Kristina M Jackson1, Bruce D Bartholow2. 1. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 2. Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evidence increasingly suggests that alcohol marketing plays a significant role in facilitating underage drinking. This article presents a review of empirical studies and relevant theoretical models proposing plausible psychological mechanisms or processes responsible for associations between alcohol-related marketing and youth drinking. METHOD: We review key psychological processes pertaining to cognitive mechanisms and social cognitive models that operate at the individual or intrapersonal level (attitude formation, expectancies) and the social or interpersonal level (personal identity, social identity, social norms). We use dominant psychological and media theories to support our statements of putative causal inferences, including the Message Interpretation Processing Model, Prototype Willingness Model, and Reinforcing Spirals Model. RESULTS: Based on the evidence, we propose an integrated conceptual model that depicts relevant psychological processes as they work together in a complex chain of influence, and we highlight those constructs that have received the greatest support in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence to date suggests that perceptions of others' behaviors and attitudes in relation to alcohol (social norms) may be a more potent driver of youth drinking than evaluations of drinking outcomes (expectancies). Considerably more research--especially experimental research--is needed to understand the extent to which theoretically relevant psychological processes have unique effects on adolescent and young adult drinking behavior, with the ultimate goal of identifying modifiable intervention targets to produce reductions in the initiation and maintenance of underage alcohol use.
OBJECTIVE: Evidence increasingly suggests that alcohol marketing plays a significant role in facilitating underage drinking. This article presents a review of empirical studies and relevant theoretical models proposing plausible psychological mechanisms or processes responsible for associations between alcohol-related marketing and youth drinking. METHOD: We review key psychological processes pertaining to cognitive mechanisms and social cognitive models that operate at the individual or intrapersonal level (attitude formation, expectancies) and the social or interpersonal level (personal identity, social identity, social norms). We use dominant psychological and media theories to support our statements of putative causal inferences, including the Message Interpretation Processing Model, Prototype Willingness Model, and Reinforcing Spirals Model. RESULTS: Based on the evidence, we propose an integrated conceptual model that depicts relevant psychological processes as they work together in a complex chain of influence, and we highlight those constructs that have received the greatest support in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence to date suggests that perceptions of others' behaviors and attitudes in relation to alcohol (social norms) may be a more potent driver of youth drinking than evaluations of drinking outcomes (expectancies). Considerably more research--especially experimental research--is needed to understand the extent to which theoretically relevant psychological processes have unique effects on adolescent and young adult drinking behavior, with the ultimate goal of identifying modifiable intervention targets to produce reductions in the initiation and maintenance of underage alcohol use.
Consumption of alcohol by underage individuals is a serious public health
concern. Underage drinkers consume large quantities per drinking episode (Schulenberg et al., 2017) and experience high
rates of alcohol-related negative consequences (e.g., car accidents; unintentional
injuries; Hingson et al., 2000; McGue et al., 2001). Moreover, alcohol consumption
has acute and prolonged neurobiological effects specific to the adolescent brain (Clark et al., 2008; Squeglia et al., 2009). The economic impact of underage drinking
is considerable, with estimates placing the cost as high as $62 billion annually in the
United States alone (Miller et al., 2006).Researchers and policy-makers have long suspected that alcohol marketing plays a role in
facilitating underage drinking. Despite alcohol marketing and advertising ostensibly
being aimed exclusively at adults (International
Alliance for Responsible Drinking, 2011; Jernigan, 2013), youth are, nevertheless, exposed at very high rates (Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth, 2012; International Alliance for Responsible Drinking,
2014). Most television advertising regulation related to alcohol is voluntary
and frequently violated (Noel et al., 2017a;
Russell et al., 2016); this is especially
true for ads with thematic content that is appealing to youth (e.g., sociability,
romance, individuality; Noel et al., 2017b).
Recent years have witnessed an explosion of new (digital) media marketing. Although
youth-oriented television alcohol advertising has declined over time (White et al., 2017), alcohol content on digital
media has increased (Jernigan et al., 2017b;
Winpenny et al., 2014). The alcohol industry
is aware of the effectiveness of both digital and traditional marketing strategies and
regularly integrates the two. For example, in 2012, “liking” the Corona
Lite Facebook page provided access to a smartphone app, allowing the viewer to upload a
photo to appear on a billboard in Times Square (Fitzsimmons, 2010). Advertised content on digital media marketing platforms
is poorly regulated (Barry et al., 2015; Erevik et al., 2018; Jernigan & Rushman, 2014) and age restrictions are easily
circumvented (Madden et al., 2013). Commensurate
with their heavy social media use (Critchlow et al.,
2016; Lin et al., 2012; Pew Research Center, 2018) and the ubiquity of
alcohol references in digital media, it is unsurprising that youth report high exposure
to new media alcohol content.There is reason to believe that marketing and advertising are particularly influential in
encouraging the drinking-related attitudes of adolescents and young or
“emerging” adults (i.e., ages 18–25 years). Their attitudes and
preferences are less firmly entrenched, making youth more susceptible to influence by
external factors (Glasman & Albarracín,
2006). Youth also are highly susceptible to the socializing influences of
peers and prevailing generational norms (Krosnick &
Alwin, 1989). They are preoccupied with personal image and identity (Giles & Maltby, 2004; Kroger, 2000) and respond favorably to ads appealing to lifestyle,
popular culture, and self-concept (McClure et al.,
2013). Moreover, the influences encountered during this period are believed
to have a lifelong impact, producing core attitudinal orientations that are unlikely to
change with age (Etchegaray et al., 2019; Osborne et al., 2011).Prior literature, including systematic reviews, as well as the other articles in this
special issue offer considerable evidence of a robust association between alcohol
marketing and exposure to alcohol content in the media and alcohol use by adolescents
and young adults (Anderson et al., 2009; Chung et al., 2010; Grube & Wallack, 1994; Koordeman et
al., 2012; McClure et al., 2016;
Ross et al., 2014; Smith & Foxcroft, 2009). Until recently studies focused on
traditional forms of marketing such as film, television, print, radio, and promotional
activities, but there is a recent shift to alcohol-related digital and social media
content, with support for associations between alcohol references on social media sites
and subsequent alcohol use and problems (Alhabash et al.,
2018; Barry et al., 2016; Boyle et al., 2016; Gordon et al., 2010; Moreno &
Whitehill, 2014). A recent meta-analysis found moderate effect sizes between
alcohol-related social media viewing and engagement (e.g., posting, liking, commenting)
and alcohol use and problems, with the association between drinking and marketing
stronger via digital and social media than via traditional media (Curtis et al., 2018).Much of the support for an association between alcohol-related marketing/media and youth
drinking is based on rigorous prospective cohort studies that adjust for potential
interpersonal-level (parent, peer influence) and individual-level (sociodemographics,
sensation seeking) confounders. These studies lend credence to the argument that
marketing exposure is a causal factor associated with increases in drinking behavior.
Firm conclusions about causality require rigorous, tightly controlled experiments;
however, these often are impracticable when studying underage drinking. The application
of strict epidemiological criteria—such as the Bradford Hill criteria (Hill, 1965) of strength of association,
consistency, temporality, and plausibility—to observational behavioral studies
can assist in understanding the strength of the evidence base for alcohol marketing as a
causal agent.This article presents a review of empirical studies and relevant theoretical models
proposing plausible psychological mechanisms or processes responsible for proposed
causal associations between alcohol-related marketing and media and youth drinking. The
purpose of this article is not to make the case for a causal connection between
marketing and media exposure and youth drinking per se but, rather, to consider the
extent to which a key Bradford Hill criterion—psychological
plausibility—is supported by the evidence and proposed theoretical mechanisms.
Figure 1 provides a conceptual model depicting
a number of psychological mechanisms posited in previous research to facilitate underage
alcohol use as a result of alcohol advertising and media exposure. The model represents
a synthesis of three theoretical models of media and marketing effects on alcohol
involvement, some of which share proposed mechanisms of influence, as well as additional
factors not specific to any of these models. These theoretical models—which
include the Message Interpretation Processing Model (Austin, 2007), Prototype Willingness Model (Gerrard et al., 2008), and Reinforcing Spirals Model (Slater, 2007)—posit directionality among component
processes, in particular the association from interpersonal processes (e.g., social
identity, social norms) to intrapersonal processes (e.g., expectancies) to behavioral
willingness and ultimately drinking behavior, and our synthesized model draws from these
conceptualizations.
Figure 1.
Conceptual model depicting theoretically and empirically driven putative
mechanisms of influence underlying the association between alcohol marketing and
media influences and youth alcohol involvement. Notes: The
model represents a synthesis of three theoretical models of media and marketing
effects on youth alcohol involvement: RSM = Reinforcing Spirals Model; PWM
= Prototype Willingness Model; MIP = Message Interpretation Processing
Model.
Conceptual model depicting theoretically and empirically driven putative
mechanisms of influence underlying the association between alcohol marketing and
media influences and youth alcohol involvement. Notes: The
model represents a synthesis of three theoretical models of media and marketing
effects on youth alcohol involvement: RSM = Reinforcing Spirals Model; PWM
= Prototype Willingness Model; MIP = Message Interpretation Processing
Model.To our knowledge, this article presents the first attempt to combine models of alcohol
marketing and media effects into a coherent—if complex—unifying framework.
Of course, the model depicted in Figure 1 is merely
conceptual and is not considered a formal theory. Its primary purpose is to illustrate
the complex chain of influence exerted by various factors that current theories have
proposed to explain the effects of alcohol advertising on consumption of alcohol by
youth.We initially review the literature for each of the psychological processes that have
received some degree of support from the literature—in some cases, demonstrating
prospective associations that are independent of sociodemographics and potentially
confounding variables such as peer alcohol use, impulsivity, and sensation seeking. We
first describe interpersonal mechanisms, which are most proximal to drinking behavior,
followed by a discussion of more distal intrapersonal mechanisms. We then explain how
these mechanisms fit together within the framework of several well-supported theoretical
models of health risk behavior, and last, we revisit our proposed conceptual model,
which serves to integrate content across all mechanisms and theories we considered.
Intrapersonal Mechanisms
Attitude formation
Attitudes are evaluations concerning an object or person (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993), represented as associations in
memory between a given object and a summary evaluation of it (Fazio, 1995; Jones et al., 2010; Stacy,
1997). Attitudes theoretically determine behavioral dispositions
toward objects, such that objects associated with favorable attitudes will be
approached or sought after, whereas objects associated with unfavorable
attitudes will be avoided. Arguably, the primary goal of advertising is to
encourage consumption (i.e., purchases) by promoting favorable attitudes toward
advertised products.
Exposure and favorability.
At the most basic level, the marketing of any product is about
exposure—placing the brand in view of consumers. This
“exposure approach” is grounded in the psychological construct
of familiarity and the notion that increased familiarity is associated with
more favorable evaluations (Zajonc,
1968; Zajonc & Markus,
1982). Considerable evidence supports the idea that more frequent
advertising is associated with increased brand familiarity and more
favorable evaluations (D’Souza &
Rao, 1995; Ha et al.,
2011; Rindfleisch & Inman,
1998), which, in theory, translates into stronger sales. The
effectiveness of this approach is suggested by the finding that young
peoples’ favorite alcohol brands are those with the largest
advertising expenditures (Tanski et al.,
2011).From a public health perspective, effects of exposure to alcohol advertising
in the underage segment are important mainly for their potential to affect
primary demand, or preferences, for alcoholic beverages as a product class
(Saffer, 1995). For this to
occur on a large scale, evaluative associations must generalize beyond a
particular brand. Considerable research suggests that effects of exposure on
increased liking can generalize from the exposed stimulus to others that are
conceptually related (Gordon & Holyoak,
1983; Manza et al., 1998;
Monahan et al., 2000; Rhodes et al., 2001). For example, in
one study, exposure to strangers’ faces increased liking for averaged
composites of those faces, even though the composites themselves had not
been seen previously (Rhodes et al.,
2001). By extension, frequent exposure to advertisements for
various beer brands is likely to produce more favorable evaluations of beer
as a general product class, beyond any specific brand.Moreover, the relationship between familiarity and favorability appears to
depend on additional factors. For example, consumers are more likely to
choose options they believe others will approve of, because such choices are
associated with easy rationales or justifications (Bettman et al., 1991). Rindfleisch and Inman (1998) tested the hypothesis that
consumers prefer better-known brands because purchasing those brands
reflects compliance with social norms (i.e., social desirability).
Participants led to believe that the most familiar brand was also the one
most people prefer were more likely to choose that brand over a less
familiar brand. In contrast, participants simply exposed to a particular
brand more often were no more likely to prefer it over a less-frequently
presented brand.
Misattribution of attitudes.
The association between familiarity and liking also can be influenced by the
mindset evoked by a given exposure. According to the Situated Inference
Model of priming (Loersch & Payne,
2011, 2014, 2016), incidental exposure to external
stimuli (i.e., priming) makes certain thoughts and feelings more accessible
in memory, and people often fail to recognize the (external) source of those
thoughts and feelings. That is, people mistakenly attribute mental content
made accessible by external stimuli to their own internal thought processes.
This can explain why most people believe that they are not influenced by
advertising—people tend to attribute their preferences to their own,
internally generated, reasoning rather than to persuasive external appeals
(Dempsey & Mitchell, 2010).
When this happens, people tend to rely on those thoughts and feelings to
answer implicit questions aroused by product exposure, such as what one
wants (i.e., a purchase intention) or even what kind of person one should
be.Alcohol advertisements routinely suggest these kinds of implicit questions to
underage consumers. For example, Bud Light recently used the tag line,
“Up for Whatever,” in its marketing and advertising. When
combined with actors portraying a lifestyle of leisure and spontaneity, this
campaign arguably arouses questions in consumers concerning their own
identities (i.e., “Am I the kind of person who is ‘up for
whatever’?”). When subsequently presented with an opportunity
to choose a beverage, a young person is likely to select Bud Light to the
extent that it has been associated with an identity she finds appealing
(i.e., being spontaneous). Given that Bud Light is also among the most
heavily promoted brands in the world (Tadena, 2014), this appeal to young people’s inherent
motivation to define themselves (Kroger,
2000) may serve as a powerful persuasive appeal. In such a
scenario, the consumer is likely to select an advertised product to the
extent that it provides an answer to an implicit question that she is not
aware deliberately arose from an external source.
Evaluative conditioning.
A close cousin to the exposure approach is one in which a product is
presented alongside some object, event, or person for which consumers have
an existing positive attitude. This practice is used in numerous ways,
ranging from simple co-occurrence (e.g., ensuring that a new product is
placed next to one that consumers already favor) to corporate sponsorship of
events (e.g., concerts) to celebrity endorsements. Psychologically, this
practice takes advantage of basic evaluative conditioning—the
phenomenon whereby favorability of one object is determined by its apparent
affiliation with another object (De Houwer
et al., 2001; Jones et al.,
2010).Alcohol advertisers routinely leverage evaluative conditioning to encourage
positive evaluations of their products. For example, when actors in alcohol
ads express obvious positive emotion, the audience need not infer that the
people in the ads are happy because of the alcohol they are consuming; the
mere co-occurrence of happy people with alcohol is sufficient for evaluative
conditioning to occur. Experimental research has demonstrated how evaluative
conditioning can work to shape drinking-related attitudes (Baeyens et al., 2001; Houben et al., 2010) and that exposure
to alcohol ads can automatically activate evaluations related to alcohol,
which then mediate the association between ad exposure and willingness to
drink (Goodall & Slater,
2010).
Expectancies
The extent to which individuals expect alcohol to produce effects they value
(e.g., relieving stress, making social gatherings more fun) is strongly
associated with their alcohol involvement (Goldman et al., 1991, 1999;
Janssen et al., 2018b; Schell et al., 2005). Even those with no
personal drinking experience hold alcohol-related expectancies that are
transmitted through indirect learning experiences, with media exposure being one
example (Smit et al., 2018). Media
portrayals present drinking in a favorable light, associating alcohol use with
relaxation and with social, sexual, and financial success; the hazards of
drinking are rarely shown (Stern & Morr,
2013). Television advertising features content appealing to youth,
with ads portraying camaraderie, romantic connection, and social positioning
(Padon et al., 2018). Moreover, some
alcohol brands are marketed as youth-oriented, portrayed with positive images
and emotions specifically designed to appeal to young audiences (Borzekowski et al., 2015). By fostering
more favorable beliefs about drinking and reducing its perceived harms,
marketing-and media-related alcohol content can facilitate alcohol use (Wills et al., 2009).However, the literature supporting alcohol expectancies as a channel for exposure
to influence drinking has produced mixed findings. There is cross-sectional
(De Graaf, 2013; Elmore et al., 2017; Ho et al., 2014; Morgenstern et al., 2011) and longitudinal (Collins et al., 2017; Dal
Cin et al., 2009; Osberg et al.,
2012) evidence supporting an effect of advertising and media alcohol
portrayals on outcome expectancies, even among alcohol-naïve youth (Morgenstern et al., 2011). Other research,
however, has failed to detect associations of alcohol marketing exposure with
null findings for both positive (De Graaf,
2013; Janssen et al., 2018a;
Martino et al., 2006; Wills et al., 2009) and negative alcohol
expectancies (Janssen et al., 2018a;
Kulick & Rosenberg, 2001; Osberg et al., 2012). Findings are mixed
even within the same study; for example, adolescents reported more negative
expectancies and fewer positive expectancies about the effects of alcohol after
viewing television programs portraying alcohol with negative consequences, but
the same was not true for positively portrayed content (De Graaf, 2013).Findings of studies examining proximal change in expectancies using laboratory
paradigms (Stautz et al., 2016) or
ecological momentary assessment designs also are mixed. Among college students,
exposure to positive movie portrayals of the effects of distilled spirits
(compared with exposure to a neutral movie) yielded more positive but also more
negative alcohol expectancies (Kulick &
Rosenberg, 2001). In contrast, adolescents’ positive
expectancies were unchanged after viewing a beer commercial compared with a
neutral (soft-drink) commercial or a beer commercial combined with anti-drinking
messages (Lipsitz et al., 1993). In vivo
exposure to alcohol advertising in middle school students failed to produce a
relative change in either positive or negative expectancies at the time of ad
exposure (Collins et al., 2016), although
a reduction in negative expectancies was evident when the adolescent reported
liking the ad (Collins et al., 2017).
Together, these ecological momentary assessment and experimental protocol
findings raise doubts that acute ad exposure produces more favorable alcohol
expectancies (Martino et al., 2016),
although repeated exposure may strengthen pro-alcohol beliefs (Collins et al., 2017).Formal tests of mediation of exposure effects by intrapersonal mechanisms are
rare, have been limited to tests of alcohol expectancies, and demonstrate mixed
findings. Studies with adolescents (Dal Cin et
al., 2009) and college freshmen (Osberg et al., 2012) have shown that exposure to alcohol content in
films influences consumption through positive and negative expectancies, with
negative expectancies also serving as a mediator for alcohol-related
consequences (Osberg et al., 2012).
However, this effect was not replicated when considering drinking initiation as
an outcome (Janssen et al., 2018a). One
study found that positive expectancies mediated the association between
advertising exposure and adolescents’ intention to drink (Fleming et al., 2004). One other study
detected significant mediation for intention to drink (for underage youth) and
drinking (for of-age youth) by positive expectancies but only when attention to
alcohol advertising was considered (Jang &
Frederick, 2012). Finally, a study examined associations between
exposure and adolescent heavy drinking across the full spectrum of marketing
involvement (having a favorite alcohol ad, movie alcohol brand exposure,
ownership of alcohol-branded merchandise), and failed to detect mediation by
expectancies (McClure et al., 2013).
Taken together, although a vast literature indicates a robust association
between expectancies about alcohol’s effects and drinking behavior, there
is only weak support for expectancies as a plausible mechanism for the influence
of alcohol marketing/media and youth drinking.In sum, a number of intrapersonal psychological processes plausibly link youth
drinking to alcohol advertising and marketing exposure. A major goal of
advertising is to get products into the minds of consumers, in the hope that
doing so will translate into product sales. The most straightforward mechanism
for translating advertisements and marketing into sales is simple
exposure—the more consumers are exposed to a brand or product class, the
more likely they are to like it (D’Souza
& Rao, 1995; Rindfleisch &
Inman, 1998) and to choose it in situations in which implicit
questions arise (e.g., What do I want?) (Loersch & Payne, 2011). An additional strategy for influencing
preferences is to affiliate products with objects or constructs people already
value. Although some research shows that positive responses to alcohol ads can
produce positive automatically activated attitudes toward drinking (Goodall & Slater, 2010), little work
has demonstrated a causal link between evaluative conditioning from
advertisements and actual consumption of alcohol (but see Houben et al., 2010). Last, numerous studies have tested
the idea that exposure to alcohol in media produces positive alcohol outcome
expectancies, but findings to date have been equivocal. At present there is
little reason to believe that alcohol advertising and marketing play a
significant role in young people’s alcohol expectancies.
Interpersonal Mechanisms
Adolescence is characterized by a preoccupation with personal and social identity
(Giles & Maltby, 2004; Kroger, 2000), making social-cognitive
mechanisms highly relevant to understanding marketing effects among young people.
Adolescents and young adults are very concerned with determining who they are and
how they fit in with their peers (Finkenauer et al.,
2002). Marketers and advertisers craft persuasive appeals likely designed
to engage the psychological processes underlying these natural tendencies.
Personal identity
The self-concept can be considered the association in memory of “the
self” with one or more attributes (Greenwald et al., 2002), including personality traits, values, and
preferences. The incorporation of attitudes into the self concept can be
understood through the construct of cognitive consistency. Psychological theory
boasts a long tradition of cognitive consistency models (Abelson et al., 1968; Festinger, 1957; Heider,
1958; Osgood & Tannenbaum,
1955), which generally posit that people are motivated to ensure that
their behaviors are consistent with their beliefs.A central goal of alcohol marketing approaches is the cultivation of a so-called
“drinker identity,” in which alcohol use is incorporated into the
self-concept (Casswell, 2004; McCreanor et al., 2005). Research suggests
that incorporation of a drinker identity plays a role in explaining effects of
alcohol marketing exposure on youth drinking. In their study of marketing
exposure and drinking among more than 1,700 U.S. adolescents and emerging
adults, McClure and colleagues (2013)
found that strength of drinker identity mediated the association between alcohol
marketing exposure and heavy drinking, even when accounting for the influence of
outcome expectancies and social norms.The idea that formation of a drinker identity can causally explain the effects of
alcohol marketing on youth drinking gains plausibility when examined through the
lens of Self Categorization Theory (Turner
& Reynolds, 2010, 2011).
Self-Categorization Theory describes the processes by which people form social
categories and their memberships in them; it can be used to understand two
common marketing and advertising practices. First, marketers strive to instill
identification with a behavior or lifestyle, such as that associated with
drinking. This form of identity is not specific to any brand but, rather,
reflects use of a type of commodity. Within Self-Categorization Theory, this
level of self-categorization is considered part of personal identity, in which
the individual identifies aspects of herself that align her with some
individuals (e.g., people who drink) and distinguish her from others (e.g.,
people who don’t) (Turner et al.,
2006).
Social identity
At the more specific level of brand identification, Self-Categorization Theory
also can be used to understand the allure of so-called brand communities,
comprising consumers who share a preference for a given brand (McAlexander et al., 2002). One of the
best-known and well-orchestrated brand communities is the Harley Owners Group
(HOG), established in 1983 by the Harley-Davidson motorcycle company. The HOG is
a key aspect of Harley-Davidson’s marketing efforts, promoting not only
the company’s products but also a lifestyle associated with motorcycling.
Sales of HOG-branded merchandise and organization of events for members help to
ensure a strong feeling of group cohesion among HOG members.The practice of cultivating brand communities such as the HOG takes advantage of
a broader level of self-categorization associated with social identity. The need
to belong to and feel valued by social groups is among the most powerful
motivating forces in human life (Baumeister
& Leary, 1995). According to Social Identity Theory (Tajfel &Turner, 1979), people
naturally view themselves and others as members of social categories. Moreover,
social categories are inherently evaluative in nature, in that people strive to
view the groups to which they belong (i.e., in-groups) positively, relative to
other groups (i.e., out-groups). Brand communities are social categories united
by loyalty to particular brands; but group membership also implies similarity
among members in numerous other domains, such as lifestyle choices and
personality, providing a deeper level of meaning to group membership.Some beer advertising campaigns have taken advantage of social identity
principles by affiliating brands with a particular lifestyle or social group.
For example, ads for Michelob Ultra attempt to align the brand with fitness and
athletics— the brand’s current slogan is, “Brewed for Those
who Go the Extra Mile”—and its ads routinely feature people
drinking Michelob Ultra after exercising or competing in sports. This campaign
appears geared toward resolving a kind of dissonance that might be experienced
by those who not only value fitness but also want to drink beer and, in so
doing, allows those individuals to maintain both a drinker identity and a
fitness identity.Clearly, fostering brand communities is in companies’ best interest for
building and maintaining a loyal customer base (Algesheimer et al., 2005). It is in alcoholic beverage
manufacturers’ interest to stimulate brand community membership among
adolescents (e.g., through ownership of branded merchandise), because doing so
ensures that preferences are in place when these consumers become of age to
purchase alcohol. One way in which alcoholic beverage manufacturers have a
presence in the lives of underage consumers is by affiliating themselves with
U.S. universities, where the majority of students are 18–20 years old.
Historically, manufacturers have used a number of indirect means to associate
themselves with universities, including advertising during college sports
broadcasts (Jernigan & Ross, 2010)
and sponsoring campus facilities (e.g., Anheuser-Busch Natural Resources
Building, University of Missouri; Coors Events Center, University of
Colorado).Recently, beer companies have taken a more direct approach, explicitly
affiliating their brands with universities through licensing agreements that
permit corporations to use trademarked university symbols and logos in marketing
campaigns. Bartholow, Loersch, and their colleagues have investigated the
consequences of this practice for the perceptions and attitudes of underage
student drinkers. In their initial studies, Loersch and Bartholow (2011) randomly assigned underage university
students to conditions in which they viewed either typical cans of Bud Light
beer, or so-called Bud Light “fan cans,” which display the colors
of the students’ university (Peltz,
2009). Across three experiments, Loersch and Bartholow found that,
compared with participants exposed to typical Bud Light cans, participants
exposed to fan cans were more likely to associate beer drinking with safety and
to believe that drinking and partying were less risky. This result is consistent
with research indicating that cues signaling in-group affiliation elicit
feelings of trust and safety (Brewer,
2008; Voci, 2006). Given that
students tend to identify strongly with their universities (Burke & Reitzes, 1981; Reitzes, 1981), this apparent transfer of
safety-related feelings to a product that arguably poses considerable risk in
this population (Perkins, 2002),
although unsettling, is not surprising.More recently, Bartholow and colleagues
(2018) tested the extent to which directly pairing beer logos with
trademarked university symbols enhances the incentive salience of the brands for
underage students. As predicted on the basis of both communication theory (Du Plessis, 2005) and Incentive
Sensitization Theory (Robinson & Berridge,
1993, 2000), beer logos
paired with symbols representing students’ universities (i.e., their
in-group) elicited larger brain responses than beer logos paired with other
universities’ symbols. This phenomenon was demonstrated using both
artificially contrived pairings of beer logos with university symbols, and in a
more naturalistic setting in which a beer brand was advertised during a
basketball game involving students’ own university.
Social norms
Indirect experiences such as modeling by parents, peers, and media
representations constitute a primary source of learning for youth. These social
influences are crucial to the development of normative beliefs concerning the
acceptability and prevalence of drinking, including the extent to which underage
drinking is accepted, or even encouraged, by those in one’s environment.
Perhaps the most widely accepted psychological model for the formation and
consequences of social norms is Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977). According to this perspective, youth
acquire their behavior through observation of social role models with whom they
identify.Ecological models highlight the powerful influence of social norms on adolescent
and young adult substance use behaviors (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, 1986;
Hawkins et al., 1992). Normative
beliefs about the prevalence of drinking (descriptive norms) and approval of
alcohol use (injunctive norms) are among the strongest risk factors for alcohol
use (D’Amico & McCarthy,
2006; Kelly et al., 2012; McAlaney et al., 2015). An emerging
literature suggests that marketing and media alcohol portrayals play a powerful
role in shaping drinking-related norms among youth. To date, the preponderance
of work on peer and friend norms has focused on exposure to alcohol in films
(Sargent et al., 2003), finding
strong prospective associations between alcohol exposure and estimates of both
close friend drinking (Gibbons et al.,
2010; Wills et al., 2009) and
alcohol use among peers (“kids your age”) (Dal Cin et al., 2009).Formal tests of mediation support both descriptive and injunctive social norms as
an important mechanism underlying the association between exposure to alcohol
content and alcohol use. Associations are observed across a range of stages of
alcohol involvement, age groups, controls, and study designs and include
exposure to alcohol content in social media (Nesi et al., 2017; Yang &
Zhao, 2018), popular music (Slater
& Henry, 2013), and films (Dal
Cin et al., 2009; Janssen et al.,
2018a; Osberg et al., 2012;
Wills et al., 2009). For example,
Janssen and colleagues (2018a) showed
that alcohol exposure in movies predicted changes in how adolescents perceive
alcohol use among their peers, which was a partial mechanism underlying the
effect of movie alcohol exposure on subsequent drinking initiation. Likewise,
Osberg and colleagues (2012) found
both descriptive peer norms and injunctive friend norms for drinking to mediate
the association between exposure to films that glorified college drinking and
typical weekly drinking and drinking consequences. Consistent with the broader
literature, stronger effects were observed for friend (vs. peer) norms,
suggesting that movie alcohol exposure exerts its influence via perceptions of
alcohol use among friends but not peers more generally (Dal Cin et al., 2009).A major source of social influence is direct advertising from alcohol
manufacturers, which often includes product placement in the entertainment
media. Youth view messages in the mass media as entertainment, without the
skepticism reserved for advertising messages (Dal Cin et al., 2009). In the quest to develop identity, youth may
be particularly susceptible to prominent media figures who serve as influential
“super peers” (Brown et al.,
2005; Distefan et al., 2004;
Elmore et al., 2017). These models
provide information on norms and contexts for alcohol use and serve to socialize
youth attitudes about the prevalence and acceptability of underage drinking
(Anderson et al., 2009; Elmore et al., 2017; Sargent et al., 2006). In addition, social media sites
provide “virtual” peers, expanding the individual’s social
network and providing information about drinking norms beyond one’s
real-world peers (Scull et al., 2010).
Portrayals of drinking in marketing and the media increase its perceived
normativeness in the broader culture, thereby contributing to overestimation of
peer alcohol use and approval of use.The power of social norms can also explain the effectiveness of the so-called
“viral marketing” phenomenon in digital media (Jernigan & Rushman, 2014; Jernigan et al., 2017a). Viral marketing
leverages peer-to-peer transmissions in which viewers become active agents in
product promotion (Alhabash et al., 2015).
Users interact with social media sites through liking, sharing, retweeting,
following, posting comments, or posting branded commercial messages and photos
of products (either commercial or user generated). When users share content
generated by alcohol manufacturers with their friends, they serve not only to
redistribute commercial messages to potential customers (Jernigan & Rushman, 2014; Winpenny et al., 2014) but also to communicate and
strengthen alcohol-related norms, which then drive subsequent drinking
behavior.Unlike traditional mass media, social media includes both industry-generated and
user-generated content. The latter involves both user-generated branding, in
which individuals promote their own sense of brand meaning (Arnhold, 2010; Griffiths & Casswell, 2010; Nicholls, 2012), and user-created alcohol content, in
which individuals promote alcohol consumption independent of brand influence
(Moreno et al., 2012; Morgan et al., 2010; Ridout et al., 2012). These activities often blend
seamlessly with industry-generated content, making them difficult to distinguish
(Brodmerkel & Carah, 2013). When
the message source is peers and friends rather than the alcohol industry,
pro-alcohol messages are seen as more authentic. Moreover, the large public
audience typical of digital media produces a multiplier effect, increasing
advertising effectiveness (Lyons et al.,
2014; McCreanor et al.,
2008). These factors make viral marketing extremely powerful yet less
controllable than traditional marketing. Consumers are encouraged to engage with
digital marketing, for example, by uploading photos of themselves drinking
(Atkinson et al., 2014; Nicholls, 2012). Given that social media
platforms lack adequate mechanisms for barring underage visitors, viral
marketing has the potential to assimilate youth culture, even among
alcohol-naive youth.Experimental manipulations of exposure to alcohol-related content on fabricated
social network profiles yield inflated perceptions of descriptive peer drinking
norms. In a seminal study that manipulated descriptive norms for peer drinking
through Facebook profiles, more favorable images of drinkers, positive attitudes
toward use, and greater willingness to use were reported after viewing pages
portraying alcohol consumption (vs. no consumption; Litt & Stock, 2011). A related study documented
higher estimates of college student drinking subsequent to viewing a Facebook
user profile containing alcohol-related photos and comments (Fournier et al., 2013). In addition, a
recent study examined in vivo exposure to alcohol advertising using innovative
ecological momentary assessment methods and found that alcohol use was perceived
as more normative among both same-grade students and teenagers in general during
times of exposure, which was predominately through outdoor and television
advertisements (Collins et al., 2016;
Martino et al., 2016, 2018). Moreover, these ad-induced changes
in normative beliefs decayed at a slower rate than average time to re-exposure
(Martino et al., 2018).The evidence gathered from observational and experimental studies described above
demonstrates that alcohol-related marketing and media content clearly has
powerful effects on (mis)perceptions of peer alcohol use, supporting the
plausibility of the idea that exposure to such content alters youth behavior
through well-known psychological processes. Given that psychological theories
such as Social Learning Theory posit within-person mechanisms, event-based
correlational studies and tightly controlled experimental studies such as those
reviewed above as well as rigorous evaluation of mechanisms within prospective
studies are crucial for making inferences about within-person mechanisms of
influence and, ultimately, for building a case for the psychological
plausibility of social norms as a mechanism through which exposure to alcohol
content can increase risk for underage drinking.
Theoretical Models
Message Interpretation Processing Model
The Message Interpretation Processing Model (Austin, 2007; Austin & Meili,
1994) holds that the way individuals interpret advertising content is
as important as the exposure itself in explaining its effectiveness (Grube & Wallack, 1994). According to
the Message Interpretation Processing Model, young people evaluate media
messages using a combination of logic (i.e., whether the information conveyed in
the message squares with their understanding of reality) and affective
reactions. If persuasive messages are judged to be illogical, they will be
rejected and have little influence over behavior. However, if not rejected,
messages with some degree of similarity (i.e., messages that reflect the
individual’s normative personal experience) are said to elicit varying
degrees of identification. To the extent that advertisements portray alcohol
use—and alcohol users—in a positive light (Grube, 1993, 2004),
identification with alcohol portrayals can lead to the development of positive
expectancies and, ultimately, alcohol use (McClure et al., 2013). Interpretation of alcohol-related media
messages appears to influence normative perceptions as well. High school
students who rated such messages as accurately portraying teens’ lives
estimated greater alcohol use among kids their age, and perceptions that
alcohol-related media messages portray teens similar to themselves were
associated with greater estimates of the social acceptability of alcohol-using
peers (Elmore et al., 2017).An important construct related to message interpretation is marketing
receptivity, or the extent to which an individual’s thoughts, feelings,
and behaviors are influenced by persuasive appeals (Pierce et al., 1998). Initially operationalized for
tobacco marketing (Pierce et al., 1998),
this concept has been applied to alcohol marketing research (Henriksen et al., 2008; McClure et al., 2013; Unger et al., 2003). In a seminal model
proposed by McClure and colleagues, marketing receptivity is portrayed as a
sequence of steps, each representing greater involvement with and influence from
marketing (McClure et al., 2013).
Initial steps (“low receptivity”) are characterized by brand
awareness and recognition, intermediate steps (“moderate
receptivity”) are associated with endorsement of favored ads or marketing
campaigns, and final steps (“high receptivity”) are evident
through owning and/or displaying alcohol-branded merchandise such as clothing.
These continuous stages of marketing receptivity are sequentially and
reciprocally linked to the progression of alcohol use spanning initiation
through heavy drinking, with greater engagement in marketing corresponding to
heavier stages of drinking (McClure et al.,
2013; Tanski et al., 2015).
Moreover, this model supports marketing-specific cognitions (drinker identity,
favorite alcohol brand), but not alcohol-specific cognitions (expectancies,
social norms), as mediators of the association between alcohol marketing and
drinking. Earlier work by McClure and colleagues demonstrated that ownership of
alcohol-branded merchandise, a marker of advertising receptivity that reflects
both exposure and positive affective reaction to the message, was in fact
associated with drinking initiation (McClure et
al., 2006) and heavy drinking (McClure et al., 2006, 2009)
to a greater extent than more passive exposure such as movie alcohol brand
content (McClure et al., 2006). These
studies controlled for a broad range of potential confounders shown to be
associated with both alcohol-branded merchandise ownership and alcohol
involvement, including personality factors such as sensation seeking, social
influences such as peer drinking and involvement in extracurricular activities,
perceived alcohol availability in the home, parenting style, and parental
drinking, suggesting it is not simply an aspect of the child or his/her
environment that accounts for the relationship between receptivity to marketing
and youth drinking. Clearly, additional research on this topic is warranted.
Prototype Willingness Model
The cognitive mechanisms reviewed above include alcohol-related attitudes and
formation of alcohol-related expectancies. Two additional cognitive mechanisms
proposed to underlie the effect of exposure to alcohol content on youth alcohol
use are drinker prototypes and behavioral willingness, both of which are
described in the Prototype Willingness Model. This model focuses on the
cognitions that mediate the effects of environmental and social factors on
risk-taking behaviors, with more favorable images of the typical person their
age (prototype) increasing willingness to engage in a risky behavior. Favorable
norms lead to more favorable perceptions of a risk-taker’s image and
greater willingness and intentions to perform a risky behavior (Dal Cin et al., 2009; Gerrard et al., 2008). Perceived drinking norms have been
shown to be associated with greater willingness to engage in alcohol use (Blanton et al., 1997; Gibbons et al., 1995, 2010; Janssen et al., 2018a;
Litt & Stock, 2011; Pomery et al., 2005), more favorable
drinker prototypes (Blanton et al., 1997;
Litt & Stock, 2011; Martino et al., 2016), and lower perceived
vulnerability to the consequences of drinking (Gerrard et al., 2008). Injunctive (as opposed to descriptive) norms
may be particularly predictive of drinker prototypes, because the qualities
associated with the typical drinker may include tacit measures of perceived
social approval, such as popularity or coolness (Elmore et al., 2017).
Reinforcing Spirals Model
The models reviewed thus far assume a unidirectional influence of marketing and
media on cognitions and behavior. Slater
(2007) proposed the Reinforcing Spirals Model, which posits that
media selectivity and effects are dynamic, bidirectional, mutually influential
processes. That is, exposure to alcohol content may encourage youth to engage in
alcohol use, which then could increase their propensity to seek out media that
positively portray and encourage alcohol use. Pro-alcohol media content
essentially reinforces the adolescent’s emerging social identity as a
drinker, leading them to continue their alcohol involvement and seek out
additional alcohol content. Bidirectional, prospective (1year) associations
between alcohol-related media content and adolescent drinking have been
observed, although the pathway from media exposure to alcohol use is stronger
than the converse (Tucker et al., 2013).
Associations between exposure to alcohol content and peer norms may be the
result of selection (youth who affiliate with peers favoring drinking may seek
out media with alcohol content) as well as socialization (viewing alcohol
content may make youth more vulnerable to social influence) (Gibbons et al., 2010).However, a recent study found that viewing alcohol content in films was
associated with changes in perceived (descriptive and injunctive) norms but
failed to find evidence for the converse, suggesting that youth are not
necessarily seeking out alcohol content as a function of associating with
friends and peers with alcohol-permissive beliefs (Janssen et al., 2018a). Future work using multivariate
modeling of multiwave data within the Reinforcing Spirals Model framework could
provide important information about temporality and ultimately contribute to a
basis for causality in the alcohol marketing–youth drinking link.
Conclusions
The purpose of this review was to consider the psychological plausibility of
several mechanisms that have been proposed to support a causal effect of alcohol
advertising on youth drinking. Psychological plausibility is but one criterion
posited by formal systems of evaluation to be important for establishing causal
relations among constructs. Thus, it was not the intention of this article to
provide any kind of definitive resolution to the question of whether alcohol
advertising and marketing cause underage drinking. Because our article is theory
driven rather than a formal systematic review of the literature reporting
associations among psychological risk factors, alcohol marketing exposure, and
youth drinking, this report is somewhat limited in scope. Nevertheless, some
broad conclusions are warranted on the basis of the research reviewed here.It bears repeating that it is the intention of advertising and marketing to
instill positive evaluations of advertised products, thereby encouraging
intentions to purchase and ultimately consume or use those products (Wood, 2009). Advertisers and marketers
routinely leverage evidence generated in basic psychological research (e.g., on
attitude formation and consumer behavior) to design campaigns intended to
achieve those ends. Thus, it should come as no surprise that young
people’s alcohol-related attitudes and behaviors are influenced by
exposure to alcohol advertising and media content.The evidence reviewed here leads us to conclude that exposure to alcohol
advertising and media content influences a host of psychological processes, some
operating at the individual or intrapersonal level (familiarity, attitude
formation, evaluative conditioning, expectancies) and others at the social or
interpersonal level (individual and group identification, social norms), and
that changes in these processes affect the likelihood that adolescents will
initiate and maintain alcohol involvement. Moreover, in some cases there is
evidence for a reciprocal relationship, such that alcohol involvement influences
preferences for or likelihood of exposure to alcohol-related media content.
These factors work together in a complex chain of influence, as depicted in the
conceptual model shown in Figure 1. The
figure depicts associations for which at least some empirical evidence exists in
the published literature, with stronger evidence represented in bolded paths and
lack of evidence (either the result of null findings or because these
associations have yet to be tested in the literature) shown in lighter arrows.
Note, too, that this model is not meant to be comprehensive; there likely are
additional associations among various elements that are not depicted here (e.g.,
reciprocal effects between social identification and social norms, between
expectancies and other cognitive mechanisms).Individual psychological theories predict effects of marketing exposure on
specific outcomes depicted in the model (e.g., increasing personal and social
identification with drinking, forming positive expectancies regarding
alcohol’s effects), and numerous empirical observations support links
between those outcomes and drinking-related behaviors. Broader, integrated
models posit connections among specific mediating variables; these are
represented in our model by colored outlines and pathways. The extant literature
provides the most consistent support for social norms as a mediator. In
contrast, support for expectancies as a mediator is less robust. That is,
perceptions of others’ behaviors and attitudes in relation to alcohol may
be a more potent driver of drinking behavior than are individual personal
evaluations of drinking outcomes. This conclusion is consistent with
observations that advertisements communicate more about who you are, or who you
could be, if you consume a specific brand of alcohol than about what might
result if you drink alcohol (Martino et al.,
2016).It is important to recognize that the literature reviewed above is focused on
Western cultures, predominately studies from the United States and northern
Europe. There is a gap in the field with regard to the association between
exposure to alcohol marketing and youth drinking, and the applicability of the
conceptual model, for non-Western cultures and low and middle income countries,
many of whom have recently been targeted by alcohol corporations as emerging
alcohol markets (Jernigan & Babor,
2015; Jiang et al., 2017).
Themes that appeal to underage youth such as camaraderie and celebrity models
are evident in alcohol marketing in Southeast Asia (Lee et al., 2012) and Africa (Jernigan & Babor, 2015). Non-Western youth are exposed
to alcohol-related advertising through the mass media and international
sponsorship of sports events (Jernigan,
2010; Jernigan & Babor,
2015; Pinsky et al., 2017;
World Health Organization, 2006) and
through social media (Kaewpramkusol et al.,
2019). Little empirical research has examined the association between
alcohol-related marketing and youth drinking in non-Western countries, although
two recent longitudinal studies conducted with Thai adolescents have shown
greater alcohol initiation following exposure to alcohol media (TV, films,
magazine/newspaper, billboard, and Internet) (Chang et al., 2016) and television alcohol advertisements (Chen et al., 2017).For the most part, the pathways in the conceptual model have not been tested in
non-Western cultures. Qualitative work has supported the roles of brand
familiarity and favorability (Kaewpramkusol et
al., 2019; Pinsky et al.,
2017) and personal identity (Dumbili
& Williams, 2017) in the marketing–alcohol link.
Interestingly, although the Western studies reviewed above showed tenuous
support for alcohol expectancies as a pathway, there does seem to be support for
expectancies as a pathway in non-Western cultures. A study of Thai adolescents
showed that time spent watching television was associated with a subsequent
increase in positive alcohol expectancies, especially relaxation and tension
reduction, and a decrease in negative alcohol expectancies, presumably as a
result of greater exposure to televised alcohol ads (Chen et al., 2017). Young people in Nigeria associated
recreational drinking with Western media images portraying alcohol with themes
of successes and wealth more so than local media images, which contained
negative alcohol portrayals (Dumbili &
Henderson, 2017). It is possible that Western alcohol marketing and
media exposure are more influential in developing countries without a history of
alcohol advertising and integrated marketing. Indeed, holding a more Western
cultural orientation increases the likelihood of drinking in adolescents and
this association is mediated through the expectancies about the effects of
alcohol (Shell et al., 2010). At the
same time, the phenomenon of viral marketing may be less prominent in cultures
with lower tolerance for free speech and freedom to express views, including on
social media. We encourage future research on global alcohol marketing to attend
to both common and culturally-specific influences underlying alcohol marketing
influences on youth drinking.Recommending policy changes to the alcohol industry is unlikely to be successful
in the current environment, which emphasizes self-regulation. However, as
evidence accumulates regarding the association between alcohol marketing and
underage drinking, it is possible to reach scientific consensus about whether
that relationship is causal. A statement of causality could be the basis for a
more muscular approach to government oversight. In the meantime, it is crucial
that researchers continue to identify modifiable targets of intervention.
Reducing misperceptions of alcohol use and approval of use among important
social role models may serve to reduce drinking behavior directly as well as
indirectly by virtue of modifying ones’ cognitions related to
interpretation of media and marketing messages. Careful consideration of how
alcohol exposure is operationalized (marketing vs. entertainment media,
traditional vs. digital media, industry sponsored vs. user generated, in vivo
vs. cumulative exposure, simple dosage effects vs. stages of personal
involvement) is crucial for future research, as is precision regarding the
outcomes under investigation (intention, initiation, consumption, heavy use,
problems). Last, considerably more research is needed to understand the extent
to which theoretically relevant psychological processes identified in the
literature have unique effects on youth drinking outcomes (Dal Cin et al., 2009; Janssen et al., 2018a; McClure et
al., 2013; Osberg et al.,
2012; Wills et al.,
2009).
Authors: Ilana Pinsky; Ana Regina Noto; Maria Carolina Botéquio de Moraes; Elaine Lucas Dos Santos; Robert Sparks; Kerry O'Brien Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 2.582
Authors: Brenda L Curtis; Samantha J Lookatch; Danielle E Ramo; James R McKay; Richard S Feinn; Henry R Kranzler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 3.455