Content uploaded by Dina L G Borzekowski
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dina L G Borzekowski on Mar 13, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [Holly Henry]
On: 09 August 2011, At: 14:28
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Children and Media
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rchm20
The Nag Factor
Holly K. M. Henry & Dina L. G. Borzekowski
Available online: 01 Aug 2011
To cite this article: Holly K. M. Henry & Dina L. G. Borzekowski (2011): The Nag Factor, Journal of
Children and Media, 5:3, 298-317
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2011.584380
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
THE NAG FACTOR
A mixed-methodology study in the US
of young children’s requests for advertised
products
Holly K. M. Henry and Dina L. G. Borzekowski
The “Nag Factor” is the tendency of children, who are bombarded with marketers’ messages, to
unrelentingly request advertised items. Using quantitative and qualitative methodologies, we
interviewed 64 mothers of children ages 3 to 5 years. All the participating mothers indicated that
their young children engaged in some form of nagging. While overall media use was not associated
with nagging, one’s familiarity with commercial television characters was significantly associated
with overall and specific types of nagging. Mothers described packaging, characters, and
commercials as the three main forces compelling their children to nag. Ten strategies were offered
as ways to deal with children’s nagging; these fell on two continua from child- to parent-controlled
and reactive to proactive strategies. This work scientifically examines the Nag Factor and offers a
platform from which to propose future research and policy recommendations to lessen children’s
repeated requests for advertised items.
KEYWORDS advertising; commercials; marketing; mothers; nag factor; preschoolers; requests;
television
As researchers investigate factors influencing the childhood obesity epidemic,
attention often turns toward the marketing and consumption of junk food. Clearly, children
are not the primary shoppers in households, so how do child-oriented low-nutrition foods
and beverages enter the homes and diets of young children? Some suggest the “Nag
Factor,” which is the tendency for children to request that their parents buy them
advertised items. Well-designed and ubiquitous messages not only give children specific
reasons to ask for products but also offer strategies to get others to buy the items
(Schlosser, 2001).
Advertising to Children, Media Exposure, and Purchase Requests
Around 50 per cent of all advertising time on children’s television is for food (Gantz,
Schwartz, Angelini, & Rideout, 2007). One-third (34 per cent) of these food advertisements
are for candy and snacks. Almost another third (28 per cent) are for cereal and 10 per cent
are for fast food. In contrast, just 4 per cent of advertisements are for dairy products and
1 per cent are for fruit juices. None of the advertisements targeting children are for fruits or
vegetables. The two most commonly used appeals in advertisements are taste (34 per cent)
and fun (18 per cent). Over 10 per cent of advertisements also use a children’s television or
movie character to promote the product (Gantz et al., 2007).
Journal of Children and Media, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2011
ISSN 1748-2798 print/1748-2801 online/11/030298-317
q2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/17482798.2011.584380
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
In the past decade, marketing of low nutrition foods to children has increased much
faster than to other age groups. Companies now spend an estimated $10 billion annually
marketing foods and beverages to US children (McGinnis, Gootman, & Kraak, 2006). There
are also differences in the types of new food products introduced into the market. Between
1994 and 2004, 58 per cent of all new candy, cookie, snack, and ice cream products were
targeted to children, compared to just 27 per cent targeted toward the general public
(McGinnis et al., 2006).
Child-directed advertising works. Among children 2 to 6 years old, even a brief
exposure (10 to 30 seconds) to advertisements can influence subsequent food, drink, and
toy preferences (Borzekowski & Robinson, 2001). Branding also influences children’s beliefs
and food and beverage consumption; children prefer the tastes and consume more foods
and drinks if they think the items are from McDonald’s (Robinson, Borzekowski, Matheson,
& Kraemer, 2007).
In addition to preferences, advertising influences purchase requests and family
dynamics. A seminal study by Galst and White (1976) reported how television commercials
affected children’s attempts to influence parental purchasing, calling advertising a “vehicle
for unhealthy persuasion.” Children are much more likely to ask their parents for items they
have seen advertised on television (Brody, Stoneman, Lane, & Sanders, 1981). Studies by
Sheikh and Moleski (1977) and Robertson, Rossiter, and Gleason (1979) added to the
literature investigating child purchase requests.
Over thirty years ago, Atkin (1978) observed families in supermarket breakfast cereal
aisles in the US. Among 516 family units, 46 per cent of children made strong demands for
specific cereal brands while 20 per cent made less emphatic requests for these items.
Younger children were more likely to initiate demands than older children (Atkin, 1978). In
another study, researchers found that younger children (less than 5 years old) gestured
toward products and were more physical in their demands than older children. Parents
were more likely to be firm and unyielding with younger children and negotiate and
compromise with older children (Rust, 1993).
Current studies must consider the magnified and multiple methods companies use to
reach children. When previous studies occurred, new forms of technology were not part
of the typical child’s experience. Children are now exposed to advertising not only via
television but also through product placement in DVDs and videos, adver-gaming and
commercial websites, product co-branding, stealth marketing, and text-messaging.
1
Almost 85 per cent of all children ages zero to 6 in the US use screen media daily and spend,
on average, 2 hours per day using the media (Rideout, Vandewater, & Wartella, 2003).
Today’s food and beverage advertisements target their appeal to young children
(Coon & Tucker, 2002; Hitchings & Moynihan, 1998). A recent content analysis of the top 40
food and beverage brand websites found that 63 per cent of websites contain adver-gaming,
games in which a product is featured (Weber, Story, & Harnack, 2006). More than half used
cartoon characters or had websites specifically designed for children (Weber et al., 2006).
Typical American children encounter these targeted messages in their homes,
schools, and screen environments. This targeting is problematic and unethical because very
young children often lack the ability to differentiate between advertising and program
content and often consider commercial advertising as a part of the television programming
(Kunkel et al., 2004). As children mature, they are able to differentiate between the two but
often fail to understand the persuasive and biased content of commercials (Kunkel et al.,
2004).
THE NAG FACTOR 299
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
Among third-grade children, Chamberlain, Wang, and Robinson (2006) found a positive
correlation between overall screen media exposure and increased food and drink requests. In
this prospective study, after adjusting for ethnicity/race and sex, baseline screen media
exposure was significantly associated with mean food/drink requests 20 months later
(Chamberlain et al., 2006). Similarly, Arnas (2006) found that over 40 per cent of young
children requested advertised items in the grocery store after seeing commercials for the
items. Two 2007 studies found increasedconsumption of high fat and/or sweet energy dense
foods among children exposed to advertisements for food during cartoons, and this
relationship was even stronger among overweight children (Halford, Boyland, Hughes,
Stacey, McCean, & Dovey, 2007; Halford, Boyland, Hughes, Oliveira, & Dovey, 2007).
Researchers report a strong, significant positive correlation between heavy television use and
favorable attitudes toward junk food (Dixon, Scully, Wakefield, White, & Crawford, 2007).
US children influence household purchases at a rate of $500 billion annually
(McGinnis et al., 2006). Not only do children influence purchases such as groceries, clothing,
and games, but they also impact sales of bigger items such as automobiles, vacations, and
electronics. Parents give their children’s preferences serious consideration when making
major purchases (Buijzen, Schuurman, & Bomhof, 2008).
Children in the US accompany their parents to the grocery store two to three
times per week, on average (Schor, 2004). According to the marketing firm Gepetto
Group, when children are in a grocery store, they put approximately six items in the cart
(Schor, 2004). A 2002 survey describes that among children ages 12 to 17, on average a
child will repeatedly request an item around nine times, until his or her parent yields
and makes the purchase (Lambert, Plunkett, & Wotowiec, 2002). A small fraction of
pre-adolescents report that they will ask more than 50 times for particular products
(Lambert et al., 2002).
Children and parents can become frustrated around these requests. Purchase
demands by children lead to parents’ denials, and subsequent conflict can emerge in the
relationship (Buizjen & Valkenburg, 2003). Parents who constantly deal with requests need
to develop strategies for handling or avoiding these interactions; however, little is known
about strategies parents use.
While most people can describe anecdotes about requests and even tantrums, little
scientific data exist on current dynamics of the Nag Factor. This study contributes to the
scientific literature as it offers both quantitative and qualitative information on how
mothers and children in the US interact around food requests and purchases. The following
hypotheses guided the quantitative analysis:
Hypothesis 1: Mothers reporting higher levels of media use by their children would also
report higher levels of nagging behaviors.
Hypothesis 2: The type of media content a child was familiar with would be associated
with food and beverage requests and potentially would mediate the
relationship between media exposure and nagging behaviors
Considering the qualitative data, we pursued two aims. First, we explored whether
and how mothers of young children have experienced this phenomenon. Second, we
elicited a range of strategies reported by mothers to cope with the Nag Factor. From this
mixed-methodological approach, we intend to provide a solid foundation for further
exploration and intervention work with more generalizable samples.
300 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
Methods
The study was conducted between October 2006 and July 2007. Participants were
mothers of 3- to 5-year-old children recruited from the suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Mothers were selected as interview subjects because they are likely to act as “nutritional
gatekeepers” for their household and control the food purchasing and preparation for small
children (Wansink, 2006). The Institutional Review Board of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg
School of Public Health approved the study protocols.
Recruitment involved posting paper flyers at preschool centers as well as
announcements on electronic community list-servs. Interested participants contacted the
research team by email or toll-free telephone number. All mothers of children ages 3 to 5
were eligible. The study’s only exclusion criterion was language. If a mother could not speak
English, she was thanked for her interest and told that if we extended our interview cohort
to include non-English speakers, she would be contacted. Research sessions were
scheduled at a time and location convenient to the participant. The research team included
four graduate students and the principal investigator.
Data were collected using paper instruments as well as a semi-structured, in-depth
interview. The interviews took approximately 45 minutes to complete and often occurred in
the respondent’s home or a local coffee shop. All interviews were digitally recorded.
Interviewers asked the mothers to focus all responses on just one child if they had more
than one child in the study’s age range. Mothers with more than one child in the study’s age
range were asked to focus responses on the child whose birthday was coming up next.
Mothers answered questions about the household environment, themselves, and the focus
child’s demographics, media use, eating and shopping patterns, and requests for advertised
items. Toward the end of the interview, mothers described through a series of open-ended
questions their experiences with and strategies for dealing with the “Nag Factor.”
2
Respondents received compensation for their time and effort, in their choice of a $15
gift certificate card. Debriefing material included a booklet, “Tips for Parenting in a
Commercial Culture,” from the non-profit Center for a New American Dream (Center for a
New American Dream, 2006).
Measures
Demographics
Demographic data collected from the mothers included age, race/ethnicity, employ-
ment status, type of work, number of hours worked at home, education level, marital status,
number of children and adults in the household, approximate household income, height and
weight, general physical health, healthfulness of eating habits, parenting style, and level of
stress. Additionally, mothers described demographic data about the focus child, including his
or her gender, age and birthday, race/ethnicity, height and weight, general physical health,
healthfulness of eating habits, and cognitive, developmental, and physical disabilities. In this
report, we only refer to basic demographic data to describe the sample population.
Household media environment. Data about the household media environment
covered the number of working television sets in the household; location of television sets;
whether the television was connected to a DVD player, a VCR, TiVo or DVR, video game
consoles, cable, and satellite; number of computers; type of Internet access; location of
THE NAG FACTOR 301
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
computers; whether child had access to websites for commercial products; how often the
television was on during a typical day; and how the mother engaged in television viewing
with her child (Valkenburg, Krcmar, Peeters, & Marseille, 1999).
Screen time. Mothers reported the time their child spent watching television
separately for morning, afternoon, and evening on the day prior to the interview. The mothers
also reported the time their child spent watching videos on a VCR, watching DVDs, playing
video games, reading or being read to, and using the computer during the same time periods.
Total screen time included television watching, VCR and DVD viewing, video game and
computer use per day. Mothers also reported the time they spent using each type of media.
Content familiarity. Familiarity with content was assessed using a 20-item battery,
where mothers reported their familiarity and their child’s familiarity with different popular
media characters. Familiarity was assessed on a scale from zero (don’t know) to ten (very
familiar). Four of the characters were foils and allowed a check on the measure’s validity.
The remaining sixteen characters represented three different types of television
programming and content. We performed an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), which
revealed a three-factor solution (accounting for 51.8 per cent of the variance) that can be
characterized as commercial (n¼5, alpha ¼0.80), educational (n¼6, alpha ¼0.83), and
adult TV viewing (n¼4, alpha ¼0.40). It is not surprising that scores for commercial and
educational factors had higher internal consistency than adult TV viewing. These genres
had more similar characters (for example, SpongeBob SquarePants and Kim Possible were
used for the commercial factor and Dora the Explorer,Blues Clues, and Dragon Tales for the
educational factor) than those for the category of adult programming (CSI: Miami,The View,
and American Idol).
Nagging behaviors. The dependent variable was children’s nagging behaviors for
advertised foods and drinks, and researchers assessed this by asking the mothers how often,
on a scale from zero (never) to ten (all the time), their children engaged in ten different types
of nagging (n¼10, Cronbach’s alpha ¼0.77). Overall nagging behavior was the sum of the
ten items. This measure was developed for this study and has not been used before. Nagging
was operationalized for participants as when a child asks four or more times for an item, even
when the parent has indicated more than once that he or she will not get the item. This type
of nagging may elicit frustration and cause stress for both the child and the parent.
Exploratory factor analysis, using principal components analysis and varimax rotation,
was conducted on the ten-item measure and revealed a three-factor solution accounting
for 63.8 per cent of the variance: juvenile nagging (n¼3, alpha ¼0.75), nagging to test
boundaries (n¼3, alpha ¼0.60), and manipulative nagging (n¼3, alpha ¼0.65). Juvenile
nagging consisted of constantly repeating or asking for items, whining, and mild physical
reactions such as stomping feet, making fists, or grunting. Nagging to test boundaries
consisted of putting items in the cart even if the mother had said no, having an all-out
tantrum in public, and asking other family members for the item. Manipulative nagging
consisted of flattering the mother, professing love or hate for the mother, and saying other
children had the item.
Experience and strategies to deal with the Nag Factor. Researchers introduced and
described the concept of the Nag Factor toward the end of each interview:
302 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
I’d like to tell you a little more about what we are studying. We call it the “Nag Factor.” It’s
the tendency of children, who are bombarded with marketer’s messages, to unrelentingly
request that their parents buy them advertised items.
Then, each mother was asked to respond to the following five questions:
(1) Can you describe your experience, including what items were [focus child] requested and
how you handled the situation?
(2) What do you think are the worst ways to deal with the “Nag Factor”?
(3) What do you think are the best ways to deal with the “Nag Factor”?
(4) How do you think other moms deal with food and beverage demands from their children?
(5) Are there any other things you would like to tell me about your experiences with the “Nag
Factor”?
Responses to these questions were transcribed and coded as part of the qualitative
analyses.
Analyses. All quantitative analyses were conducted using SPSS release 15.0 (Statistical
Package for Social Sciences, 2006). Descriptive statistics were calculated as well as bivariate
analysis using Pearson’s correlations and multivariate analysis using linear regression.
The qualitative analysis presented was undertaken using a phenomenological
perspective with the goal of understanding the “essence of the experience” mothers have
with the Nag Factor (Creswell, 2007, p. 78). As such, quotes from respondents are used
extensively to highlight the variety of experiences and perspectives that exist in the sample.
Researchers conducted a line-by-line coding process of the five questions about the
Nag Factor. Themes emerged and a coding scheme was applied to the interviews.
Respondents’ own words were used as codes whenever possible. The qualitative data analysis
software Atlas-ti 6.0 (Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin, Germany) was employed.
Results
Demographics
The sample consisted of 64 mothers of children ages 3 to 5 years. Many were older
(mean ¼37.8 years) and highly educated (over half, 56 per cent, held a graduate degree).
Most were married (88 per cent) and employed (68 per cent). Annual household income
was higher than $60,000 for 93 per cent of the sample. The gender distribution of children
was equal (53 per cent female). Table 1 provides information on the mothers, households,
and the focus children. As can be seen from the demographic data, this sample has a much
higher than average socio-economic status, compared to other households in the US.
Home Media Environment
The average household had two television sets (mean ¼2.1, SD ¼1.1, range ¼0–5).
All households had at least one computer, with the average having two (mean ¼2.1,
SD ¼1.0, range ¼1–5). Seventy-two per cent had cable and 9 per cent had cable or satellite,
respectively. Most had a DVDplayer(89 per cent) or a VCR (24 per cent); a quarter (25 per cent)
had TiVo or another digital recorder. Twenty-two per cent had a video game player. Sixty-
three of the 64 households (98 per cent) had high-speed Internet on at least one computer.
THE NAG FACTOR 303
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
Just three children had a television in their bedroom; none of the children had a computer in
their bedroom. These results are vastly divergent from the much higher media use rates
found by the Kaiser Family Foundation (Rideout et al., 2003) and likely reflect the unique
demographic characteristics of our sample.
According to these mothers, the focus children spent about 39 minutes a day
(SD ¼52.8, range 0 to 5 hours) in front of electronic screens. This included an average daily
amount of 24.5 minutes using television (SD ¼44.6, range 0 to 4 hours). While there were
no significant differences in screen time by gender, we observed that younger children
(under 4 years of age) spent less time using screen media than older children [younger
mean ¼22.6 (SD ¼5.5), older mean ¼50.8 (SD ¼10.4), t(62) ¼-2.17, p,0.05].
Content Familiarity
As described earlier, we performed an EFA and assessed children’s familiarity with
different media content, including commercial, educational, and adult television.
As reported by mothers, children seemed most aware of educational characters, with a
mean familiarity score of 30.9 (SD ¼14.3, range 4.3 to 56.0). The score for commercial
TABLE 1
Respondent demographics (N¼64)
Mother’s age in years, mean ^SD (range) 37.8 ^5.1 (25–50)
Mother’s marital status (% married) 88
Mother’s educational level
High school degree (%) 1
Attended college (%) 3
College degree (%) 40
Graduate degree (%) 56
Mother’s occupational status
Full-time (%) 45
Part-time (%) 14
Stay-at-Home mom (%) 19
Self-Employed (%) 9
Other (%) 13
Annual household income
,$60,000 (%) 7
$60,000 - $140,000 (%) 52
.$140,000 (%) 41
Child’s age in years, mean ^SD (range) 3.8 ^0.7 (3– 5)
Child’s gender
Female (%) 53
Male (%) 47
Child’s race/ethnicity
White (%) 70
African American (%) 11
Asian American (%) 3
Other (%) 16
Child’s number of siblings
0 (%) 36
1 (%) 56
2 or more (%) 8
304 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
content was 11.9 (SD ¼10.2), with a range from 0.3 to 43.0, and for adult content, it was 3.7
(SD ¼3.8, range 0.0 to 16.0).
Nagging
On average, children had an overall nagging score of 24.5 (SD ¼12.0, range 2.8 to
51.3). No significant differences were observed by gender; however, overall nagging scores
increased with age. On average, 3-year-olds had a mean score of 21.5 (SD ¼8.6), 4-year-olds
23.0 (SD ¼12.4), and 5-year-olds 35.5 (SD ¼12.0) (F¼6.7, df ¼2, 61, p,0.01). No
significant correlations in overall nagging scores were observed with overall screen time or
TV time.
Considering the three different types of nagging, there was a mean score of 13.1 for
juvenile (SD ¼6, range 0.8 to 24.3), 4.6 for testing boundaries (SD ¼4.1, range 0.5 to 22.5),
and 6.0 for manipulative (SD ¼5.2, range 0 to 19.8). No significant differences in juvenile
nagging, nagging to test boundaries, or manipulative nagging were seen by gender.
A significant difference in manipulative nagging was observed by age. On average, 3-year-
olds had a mean score of 4.4 (SD ¼3.7), 4-year-olds 4.8 (SD ¼4.0), and 5-year-olds 12.6
(SD ¼5.8) (F¼16.5, df ¼2, 61, p,0.001).
Table 2 offers a correlation matrix for familiarity with different content and nagging.
The strongest correlations were found between familiarity with commercial television and
overall nagging and nagging to test boundaries.
We conducted a multivariate analysis to predict nagging, controlling for child’s age and
gender, mother’s level of education, overall screen time, and different content familiarity.
Separate models were constructed for overall nagging as well as for each of the three specific
types of nagging (see Table 3). Three out of four models predicted a significant and large
amount of variation in the outcome variable. Unlike the other variables entered into these
models, one’s familiarity with commercial television was a strong predictor of nagging.
Experiences with the Nag Factor
As mentioned, child’s age was an important factor in predicting nagging and this
came out in mothers’ descriptions. Mothers of 5-year-olds were more likely to have personal
and negative experiences with the Nag Factor, using words like “battle,” “overwhelming,”
and “susceptible.” For example, one mother of a 5-year-old girl said this:
It’s been a battle with my child. She would do everything you had on the list [of nagging
behaviors]. She would whine, put things in the cart but she never tried making the deals,
TABLE 2
Correlations between media use, content familiarity, and nagging (N¼64)
Overall Screen
Time
Television
Time
Educational
TV Viewing
Commercial
TV Viewing
Adult TV
Viewing
Overall nagging .04 .10 .29*.51*** .23 ,
Juvenile nagging .07 .12 .16 .35** .04
Nagging to test Boundaries .02 .06 .15 .45*** .25*
Manipulative Nagging 2.03 .05 .32*.37** .23 ,
Note. ,p,0.10, *p,0.05, **p,0.01, ***p,0.001 (all based on two-tailed Pearson correlations).
THE NAG FACTOR 305
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
TAB LE 3
Estimated linear regression models predicting overall and different types of nagging behaviors (N¼64)
Overall Nagging Juvenile Nagging Nagging to Test Boundaries Manipulative Nagging
b(SE) b(SE) b(SE) b(SE)
Child’s gender (male ¼0, female ¼1) 4.3 (2.7) 1.1 (1.5) 2.5 (1.0)** 0.1 (1.2)
Child’s age 2.9 (2.0) 0.3 (1.1) 20.5 (0.7) 2.8 (0.9)***
Mother’s education (#college ¼0, .college ¼1) 3.2 (2.9) 1.5 (1.6) 0.9 (1.0) 1.1 (1.3)
Overall screen time 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Familiar with educational TV content 20.1 (0.1) 0 (0.1) 20.1(0) 0.1 (0.1)
Familiar with commercial TV content 0.6 (0.2)*** 0.3 (0.1)*** 0.2 (0.1)*** 0.1 (0.1)
Familiar with adult TV content 0.2 (0.4) 20.1 (0.2) 0.2 (0.1) 0.1 (0.2)
Adjusted R
2
0.24 0.03 0.24 0.24
F(df) 3.7 (7, 54) 1.3 (7, 54) 3.6 (7, 54) 3.56 (7, 54)
Note. **p,0.05, ***p,0.01.
306 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
which probably would have worked better. “Mom did not put up with whining.” No
reward in whining. I didn’t care if she had a temper tantrum.
Mothers of the youngest children told of how their children were showing initial signs
of nagging. Many mothers pointed out that with their first child, they were able to delay the
onset of nagging longer than with their subsequent children. A mother of a 3-year-old girl
remarked as follows:
I definitely see it coming on in the last 4 months. She is aware of more characters. Doesn’t
know what the product is but she wants it. I’m shocked by her awareness ... she is
motivated by ads. She’ll have full-on tantrums. It’s coming and it’s amazing.
The quantitative data support these comments. Compared to families without older
siblings, there was a non-statistically significant trend for children with older siblings to
have higher overall nagging scores as well as higher scores on the manipulative nagging
and nagging to test boundaries scales.
Perceived Motivations for Nagging
Mothers offered three main reasons why their children nagged for items: packaging,
characters, and commercials. Moreover, many mothers remarked that marketing
techniques attracted attention to items, regardless of the product features or even
children’s preferences.
1) Packaging and characters. In relation to the Nag Factor, mothers talked about
eye-catching packaging and characters. One mother stated, “I think packaging makes
products really interesting with all the sizes, shapes, and colors to attract kids.” Many
described the use of bright colors and popular icons as “clever .. . effective ... and
powerful.” A mother of a 3-year-old girl said the following:
But she has certain characters she likes. So we have a Dora video or a Princess video and
she is not necessarily seeing promotional messages about an item ... but she’ll see that
character on Fruit Roll-Ups or cereal and she’ll be like, “I need to have those!” And I’ll say,
“You don’t need that just because it has Dora on it,” and so you know, they see the images
that they like echoed on packaging and you know, it’s a clever marketing strategy and
every once in a while we will—that will be one of the treats.
Even children with very little exposure to screen media were still attracted to
characters. Mothers explained that peers make their children aware of the characters, and in
turn, their children want items whose packages feature these characters. A mother of a
5-year-old girl with very restricted viewing said the following:
I notice when she’s drawn to stuff and it’s the packaging. She picks up on characters
almost by osmosis. I avoid ads but she still notices and they are manipulative.
Not all perceptions of characters were negative; some mothers thought that characters
could help attract children to more nutritious products. A mother of a 4-year-old girl said
the following:
You’ll have the box with Dora and the box without .... When we go to the store, she usually
sees the character. A simple box of Kix with Dora or Clifford. “I want the Dora cereal” and I’ll
THE NAG FACTOR 307
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
get it for her ‘cause it’s somewhat healthy. Mac and cheese with SpongeBob and Scooby
Doo—No. We’ll get regular. But her father will get it for her. Dora she gets with her cousin. It
drives me crazy that they put characters on things that are unhealthy!
Another mother of a 5-year-old girl offered similar sentiments, suggesting characters be
used to promote healthy eating:
There’s organic Elmo oatmeal. And so, what we did, ‘cause she was always nagging about
Elmo, she had a thing about it—So all I did was take any oatmeal and put it in an Elmo
bowl. I mean, I don’t care if she likes Elmo. And I don’t care if it has Elmo. I just buy what I
would normally buy. I mean, they’ve got it right putting Elmo on there.
2) Commercials. Many mothers felt commercials were responsible for encouraging
nagging. Consider the following comments, all made by mothers of 4-year-olds boys:
Well, I find that what strikes me is that if we are watching TV, it’s not on PBS or Noggin, it’s
that stupid Cartoon Network—the junk channels I call them. And I notice they are loaded
with these commercials for garbage and junk. So if he is ever to request something or he’ll
look at it—it is always junk ... that is where he is getting it from; it’s not from the grocery. I
don’t let him watch it because of that ... in my opinion, that is the place where he gets the
most info about what is out there.
It really became clear to me how much TV impacts his preferences when he asked me to
go to Burger King and I said, “Why Burger King?” and he replied he had seen it on TV!
Um, I think commercials are very powerful ... like he watches Nick Jr. I don’t think he is
influenced yet but he can totally sing back a jingle. He liked the Hot Pockets one; we had
to make a rule that he couldn’t sing commercials! One time, he was singing “Uh-Oh
Spaghettios,” and he caught himself.
Mothers reported how commercials exposed children to new products. The commercials
spurred and encouraged requests for the advertised items. A child requesting an item
based solely on exposure to commercials was common.
Noticeably absent were descriptions of children who requested items based on the
item’s attributes. One mother explained that her child may not know what a product is, but
she does know that she wants it. Only one mother stated that her child, who had very
restricted media use, asked for products because he knows that he likes it (yogurt). No other
mothers discussed the Nag Factor in terms of the specific attributes of the asked-for item; it
was always couched in a description of the packaging, character placement, or
commercials. Four other mothers stated that their children did not consistently nag for
food items, but rather nagging was centered on toys.
Consistency
When discussing the Nag Factor and product requests from children, 30 per cent of
the mothers raised the issue of consistency. It was commonly thought, at least for some of
the approaches, that strategies must be upheld. A mother of a 3-year-old girl remarked as
follows:
Parents can have such a lack of follow through—threatening and then not following
through, being inconsistent in what they tell their kid.
308 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
Another mother of a 4-year-old boy said, “If you make the rule, enforce the rule.” Mothers
described how parents may not adhere to their own ways of dealing with the Nag Factor,
and this was problematic. It was felt that if parents were inconsistent, the child would just
try again.
Strategies to Deal with the Nag Factor
Mothers discussed more and less effective ways to deal with their children’s nagging
behaviors. Most mothers viewed the nagging interaction as conflict, in which both parties
had different sides. Mothers talked of “battles,” “losses,” and “victories.”
Strategies could take on different qualities. Based on the context, the nature of the
nagging, and the reaction of the parent, strategies could be seen as good or bad. An
example is the strategy of ignoring requests. Mothers mentioned that they would ignore
constant, repetitive requests from children during a shopping trip, and this would be seen
as a positive strategy. However, mothers also described that ignoring the phenomenon in
general was a negative way to deal with the behavior.
Ten strategies emerged through the qualitative analysis, and we provide mothers’
thoughts on each. These ten strategies were not framed as such in the interviews, but
rather they emerged through the research team’s analyses of the transcripts. A coding
scheme for each strategy was developed, outlining what the strategy entailed and an
example of the type of statement that should be coded as each strategy. Prevalence of
strategy was determined noting how many mothers included a statement of each.
1) Giving in. Unprompted, over 70 per cent of the participating mothers discussed
“giving in.” Practically all said that this was one of the least effective strategies. A mother of
a 3-year-old girl commented as follows:
Well, I mean, giving in every time they ask for something. It’s just encouraging the
behavior. You just, I’m trying to think ... letting them even get to the point of having
those tantrums, I mean, I’ve seen other kids get there and I wonder—how did that
happen!? [laughing] I just don’t .... [trails off shaking head]
The mother of a 5-year-old boy said the following:
I think that giving in to it is always a bit concerning to me when you see what happens. I
had a mother tell her daughter, if you don’t do this, we’re going to leave and then doesn’t
do it. Just gives them that ultimatum, and your daughter is bright, so she knows you are
just throwing around threats, so ... no follow through, and it seems like, I mean, we’re not
perfect, but at least we try!
2) Yelling. Mothers reported that an immediate reaction to nagging was to yell and
scream back at their children. The mothers who discussed yelling had more than one child
(10 out of 13); possibly those with more children have less patience to deal with nagging of
multiple children. Mothers described how nagging angered them; many were unable
to stay calm and raised their voices in response to repeated requests. Around a quarter
of mothers suggested that yelling was counterproductive; in fact, it was thought
that yelling might lead their children to nag more. As said by the mother of a 5-year-old
boy,
THE NAG FACTOR 309
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
I think over-reacting and yelling because then kids become more fascinated with the
object or idea of nagging ... it will increase the incidence of nagging.
3) Ignoring. A fifth of mothers discussed ignoring the child’s repeated request for
advertised items. As noted, this strategy was considered to be both positive and negative.
Interestingly, this strategy was only mentioned by mothers in the older half of our sample
(above age 35 years). One mother of a 5-year-old girl even felt she had experienced both
the positive and the negative with her child, saying,
I remember doing that when she was younger and was overwhelmed by things. But now
that she is older I don’t think that is healthy. I want her to be part of society. Ignoring is not
good.
4) Distracting. Around 20 per cent of the mothers talked about using distraction
techniques, either through objects or tasks, to deal with nagging. Seven mothers described
how they might ask their children to do something in the store such as picking out fruit or
pushing the cart. Another six said that they brought along items so their children would have
something to divert their attention. A mother of a 4-year-old boy said the following:
Distracting the child, trying to redirect their attention. I try to play games, ask for help and
that tends to work well.
5) Calm consistency. Remaining both calm and consistent was offered as a strategy
for nagging requests. One mother of two young children, one boy and one girl, put it very
simply: “Give firm and calm responses, move on and don’t talk about it anymore.”
6) Avoidance. One mother ofa 4-year-old boy and a 2-year-old girlsaid she would “ ...
avoid taking them in situations where they might be prone to nag.” Although not many
mothers indicated they had done this, several (15 per cent) discussed avoidance as a potential
strategy. These mothers tended to have older children. Mothers described leaving their child at
home during shopping trips as a way to deal with nagging. While mothers said it was a good
strategy, they also felt it was unrealistic. Avoidance was discussed as being context specific,
such as not taking a child when rushed or if the child was hungry. Mothers recognized that this
strategy required additional resources such as prior planning, childcare, and more flexibility.
7) Limiting commercial exposure. As many mothers discussed how advertising and
commercials shaped their children’s propensity to nag, a strategy that was offered by a third
of mothers (36 per cent) was limiting children’s exposure to commercials by controlling
media use. Mothers recognized that devices such as TiVo and DVD players could assist with
this strategy. A mother of a 3-year-old girl advised as follows:
Limit TV commercials; keep them busy during commercials. Cut out TV. Limit time a kid
can watch TV.
8) Rules and negotiation. Established rules and structure for shopping trips helped
mothers reduce nagging. Mothers described overt and understood rules, such as a child
310 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
getting to pick out one treat, only buying what was on the list, or the child not using a
whining voice. A mother of a 4-year-old boy said the following:
You have a system in place and everyone knows the parameters and you can’t be so strict
all of the time, but know what is acceptable in your house and what is not. If you make the
rule, enforce the rule.
Many who had rules also mentioned negotiations. Discussions and compromises
happened most frequently in families with older children. Mothers reminded children of
previously made agreements (i.e., cleaning one’s bedroom), although bending of rules did
occur. A mother of a 5-year-old boy warned as follows:
Agree ahead of time what you will get or not get—Agree to the terms or else don’t go!
With sweets and other items, rationing amounts ... and pre-arranged negotiations and
substitutions.
9) Allowing alternative items. As children assumed a role during shopping, mothers
felt that the process could be a learning experience. Many suggested a strategy where
children could request and receive a healthy alternative to the product originally requested.
For example, a child could request a granola bar instead of a candy bar or juice instead of
soda. As suggested by the mother of a 3-year-old boy, a strategy was to “Trade out a
product or redirect a request to a healthy alternative.”
10) Explanation. Finally, about a third (35 per cent) of the mothers said that one
strategy was to explain why they made or did not make certain purchases. This strategy
could include descriptions of items that were “good” or “bad,” often by making reference to
wanting the child to grow up to be strong. About 20 per cent of mothers said that they
discuss how marketing and commercials try to influence purchases. A mother of two boys,
ages 4 and 5, commented:
Balance and reality. I mean, one thing I have done is explain advertising. The reason this is
here is ‘cause they want you to want to buy it. That doesn’t mean it’s the best for you and
they might not even tell you the truth. I think that can be helpful ....
Another mother of a 4-year-old girl described her strategy like this:
They participate in the process; you explain to them what you’re going to the store for and
what the point of food is and then, you know, we give them small choices like special
treats that aren’t really bad for them ....
In this way, nagging became a teaching moment for mothers. Mothers often
provided explanations not only in the store, but when their children were viewing
advertising, as a proactive strategy.
Discussion
Even among preschool children from households of older, educated, and wealthier
parents, nagging was common. Most mothers described that they were fighting a battle. As
confirmed through this study, the operationalization of the Nag Factor includes repeated
requests and a high level of frustration and stress. Many mothers felt that clever packaging,
THE NAG FACTOR 311
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
characters, and commercials encouraged their children to repeatedly request items,
regardless of whether they had information about the item. Other research has shown that
commercials and branding significantly influence young children’s requests and
preferences for advertised food items (Borzekowski & Robinson, 2001; Halford, Boyland,
Hughes, Oliveira, & Dovey, 2007; Robinson et al., 2007).
Nagging seemed to fall into three categories: juvenile nagging, nagging to test
boundaries, and manipulative nagging. Interestingly, overall media use was not associated
with nagging behaviors, but rather the type of media content a child was familiar with
predicted different levels and types of nagging. Even among a small sample, we see that
certain variables, such as age, gender, and familiarity with characters, help to predict overall
and specific nagging behaviors. For example, there was a significant jump in manipulative
nagging among 5-year-olds. This may be explained by developmental changes. Young
children (2, 3, and 4) are in a “preoperational phase” characterized by difficulty thinking
about things from the perspective of others. Around the age of 5, children become less
egocentric and develop a better ability to account for other people’s perspectives and
motivations. It is more common for younger children to whine and throw tantrums while
older children are more able to use communication to provide explanations and excuses
(Valkenburg & Cantor, 2001).
A child’s familiarity with commercial television, in particular, seemed to be a
consistent and significant predictor of nagging. When discussing nagging, mothers would
mention characters that their children knew well, including SpongeBob SquarePants, the
Disney princesses, and Dora the Explorer.
Mothers described that “giving in” to nagging was the worst way to deal with
children’s repetitive and insistent requests. Explanations about purchase decisions and
even advertising were the most sophisticated strategies offered by this sample.
Results from the quantitative and qualitative analyses should be taken together to
provide further insight into the phenomenon of nagging. The ten strategies that resulted
from the qualitative analysis confirm patterns found in the quantitative results. While some
of the strategies, such as “giving in” and “limiting television exposure” may be helpful for
dealing with all three types of nagging, other strategies may be more effective with certain
types. For instance, juvenile nagging may be best dealt with using “ignoring” and
“distracting.” Nagging to test boundaries may elicit less favorable responses such as
“yelling” but could also be dealt with using “calm consistency” and “explanation.” Finally,
mothers dealing with manipulative nagging, typical of older children, may need to practice
“avoidance” strategies or those that enable them to offer alternatives. Further research
should be conducted to confirm these linkages.
The ten discussed strategies span a continuum from reactive to proactive strategies
as well as a continuum of who is in control (see Figure 1). The figure also shows
that strategies can occur before an incident of nagging or as a result of an incident
of nagging. Reactive strategies include those caused by the nagging behavior of the
child. These strategies generally occur as an immediate response. On the other hand,
proactive strategies are behaviors mothers choose to enact, usually ahead of the nagging
incident.
The strategies vary in who is controlling the situation, and some require cooperation
from the parent and child. Reactive strategies tend to be controlled by parents, with the
exception of “giving in.” Interestingly, this may be the strategy most preferred by
young children. It should be noted that the development of this list of strategies
312 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
emerged from a grounded analysis of this sample. This list of ten strategies may differ in
other socio-economic subgroups. Future studies could better explore how these strategies
are enacted and look at better measures to understand strategies used.
Implications of this study highlight the need to regulate and monitor the
amount of commercial television young children view in order to reduce nagging.
To address childhood obesity, it may be necessary to limit the amount of food and
beverage advertising shown on commercial television, as this may lessen children’s
nagging for unhealthy items (Arnas, 2006; Gantz et al., 2007). As children are drawn to
packaging, characters, and commercials, another recommendation may be to promote
advertising and character licensing on healthier items, such as fruits and vegetables
(McGinnis et al., 2006).
Public health professionals may use the information obtained in this study to design
interventions that help parents deal with different types of nagging. The proactive
strategies mentioned by the mothers in this sample may be helpful in mitigating
nagging. As Brody et al. (1981) suggested, strategies for mothers to teach children about
nutrition and advertising are a “marvelous” missed opportunity. Intervention messages to
limit the amount of commercial television viewed by young children may also be
successful.
This research may also be useful in understanding the role advertising and media
exposure plays in non-US settings. Measures could be adapted to look at similarities and
Reactive Proactive
Who is in control?
Give in
Distract
Ignore Stay calm and
Consistent
Yell
Parent
Child
Limit
commercial
exposure
Allow child to
pick alternative
items
Negotiate and
make rules
Avoid
environment
Explain
KEY
= strategy occurs at time of nagging incident
= strategy occurs before or after nagging incident
= strategy occurs before nagging incident
FIGURE 1
Suggested strategies plotted by how reactive each is to the nagging situation
THE NAG FACTOR 313
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
differences across nations in terms of advertising practices, media use, and parent – child
interaction.
Limitations and Strengths
There are several limitations of this study. First, the small sample size does not permit
complex statistical tests. With a larger sample size, it may be possible to discern
relationships that are not obvious with small numbers. However, the small sample, which
was exploratory in nature, did allow the researchers to speak in depth with the mothers and
scrutinize their transcripts.
Second, the need to extrapolate type of television viewing from the measure of
character familiarity as reported by mothers, rather than children’s report or direct measure
of television viewing, limits the ability to determine what types of programming children
are watching. The team that did this work is now conducting research where this measure is
being used with child subjects.
Third, this study relies on self-report, and mothers may have underreported some
variables in question (i.e., media use, nagging) due to social desirability. However, the
protocol used and environments where the research occurred (homes and coffee shops)
encouraged open conversations, and most mothers were ready to discuss the naughtiest of
their children’s behaviors.
Fourth, the restriction of the study to only English-speaking families may have
eliminated some Hispanic children, a population with high rates of obesity (McGinnis et al.,
2006). The sample did, however, include other minority children.
Finally, the sample was not a representative sample of the US population and this
limits the generalizability of results. Those sampled may also be more likely to restrict
exposure to advertisements and characters likely to stimulate requests, which in turn
may reduce nagging behaviors. The low correlation between media use and nagging
behaviors may be attributable to the unique sample. We might assume that other, more
representative populations may be at higher risk for the Nag Factor.
Future Research
Future research is necessary to refine measures of screen media use, determine
whether strategies are universal, and design interventions to teach effective strategies to
combat nagging. In this study, we spoke with mothers; future work should interview
children and consider their perceptions. It would be useful to examine whether
relationships observed in this sample are similar to others; studies should be conducted
with older children and those with different ethnicities and socio-economic backgrounds.
The authors recommend further post-exploratory research with a larger and more
representative sample to produce generalizable findings.
Additional research studies should investigate the ten Nag Factor strategies
discussed by these mothers; it would be interesting to see whether these strategies are
universal or whether they differ by child’s age and other demographics. Observational
studies in grocery stores may be another way to identify the strategies being utilized and
whether they are effective in managing children’s purchase requests. Once these strategies
are better understood, it would be valuable to develop educational materials and methods
to train families to better manage the Nag Factor.
314 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
NOTES
1. Adver-gaming is the use of a free online video game to advertise a product. Co-branding
refers to using more than one brand name in association with a single product. Stealth
marketing is a marketing practice in which individuals are marketed to without their
knowledge, for example, being given information about a product from a person who
appears to be a friendly fellow shopper in a store.
2. The research instrument is available from the corresponding author.
REFERENCES
Arnas, Y. A. (2006). The effects of television food advertisement on children’s food purchasing
requests. Pediatrics International,48, 138–145.
Atkin, C. K. (1978). Observation of parent-child interaction in supermarket decision-making. The
Journal of Marketing,42(4), 41–45.
Borzekowski, D. L., & Robinson, T. N. (2001). The 30-second effect: An experiment revealing the
impact of television commercials on food preferences of preschoolers. Journal of the
American Dietetic Association,101(1), 42–46.
Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., Lane, T. S., & Sanders, A. K. (1981). Television food commercials aimed
at children. Family grocery shopping, and mother-child interactions. Family Relations,
30(3), 435–439.
Buijzen, M., Schuurman, J., & Bomhof, E. (2008). Associations between children’s television
advertising exposure and their food consumption patterns: A household diary-survey
study. Appetite,50, 231–239.
Buijzen, M., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2003). The effects of television advertising on materialism,
parent-child conflict, and unhappiness: A review of research. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology,24(4), 437–456.
Center for a New American Dream. (2006). Tips for parenting in a commercial culture. Retrieved
June 9, 2011, from http://www.newdream.org/resources/publications/2011-05-tips-for-
parenting-in-a-commercial-culture
Chamberlain, L. J., Wang, Y., & Robinson, T. N. (2006). Does children’s screen time predict
requests for advertised products? Cross-sectional and prospective analyses. Archives of
Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine,160, 363–368.
Coon, K. A., & Tucker, K. L. (2002). Television and children’s consumption patterns: A review of the
literature. Minerva Pediatrica,54(5), 423–436.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dixon, H. G., Scully, M. L., Wakefield, M. A., White, V. M., & Crawford, D. A. (2007). The effects of
television advertisements for junk food versus nutritious food on children’s food attitudes
and preferences. Social Science Medicine,65(7), 1311 –1323.
Galst, J. P., & White, M. A. (1976). The unhealthy persuader: The reinforcing value of television and
children’s purchase-influencing attempts at the supermarket. Child Development,47,
1089–1096.
Gantz,W.,Schwartz,N.,Angelini, J. R., & Rideout, V. (2007). Food for thought:
Television food advertising to children in the United States. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family
Foundation. Retrieved May 24, 2011, from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/7618.pdf
Halford, J. C. G., Boyland, E. J., Hughes, G. M., Oliveira, L. P., & Dovey, T. M. (2007). Beyond-brand
effect of television (TV) food advertisements/commercials on caloric intake and food
choice of 5-7-year-old children. Appetite,49, 263 –267.
THE NAG FACTOR 315
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
Halford, J. C. G., Boyland, E. J., Hughes, G. M., Stacey, L., McCean, S., & Dovey, T. M. (2007). Beyond-
brand effect of television food advertisements on food choice in children: The effects of
weight status. Public Health Nutrition,11(9), 897–904.
Hitchings, E., & Moynihan, P. J. (1998). The relationship between television food advertisements
recalled and actual foods consumed by children. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics,
11(6), 511–517.
Kunkel, D., Wilcox, B. L., Cantor, J., Palmer, E., Linn, S., & Dowrick, P. (2004). Report of the APA Task
Force on Advertising and Children. Section: Psychological issues in the increasing
commercialization of childhood. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Lambert, E., Plunkett, L., & Wotowiec, T. (2002). Just the facts about advertising and marketing to
children. Takoma Park, MD: Center for a New American Dream.
McGinnis, M.J., Gootman, J., & Kraak, V. I.(Eds.). (2006). Food marketing to children and youth: Threat
or opportunity? (A report of The Institute of Medicine Committee on Food Marketing and the
Diets of Children and Youth). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Rideout, V. J., Vandewater, E. A., & Wartella, E. A. (2003). Zero to six: Electronic media in the lives of
infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.
Robertson, T. S., Rossiter, J. R., & Gleason, T. C. (1979). Children’s receptivity to proprietary
medicine advertising. Journal of Consumer Research,6(3), 247–255.
Robinson, T. N., Borzekowski, D. L., Matheson, D. M., & Kraemer, H. C. (2007). Effects of fast food
branding on young children’s taste preferences. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent
Medicine,161(8), 792–797.
Rust, L. (1993). Observations: Parents and children shopping together: A new approach to the
qualitative analysis of observational data. Journal of Advertising Research,33(4), 65 –70.
Schlosser, E. (2001). Fast food nation: The dark side of the all-American meal. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Schor, J. (2004). Born to buy: The commercialized child and the new consumer culture. New York:
Scribner.
Sheikh, A. A., & Moleski, L. M. (1977). Conflict in the family over commercials. Journal of
Communication,27(1), 152–157.
Statistical Package for Social Sciences. (2006). SPSS release 15.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS Corporation.
Valkenburg, P. M., & Cantor, J. (2001). The development of a child into a consumer. Applied
Developmental Psychology,22, 61–72.
Valkenburg, P. M., Krcmar, M., Peeters, A. L., & Marseille, N. M. (1999). Developing a scale to assess
three styles of television mediation: “Instructive mediation,” “restrictive mediation,” and
“social coviewing”. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media,43(1), 52 –66.
Wansink, B. (2006). Nutritional gatekeepers and the 72% solution. Journal of the American Dietetic
Association,106(9), 1324–1327.
Weber, K., Story, M., & Harnack, L. (2006). Internet food marketing strategies aimed at children
and adolescents: A content analysis of food and beverage brand web sites. Journal of the
American Dietetic Association,106(9), 1463–1466.
Holly K. M. Henry is a PhD candidate in the Department of Health, Behavior and Society at
the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (JHBSPH). Ms. Henry holds a
Masters in Health Sciences with a Certificate in Health Communication from JHBSPH
and a BA in International Relations and German from the Johns Hopkins University.
316 HOLLY K. M. HENRY AND DINA L. G. BORZEKOWSKI
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
Her research interests include obesity prevention, structural interventions, and the
intersection of children, media and health. E-mail: hhenry@jhsph.edu
Dina L. G. Borzekowski is an Associate Professor in the Department of Health, Behavior
and Society, John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Borzekowski’s
research focuses on how youth come to use media and how media impacts the
health of children and adolescents. She has published in journals of communication
and public health. Besides conducting research, Dr. Borzekowski takes pride in
teaching and advising students in Health Communication. E-mail:
dborzeko@jhsph.edu
THE NAG FACTOR 317
Downloaded by [Holly Henry] at 14:28 09 August 2011
