MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157508217 · doi:10.1017/s0007114509220848

Changes in food advertisements during ‘prime-time’ television from 1991 to 2006 in the UK and Canada

2009· article· en· W2157508217 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean Adams, Kathleen Hennessy‐Priest, Sigrún Ingimarsdóttir, Judy Sheeshka, Truls Østbye, Martin White

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal Of Nutrition · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNewcastle University
KeywordsPrime timeAdvertisingPrime (order theory)Food scienceBusinessBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Food advertisements on mainstream television have received less research attention than those on children's television. Little is known about how television food advertisements vary internationally or if there have been changes over recent years. We describe food-related television advertisements and the nutrient content of foods advertised during prime-time television in Ontario, Canada and the UK in 1991 and 2006. Information on what advertisements were broadcast were obtained from video recordings and audience research bureaux. Data on nutrient content of foods advertised were obtained from manufacturers and standard food tables. The proportion of advertisements that were food related decreased between 1991 and 2006 in both countries. The frequency of food-related advertisements was relatively constant in Canada but decreased between 1991 and 2006 in the UK. In 1991, advertisements for beverages and meals predominated in both countries. By 2006, food-related advertisements in Canada were dominated by meals and restaurants. In the UK advertisements for food stores and beverages predominated. The 'TV diet' in Canada in 1991 was relatively high in fat, high in alcohol and low in fibre, compared to current recommendations. By 2006, this had changed to high in fat and sodium and low in fibre. The 'TV diet' in the UK in 1991 was high in fat, sodium, sugar and alcohol and low in fibre compared to current recommendations. By 2006, the UK 'TV diet' was high in sodium, sugar and alcohol and low in fibre. Foods advertised on 'prime-time' television do not reflect a healthful diet.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal Of NutritionSame topicCulinary Culture and TourismFrench-language works237,207