents felt annoyed by advertisements on YouTube (65%) vs Twitch (40%). - More respondents agreed that advertisements served to support content creators on Twitch (79%) compared to YouTube (54%). - 60% of respondents felt there was too much advertising on YouTube (60%), while 68% of respondents felt there was just enough advertising on Twitch. - 14% of participants recalled craving a product after seeing it advertised on Twitch; a higher proportion (19%) of paying users reported craving a product compared to non-paying (12%). - There was a significant difference in the number of participants reporting consuming candy on Twitch to YouTube (75% vs 57%). |
| Qutteina et al. (2019) | Awareness of DFM: - Non-core foods made up the majority (67%) of the images (n = 607) shared by participants. - Female participants were significantly more likely to share images from Instagram and Snapchat; male participants were significantly more likely to share YouTube and FB images. - Almost half the images were of branded food products (n = 289; 47%). |
| Qutteina et al., (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Exposure to food messages was measured on a five point scale ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘very often’. - Median exposure to core foods was 2.58; to non-core foods was 4.08; and to branded non-core food posts was 5. - Participants reported significantly higher exposure to non-core food messages than core food messages (H(70) = 315.94, p < 0.000), and significantly higher exposure to branded non-core foods compared with overall core food messages (H(18) = 131.00, p < 0.000). |
| Ragelienė and Grønhøj (2021) | Awareness of DFM: - Children reported seeing ads for and photos of snack or junk food frequently on social media. - The frequency of food products seen on social media ads was positively linked with the willingness to consume these products (r = 0.440, p < 0.01). Attitudes towards DFM: - Children reported that food seen on social media was attractive and they were willing to try it. |
| Smith et al. (2020) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants were most aware of the advertising when it was embedded in the interface of the game. - Children were not significantly aware of the advertisement in the banner ad or advergame, but were significantly aware of the rewarded game (p = 0.001). Attitudes towards DFM: - Attitudes toward the perception of fun (p = 0.06) and taste (p = 0.21) of the test brand were not influenced by the type of advertising used. - Children who were exposed to the rewarded video advertising chose the test brand significantly more than children in the other three conditions (p < 0.002). - Attitudes to the game were mostly positive, scoring 4/5. - Choice of the test brand snack (not self-reported) was significantly influenced by the rewarded video advertising condition (compared with control, banner advertising, and advergame conditions). |
| Sutinen et al. (2024) | Attitudes towards DFM: - Young people expressed a preference for subtle marketing strategies that ‘blends well in the content’. - Content that is light, fun, humorous and entertaining or games, challenges, humour and skits (playful content) were considered engaging. - Adolescents preferred to follow influencers and content creators with the same interests as themselves. - Participants were aware of the commercial nature of social media content, and have pragmatic views on influencer marketing; many expressed recognition of its necessity for content creation despite expressing some critical perspectives. - Young people acknowledged being influenced to buy products via social media influencers. |
| Thaichon and Quach (2016) | Awareness of DFM: - Participants reported that social media was effective in showing them things they liked and were interested in, including advertising. Attitudes towards DFM: - Some participants found ads annoying. - Food on social media was reported to be visually appealing. - Peer pressure: children liked and shared things their friends liked and shared. - Staying ‘on trend’ was important to young people and this included knowing about new food trends. - Participants reported that food ads influenced their food choices. - Fast food was associated with fun and socialization; ads that depicted this resonated with young people. |
| Van der Bend et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - Of 35 participants, n = 4 noticed ads never or rarely; n = 17 noticed ads sometimes; n = 12 noticed ads often; n = 1 noticed ads always; thus, 60% adolescents missed ads sometimes, often or always. - n = 16 neither liked nor disliked social media posts promoting food; n = 17 liked them moderately or very much; n = 2 disliked them moderately or very much. Recall/recognition of DFM: - Participants were more likely to recall branded food products; recall of unbranded food products tended to be dominated by non-core foods high in fat or sugar. Attitudes towards DFM: - Food promotions on Instagram were considered the most appealing, followed by Youtube, Snapchat, Pinterest and TikTok. - Reasons for dis/liking posts based largely on visual appeal, entertainment and temptation. - Power of ads: high visual quality, appealing, aesthetic, vibrant, eye-catching, refreshing, satisfying, genuine (i.e. not fake) were popular; short video formats and funny content were preferred; traditional pop-up adverts were disliked. |
| Yang et al. (2022) | Awareness of DFM: - 75% reported seeing energy drink advertisements online in the past year. - Boys scored higher on the advertising effect scale compared to girls (1.58 vs 1.44) thus were more likely to express a willingness to try an energy drink because of product placement in an online game. |
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
