MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2888980291

Exposure and Perceptions of Caffeinated Energy Drink Marketing among Youth and Young Adults in Canada

2018· dissertation· en· W2888980291 sur OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Danielle Wiggers

Notice bibliographique

RevueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2018
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCoffee research and impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
Mots-clésPerceptionAdvertisingMarketingPsychologyEnvironmental healthBusinessMedicineFood scienceChemistry
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Consumption of caffeinated energy drinks (CEDs) has become increasingly prevalent among youth and young adults, which is concerning given the association with adverse health effects and other risky behaviours. Health Canada does not recommend consumption of CEDs for use during sports, with alcohol, as well as by children. Accordingly, beverage companies must comply with regulations surrounding advertising and claims related to CEDs. There are several evidence gaps related to CED marketing: To date, very little research has been conducted on advertising exposure and perceptions, and no research has examined exposure to educational messages that warn about potential health risk of energy drinks. The current study had two primary objectives: 1) to evaluate exposure to energy drink marketing and educational messages that warn about the potential health risks of energy drinks; and 2) to examine perceptions of CED ads in association with sports and alcohol use, as well as target age groups. \n \nMETHODS: An online survey was conducted in 2015 with youth and young adults aged 12-24 years recruited from a national commercial online panel, consisting of two sub-studies. In Study 1, participants (n=2,023) were asked about their exposure to energy drink marketing via ten channels, and to educational messages that warn about the potential health risks of energy drinks. Regression models (negative binomial and logistic) examined correlates of exposure to marketing and educational messages. In Study 2, participants (n=2,010) completed three experiments in which they were randomized to view different CED advertisements for leading brands: 1) sports/party-themed ads, 2) sports-themed ad, and 3) party-themed ad, vs. control ‘product information’ ads for the same brands. For each ad, participants were asked about the perceived target age group, and if the ad promoted use of CEDs during sports and with alcohol. Logistic regression models were fitted to test for differences in outcomes between experimental conditions. Two-way interactions were also tested. \n \nRESULTS: In Study 1, over 80% of respondents reported ever seeing energy drink marketing through at least one channel, most commonly television (58.8%), posters or signs in a convenience or grocery store (48.5%), and online ads (45.7%). Respondents reported a mean of 3.4 marketing channels (SD=2.9) out of ten. Respondents aged 18-19 (vs. 12-14 and 15-17) and 20-24 (vs. 12-14 and 15-17) reported significantly more channels of exposure to marketing. Overall, 32% of respondents reporting ever seeing an educational message about energy drinks. The most frequently reported sources of exposure were at school (16.2%), online (15.0%), and on television (12.6%). Respondents aged 18-19 (vs. 12-14, 15-17 and 20-24) and 20-24 (vs. 15-17) were significantly more likely to report having seen an educational message. In Study 2, the majority of respondents reported that the energy drink ads across all themes targeted people their age. In experiment 1, both sports/party-themed ads were more likely to be perceived as promoting use of CEDs during sports (AOR=13.32; 95% CI 9.90, 17.91, and AOR=9.73; 95% CI 7.38, 12.81, respectively), and with alcohol (AOR=8.55; 95% CI 6.37, 11.48, and AOR=2.81; 95% CI 2.08, 3.78), compared to the control ad. There were also significant interactions between condition and sex (X2= 7.9, p=0.02), and condition and exposure to energy drink marketing channels (X2=124.3, p<0.001) in perceiving the ad as promoting use of CEDs during sports. In addition, there were significant interactions between condition and sex (X2=7.2, p=0.03), and condition and age group (X2=20.2, p=0.003) in perceiving the ad as promoting use of CEDs with alcohol. In experiment 2, the sports-themed ad was more likely to be perceived as promoting use of CEDs during sports (AOR=15.02; 95% CI 11.83, 19.08), but not with alcohol, compared to the control ad. There were also significant interactions between condition and sex (X2=12.8, p<0.001), condition and age group (X2=17.8, p<0.001), and condition and exposure to energy drink marketing channels (X2=13.4, p<0.001) in perceiving the ad as promoting use of CEDs during sports. In experiment 3, the party-themed ad was more likely to be perceived as promoting use of CEDs with alcohol (AOR=13.79; 95% CI 10.69, 17.78), but not during sports, compared to the control ad. There was also a significant interaction between condition and sex (X2=8.0, p=0.005) in perceiving the ad as promoting use of CEDs with alcohol. \n \nCONCLUSIONS: Exposure to energy drink marketing was common among youth and young adults and was significantly more prevalent than exposure to educational messages that warn about the potential health risks of energy drinks. In addition, ads from leading energy drink brands are perceived as targeting young people and encouraging energy drink use during sports and with alcohol, despite Canadian regulations prohibiting these marketing practices.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,016
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,103

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,194
Écart entre enseignants0,188 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2018
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Même sujetCoffee research and impactsTravaux en français237 207