Choi Hojoon, Reid Leonard N
Jack J. Valenti School of Communication, University of Houston, 101 Communications Building, Houston, TX 77204-3302, USA.
Department of Advertising and Public Relations, Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, 120 Hooper Street, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Appetite. 2014 Oct;81:218-24. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.06.020. Epub 2014 Jun 26.
Considerable knowledge on food advertising has been generated by research on consumers' psychological reactions to food advertising messaging using either students or nonstudents as subjects. Building on past research, this article investigates the methodological question of whether students are appropriate surrogates for nonstudents in food advertising studies. Following exposure to print advertisements featuring healthy and unhealthy foods with two different nutrient attribute-based message appeals, student and nonstudent subjects were asked to complete five standard evaluative response measures to the food ads: claim believability, attitude-toward-the ad, attitude-toward-the-product, attitude-toward-the-brand, and purchase intention. Among the findings, students were found to react differently and more negatively to identical food advertisements than nonstudents. Overall, the message sent to health communication researchers, policy officials, and practicing professionals is - unless certain criteria are satisfied - students should be considered inadequate subjects to represent all age groups of the general population in food advertising research. Thus, conclusions drawn from student-based research about advertising processing and effects should be questioned and broad generalizations avoided.
通过以学生或非学生为研究对象，对消费者对食品广告信息的心理反应进行研究，已经产生了大量关于食品广告的知识。在以往研究的基础上，本文探讨了在食品广告研究中，学生是否适合作为非学生的替代对象这一方法论问题。在接触了以两种基于营养属性的不同信息诉求展示健康和不健康食品的平面广告后，要求学生和非学生研究对象完成对食品广告的五项标准评估反应指标：宣称可信度、对广告的态度、对产品的态度、对品牌的态度以及购买意愿。研究结果发现，与非学生相比，学生对相同的食品广告反应不同，且更为负面。总体而言，传达给健康传播研究人员、政策官员和从业专业人员的信息是——除非满足某些标准——否则在食品广告研究中，应认为学生不足以代表普通人群的所有年龄组。因此，基于学生的研究得出的关于广告处理和效果的结论应受到质疑，避免进行宽泛的概括。
