Parental Buying Behavior Concerning Children Advertising
Since the introduction of televisions into society in the early1950s, they have become a major part of modern homes. Televisions and other devises, such as phones and computers, act as important sources of entertainment and news for most people. The average American adult is estimated to spend about five hours watching TV (Calvert, 2008). Kids, on the other hand, devote more time glued to TV sets, tablets, and others forms of screens. Specifically children between 2 and five years old spend 36 hours a week in front of a TV (Calvert, 2008). These statistics do not go unnoticed by marketers as they use TVs and the internet to advertise to children and their parents. Therefore, this paper seeks to establish whether advertisements on different media for children actually influence the buying behavior of parents.
Advertisers recognize the potential in children, which is a reason for the $15 billion advertisers spend yearly to ensure kids are continuously bombarded with commercials. Children are estimated to watch 40,000 advertisements annually on televisions (Iyiola & Dirisu, 2014). This type of exposure alone is bound to illicit interest in whatever is being advertised. Children tend to demand more on personal products, foods, and beverages as compared to their parents. . This consumption translated into a direct spending of over $200 billion in 2000 by children aged 12 and below (Iyiola & Dirisu, 2014). In 2002, children aged between 4 -12 years old spent $30 billion, while in the following year, youths between 12 and 17 years old spent $115 billion (Iyiola & Dirisu, 2014). Additionally, the same year, 33 million teenagers between ages 12 and 19 are estimated to have spent about $103 weekly (Calvert, 2008). Therefore, these numbers are evidence that children are consumers with the ability to drive sales directly.Kids aged 12 and below do not have a direct source of income. Reports indicate that their parents supply 87% of a child’s spending (Calvert, 2008). That number significantly drops to 37% in teenagers who have a more of discretionary income (Calvert, 2008). Therefore, children profoundly influence the purchasing behavior of parents.
Furthermore, children are suggested to affect the spending habits of their entire extended families. Their brand requests for clothes, for example, have been reported to have more influence on parents than actual advertisements. Areas where children make the most decisions include vacation destinations, restaurants and in some cases the choice of family car. Studies show that different genders account for various influences. Girls, for instance, will have more impact on house hold products like clothes, fashion items, make-ups, utensils, and carpets, while boys are more persuasive in entertainment and technology related products like television brands, computers, and gaming consoles (Calvert, 2008). Thus, a family’s spending patterns are directly dictated by their children.
Children use pester power or nag factor to get parents to buy them things. This power is described by marketers as the ability to nag parents into purchasing products which they would otherwise not. On average, kids ask their parents 17 products a month, ; (Geuens, Mast & De Pelsmacker, 2002). There are several factors that determine the level of a child’s influence on a parent’s buying behavior, which can be broadly classified into the family characteristics and the product type. Concerning family characteristics, it is argued that a child’s consumer habit is a gross acquisition of the parent’s. Children are keen to watch how their parents spend their money, what they prefer and how they choose. Accordingly, parents have an early opportunity to mold their children accordingly through informational influence. However, parents are increasingly finding it difficult to do so, thereby, giving in to pester power. In families where kids have more autonomy on purchasing decisions, parents are easily swayed to buy products.
Besides, socio and concept-orientation have a significant impact on a child’s tendency to influence their parents to purchase what they may need (Geuens, Mast & De Pelsmacker, 2002). A high social adjustment means that the parents view children as their subordinates. Children in such a position are required to respect their parents, avoid disagreements, and suppress their opinion in matters that do not concern them. Moreover, parents with high of concept orientation teach their children to evaluate their alternatives before making decisions and confront them with disagreement on wrong decisions (Geuens, Mast & De Pelsmacker, 2002). Therefore, family characteristics like the parent’s spending habit, a child’s autonomy, socio- and concept-orientation determine whether children can influence buying routines.
As mentioned earlier, the product type is another classification of the reasons kids influence purchases. Here, some commercial reasons are included: product placement, the use of the product, celebrity endorsements, branded characters, and invasive promotion (Iyiola & Dirisu, 2014). Product placement is where characters in movies and shows strategically use products that both kids and their guardians watch. Placement extends to websites and online gaming with increased internet use. This technique exposes both parents and children to consumer familiarity. Parents are likely to buy products they feel familiar to when requested by their kids. For instance, both parents and children are equally exposed to various Apple products in almost every movie. On the other hand, the intended use of certain products determines how likely a child is going to influence the purchasing decision. Children are more apt to affect the choice of things they directly use as opposed to things used by the entire family. When children see celebrity figures, they look up to use products they automatically want to mirror it, which necessitates celebrity endorsement. Besides, athletes are regularly depicted on cereal boxes while other stars are used to push other products (Iyiola & Dirisu, 2014). As a parent, it is hard to deny a child something when they request it while referring to an inspirational figure, which amounts to a direct influence kids have on purchases as a result of adverts they view.
Besides, branded characters are instrumental in shaping the consumer behavior of children. Every parent knows their child’s favorite cartoon character or a relatively contemporary one, like SpongeBob or Dora (Iyiola & Dirisu, 2014). Parents are more susceptible to buy products branded with such figures, even when not asked by their kids, than other products since it brings a certain level of satisfaction to see their children happy. Lastly, invasive promotion strategies employed by various companies render parents defenseless against purchases (Arul & Vasudevan, 2016). The earlier listed reasons interact with this one at different levels to effectively generate sales. Approximately 80% of all advertising targeting children is based on four categories; toys, cereals, candies, and fast foods (Geuens, Mast & De Pelsmacker, 2002). Companies combine these in one way or another and call them offers or promotions, thus, invasively targeting children’s perceptivity. McDonald’s, for instance, had happy meals where they gave out a Smurf character in July 2002. In such a situation, the parent has little choice, but to succumb to the pester power.
Society can also be a reason why parents give in to their children’s demands. Much pressure is put on both children and caregivers to conform to social trends, influencing their buying behavior (Arul & Vasudevan, 2016). For example, if a particular pair of shoes is trending and all the kids in school have them, then the parent may be forced to buy them. However, societal pressure affects different age groups differently; for example, millennials are characterized by individualism in their consumer nature (Priya, Baisya & Sharma, 2010). Consequently, peer pressure ends up influencing the buying behavior of the child.
In summary, the availability of televisions in homes have made children influence the buying behavior of their parents through different advertisements they watch. Moreover, with improvement in technology, mobile phones and other screens have also provided a platform for companies to advertise products. As such, given their influence on buying behaviors of parents, they end up spending on products their children see on commercials. The influence of advertisements on the buying patterns of their parents is entirely based on their pester power. The reasons they can do so are classified into two large groups, namely the nature of the family and that of the product. Under family aspect, a parent’s spending habit, the autonomy given to the child, and socio- and concept orientation sway the caregiver into buying things. Under product nature, product placement, product use, celebrity endorsement, character branding, and invasive promotion aid the child in influencing the parent’s choice of consumption decisions. Finally, the society has some level of control in the likelihood of the parent’s response to a child’s request. As such, companies should consider the use of appealing adverts that help influence children and their parents to increase purchases for products.
References
Arul, M., & Vasudevan, V. (2016). Influence of children on parent’s buying behavior. The Cost and Management, 44(1). Retrieved from http://www.icmab.org.bd/images/stories/journal/2016/3.Influence%20of%20Children.pdf
Calvert, S. L. (2008). Children as consumers: Advertising and marketing. Future of Children, 18(1), 205-234. Retrieved from https://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/docs/18_01_09.pdf
Geuens, M., Mast, G., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2002). Children’s Influence on Family Purchase behavior: The role of family structure. Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 130-135. Retrieved from http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/11780/volumes/ap05/AP-05
Iyiola,O., & Dirisu, J. (2014). Children advertisements and their effects on family purchasing behavior: a study of Cannanland, Ota Nigeria. Global journal of commerce & management perspective, 3(2), 9-17. Retrieved from http://covenantuniversity.edu.ng/content/download/23604/160102/file/ADVERTISEMENTS-vol-3-2-gjcmp-14204.pdf
Priya, P., Baisya, R. K. &Sharma, S. (2010). Marketing Intelligence & Planning. Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, 28(2), 151-169. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/02634501011029664
