Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
J Nutr Educ Behav. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 November 1.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC3175307

Adolescent weight status and receptivity to food TV advertisements

Anna M. Adachi-Mejia, PhD,1,2,3 Lisa A. Sutherland, PhD,1,2,3 Meghan R. Longacre, PhD,1,2 Michael L. Beach, MD, PhD,1,2,3,6 Linda Titus-Ernstoff, PhD,1,2,4,5 Jennifer J. Gibson, MS,2 and Madeline A. Dalton, PhD1,2,3,5


Food advertisements comprise a large proportion of television (TV) advertisements, accounting for 23% to 57% of all TV commercials, depending on the time of day and the channel.15 Content analyses of food advertisements reveal that most TV advertisements are for foods of minimal nutritional value.1, 511 Prior studies indicate that food advertisements are highly prevalent during child-targeted programming2, 4, 5, 9 suggesting that children may be highly exposed to TV advertising involving foods of minimal nutritional value. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has recommended that TV food advertisements targeted to youth include a greater proportion of healthier foods.12

Several studies have demonstrated a link between TV food advertisements and child food-related behavior, including increased requests, preferences, selection, and/or consumption of advertised foods.1316 Overall TV viewing time has been associated with increased caloric intake,17 decreased diet quality,18, 19 and child adiposity.12 One study estimated the hypothetical impact of a ban on food TV advertising on childhood obesity based upon the assumption that exposure to food advertisements are associated with the risk of obesity.20 However, no previous studies have assessed whether TV food advertisements influence the risk of obesity in children.

Applied advertising research has historically applied the following three steps associated with the communication/persuasion process: (1) exposure to the advertisement; (2) attending to the advertisement; (3) liking the advertisement.21 Therefore, having a preference for (having a “favorite”) a specific advertisement could be considered a measure of receptivity. Behavioral research studies have applied this paradigm to determine adolescent receptivity to health risk behaviors such as tobacco22, 23 and alcohol.24 These studies have demonstrated a clear link between receptivity to tobacco advertisements and smoking initiation22, 23 and alcohol advertisements and alcohol use.24

Reasoning that because most food TV advertisements are for foods of minimal nutritional value, and that because adolescent preferences for food advertisements over non-food advertisements could be considered an indicator of receptivity to food advertising, the hypothesis was that adolescent receptivity to food advertisements would be a predictor of adolescent overweight.


Participants and Recruitment

The data for the current study are from a longitudinal study investigating the association between parenting factors, movie viewing, and health behaviors in adolescents. The questionnaire data were collected through a baseline survey and a follow-up survey. The baseline survey included two components: (1) an in-school, self-administered written survey completed by students and (2) a telephone survey completed by the students and one of their parents. The follow-up telephone survey was completed by the students and the same parent. The study was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects at Dartmouth College (full review).

Students were recruited through New Hampshire and Vermont public schools. These schools were randomly selected from a list of all New Hampshire and Vermont schools containing grades 4 through 6 (N=559 schools), stratified by state and number of students enrolled. Twenty-six schools from 25 different communities were enrolled. Each participating school was offered a $500–$750 stipend. Most (72%, N=18) of the communities represented had less than 10,000 residents. In all but one school, passive consent was used, whereby parents received an advance letter informing them of the survey and instructing them to call the school if they did not want their child to participate. At one school, active consent was used whereby parents mailed in a signed consent form. For the telephone surveys, verbal parental consent and verbal child assent were obtained before surveying adolescents and parents by phone. The sample recruitment design and informed consent process has been described in more detail elsewhere.25

A total of 3,705 adolescents ages 9–12 years were enrolled in the baseline written survey (October 2002 through December 2003). Of these, 2,566 adolescents and one of their parents (94.6% of whom were mothers, step-mothers, or foster mothers) completed the baseline telephone survey on average 1.1 (sd = 2.7) months later. The follow-up survey was completed an average of 11 (sd=2.7) months later, by 2,431 adolescents and the same parents (March 2004 through April 2005). Adolescents and parents were surveyed separately. The baseline written survey, baseline telephone survey, and follow-up telephone survey each took approximately 30 minutes to complete.

For this analysis, 150 child-parent pairs were excluded for the following reasons: 25 nine-year olds and four 14-year olds were dropped because those age groups were not well represented, and 121 were dropped due to missing covariate data (missing data on parent income, parent education, having a TV in the bedroom) or for having weight status values that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention categorizes as “biologically implausible values.”26 Thus, the final sample for this analysis includes 2,281 adolescent/parent pairs.


Primary outcome: Adolescent overweight

The primary outcome for this study was adolescent overweight based on parental reports of their child's height and weight assessed at follow-up. Body-mass-index-for-age and gender (BMI) was calculated using the SAS program for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) growth charts.26 “Overweight” was defined as greater than the 85th percentile and “obese” as greater than the 95th percentile.27, 28

Primary exposure: Adolescent receptivity to food advertisements

The receptivity measure was based upon the persuasive communication theoretical framework, whereby greater receptivity to a product is indicated by having a favorite advertisement or willingness to use the product.21 This measure of receptivity has been used predominantly in tobacco and alcohol-related studies.22, 24, 29 Following the example of these published studies, moderate receptivity to advertisements was defined as having a favorite advertisement.22, 24, 29 Receptivity to food and non-food advertisements was determined during the follow-up telephone survey by asking adolescents the following open-ended questions, “What is your favorite television commercial?” and “What product is it advertising?” Interviewers recorded the responses verbatim. Responses ranged from one to a few words, such as, “McDonalds®” or “`McDonald's® with chicken strip” to a longer phrase describing the advertisement, such as, “McDonald's® commercial when they're playing basketball on rollerblades.” Answers to the open-ended questions were coded using inductive methods30 as follows: the first author reviewed the responses and coded them into one of two categories: food or non-food. She then further coded food advertisements into specific types of food as they emerged (e.g., beer, candy, milk). She then referred to published content analyses of food advertisements1, 2, 57, 3133 to apply a standardized naming convention of overall food categories. Sugar-sweetened

beverages (SSBs) were defined based upon previously published definitions: non-diet sodas, non-diet iced teas, punches, fruit drinks, lemonade, Kool-Aid®, sports drinks, and other sweetened drinks.34, 35 Fast food was defined according to the Institute of Medicine definition, which is described as, “any food designed for ready availability, use, or consumption and sold at eating establishments for quick availability or takeout”.12 Any mention of a brand name was also noted separately.

The overall food categories were:

  • beverages – sugar-sweetened (e.g., regular soda, sports drinks, Sunny Delight®, Ovaltine®), alcohol (e.g., beer, hard lemonade), coffee, juice, water;
  • breakfast foods – high sugar cereals/breakfast foods (e.g., Kellogg's® Frosted Flakes®, Pop Tarts®), low-sugar cereals/breakfast foods (e.g., Kellogg's® Corn Flakes®, Kellogg's® Eggo® Waffles);
  • chips and crackers (e.g., potato chips, Goldfish® Crackers);
  • dairy (e.g., milk, cheese, yogurt);
  • fast food restaurants (e.g., McDonald's®, Burger King®, SUBWAY®, Pizza Hut®, local pizza);
  • non-discernible (e.g., the respondent said, “food commercial” or “commercials about food”);
  • other (e.g. Splenda®, coffee cream, Velveeta®, sour cream);
  • other restaurants (e.g., Chili's Grill and Bar®, Applebee's®);
  • processed meats (e.g., hot dogs, bologna, SPAM®);
  • sweet snacks or desserts – candy (e.g., Starburst®, Skittles®, M&Ms®, chocolate, gum), other sweet snacks (e.g., cookies, ice cream, donuts);
  • unprocessed meats and nuts (hamburger, peanuts).

Food advertisements were classified as representing less healthy products if they primarily contained energy dense and/or nutrient poor food36 : sugar-sweetened beverages, alcoholic beverages, coffee, candy, sweet snacks or desserts, fast food restaurants, high sugar cereals/breakfast foods, processed meats, and chips and crackers.

The non-food advertisement category included a wide range of products and services ranging from airlines and amusement parks to electronic media, household products, services, station programming, and stores. It also included the response category of “none.”


A number of relevant covariates known to be related to adolescent overweight and adolescent television exposure were measured, including sociodemographics, adolescent physical activity, TV viewing frequency, and having a TV in the adolescent's bedroom.25 These measures have been used in previously published studies.25, 37 The specific measures used, sources of data (adolescent or parent surveys), and time of data acquisition (baseline or follow-up) are described below.


Adolescents reported their age and gender in the baseline survey, and in the follow-up survey they reported their date of birth (DOB). Age at follow-up was calculated using their DOB or was imputed based on their baseline age if DOB was not available. Parents reported their highest level of education and their annual household income in the baseline survey.

Adolescent physical activity

At follow-up, parents were asked, “Aside from physical education or gym at school, how often does <adolescent name> engage in physical activity: less than once a week, 1–3 times a week, 4–6 times a week, every day, don't know.” Responses were collapsed into a 3-category variable indicating whether adolescents engaged in physical activity 3 or less times/week, 4–6 times/week, or every day. None of the respondents responded “don't know.”

Media Exposure

Adolescents were asked in the baseline survey, “Do you usually watch TV or movies before school/after school/after supper?” Responses to these three questions were combined to indicate the number of TV watching sessions per day (range: 0–3). The presence of a TV in the bedroom was ascertained by asking adolescents in the baseline survey, “Do you have a TV in your bedroom that you can watch television or movies on?” (Yes/No).

Data Analysis

Categorical data were initially analyzed using Chi-square tests. Generalized Estimating Equation models were used, assuming a Poisson distribution and a log link and controlling for clustering by school, to model the relationship between identifying a food advertisement as their favorite and being overweight. Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from these models are presented. Data were analyzed using SAS (SAS version 9.1, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 2002–2003) and SPSS (SPSS version 16.0.1 for Windows, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, 2007).


Food advertisement receptivity

Of the 2281 adolescents, 1601 (70.2%) named some type of advertisement. Less than one-fifth named a food advertisement as their favorite (16.1%, N=367). Most of the food advertisements were for less healthy foods (89.6%, N=329 of 367 advertisements) (Table 1). The most common food brands named were McDonald's® (N=32), Pepsi® (N=29), and Budweiser®/Bud Light® (N=28).

Table 1
Adolescent food advertisement receptivity.

Adolescents were more likely to name a food advertisement if they were older, if their families had a higher household income, and if they did not have a TV in their bedroom (Table 2). Among adolescents who named a food advertisement, males were more likely to mention a beer advertisement compared to females (18.3%, N=35 versus 3.4%, N=6, respectively p<0.001). Females were more likely to mention a candy advertisement compared to males (21.3%, N=37 versus 5.8%, N=11, respectively, p<0.001) (data not shown).

Table 2
Food advertisement receptivity by adolescent characteristics (N=2281).

Adolescent overweight

About one-third of adolescents 35.9% (N=818) were overweight. Adolescents were more likely to be overweight if they were male, did less physical activity, watched more TV, had a TV in their bedroom, and if their parents had less education and a lower household income (Table 3).

Table 3
Food advertisement receptivity as a predictor of adolescent overweight. (RRs (95% CI) for adolescent BMI cutoff at the 85th percentile.)

Food advertisement receptivity and overweight status

Compared to non-overweight adolescents, overweight adolescents were significantly less likely to be receptive to food advertisements (unadjusted model; RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.65, 0.91) (Table 3). Accounting for clustering by school and adding the covariates of age and sex to the model did not change this relationship (RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.65, 0.91). The fully-adjusted model – which included school, age, sex, parent education, household income, physical activity, number of TV sessions watched, and having a TV in the bedroom – did not appreciably change the RR of adolescent risk of overweight (RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.70, 0.98). When assessing the same variables in relation to obesity (using a BMI cutoff at the 95th percentile), the fully-adjusted RR remained similar (RR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.99). In addition, there were no statistically significant interactions between food advertisement receptivity and sex, household income, physical activity, or having a TV in the bedroom in relation to overweight.


Not surprisingly, the types of food advertisements that adolescents mentioned were predominantly for less healthy food products. However, only a minority of adolescents named a food advertisement as their favorite. Contrary to what was predicted, adolescents who were receptive to food advertisements were less likely, rather than more likely, to be overweight.

Several possible explanations for finding an inverse association between food advertising receptivity and overweight exist. Perhaps youth with fewer risk factors for being overweight are the most likely to be receptive to food advertising. If adolescents with a healthy weight have more food restrictions in the home compared to overweight adolescents, those restrictions may make advertised foods seem more attractive. If some healthy-weight adolescents idealize food, they may be more likely to have an affinity for food advertisements. Studies have indicated that people with severe food deprivation (i.e., severe hypoglycemia, anorexia, chronic dietary restraint) attend to food more than those without, as demonstrated by studies examining preferential processing of food-related stimuli,38 and recall of food-related words.3941 Future research could investigate if similar cognitive processes would also occur in less extreme circumstances, and if these processes translate to receptivity to food advertising. Another possibility is that if the advertised foods are abundant in the homes of overweight adolescents, the advertisements for those foods would be less novel or attractive. Finally, messaging present in food advertisements such as healthful living or physical activity may be more attractive to healthy-weight adolescents. These are all areas for potential future research. Another line of research has shown that all children increased their food intake in response to exposure to food advertisements, but that obese and overweight children increase their food intake at a higher rate than normal weight children.42 Future research should investigate if this relationship is modified by exposure to advertisements for which children are highly receptive, and if, over the long-term, normal weight children eventually become overweight due to food advertising receptivity. It would also be helpful to uncover specific reasons behind normal versus overweight or obese adolescent's preferences for specific food advertisements.

This study adds to a growing body of literature which suggests that lower-risk youth are more likely to be vulnerable to some types of behavioral health-risk exposure compared to youth with higher risk factors. For example, several studies have shown that adolescents at low risk for smoking are the most vulnerable to the influence of tobacco exposure in movies.43, 44 45 Similarly, it could be that non-overweight adolescents are more susceptible to exposure to food TV advertisements.


This study was limited in that adolescent overweight was based on parent report of adolescent height and weight, rather than actual measurement, which may have introduced measurement error. Parental report of adolescent weight status has been used in other behavioral health studies and has been found to be accurate, with a greater tendency to underestimate rather than overestimate.46, 47 If parents of adolescents who cited food advertisements as their favorite underestimated their child's weight, it could explain some of the observed relationship. However, there is not a reason to believe that parents would have offered differential responses to their child's height and weight based on their child's receptivity to food advertisements. The sensitivity analysis using a BMI cutoff at the 95th percentile revealed consistent findings. Future studies are needed to confirm the finding that overweight adolescents are less receptive to food advertisements.

The analyses reported here are based on data collected for a longitudinal study investigating the association between parenting factors, movie viewing, and health behaviors in adolescents. The primary variables of interest, adolescent overweight and advertisement receptivity, along with physical activity, were measured at follow-up. Most of the covariates were measured at baseline – gender, parents' highest level of education, annual household income, media exposure, and having a TV in the bedroom. Although many of the covariates were collected at baseline, the primary exposure and outcome measures were both collected at follow-up. Another limitation is that measures of dietary intake were not assessed so the relationship between receptivity to food advertisements and dietary intake could not be determined. It is possible that the respondent's second favorite advertisement may have been a food advertisement. Finally, only those respondents who were moderately receptive to food advertisements were described. Those who did not name a favorite food advertisement may also have had some degree of receptivity.


Attracting non-overweight adolescents to food advertisements is an ideal strategy for advertisers, in that non-overweight adolescents are probably consuming healthier foods compared to their overweight peers.4850 A parallel strategy is cigarette advertising that entices non-smokers to begin smoking.22 Although a detailed content analysis of the advertisements adolescents mentioned was not conducted, some adolescents described physical activity themes in the food advertisements they mentioned. This observation is consistent with research that has demonstrated that many food advertisements contain physical activity messages.3 In 2005, the Ad Council Coalition for Healthy Children began an initiative promoting the message of healthy living, including physical activity, in corporate marketing.51 Whether the advertisements featured in this study were influenced by this messaging program is not known. If more athletically-minded adolescents are attracted to advertisements for unhealthy food because they feature positive messaging about physical activity, it raises the concern that they may be more inclined to purchase and consume those products over the long term. Future studies should carefully investigate the appropriateness of promoting physical activity messages in advertisements for less healthy foods.

Advertisements are ubiquitous to our lives. Multiple media streams increasingly reinforce messaging – food advertisements appear across different media forms to amplify the product exposure.52 For example, some TV advertisements encourage children to visit the product's website. Websites are interactive and sometimes include games or prizes for children to win. Schools offer food advertising both inside and outside buildings, such as on vending machines and athletic fields, as well as on materials used by students such as books.52 The more reinforcement that youth have to recall a product, the greater the likelihood it may influence them in the future. The IOM has recommended that researchers investigate the influence of food advertising by including not just television advertising, but other forms as well.12 Future studies should include exposure to other forms of advertisements, including movies, the internet, storefronts, billboards, vending machines, mailings, clothing gear, and school campuses. Another impact of advertising which may be more complicated to assess are advertisements that are embedded in TV shows and other forms of media both visually and as part of the script, because the lines between what is a show and what is an advertisement are blurred.53

In the same way that cigarette advertisements feature beautiful and glamorous models to promote cigarette smoking, healthy behaviors portrayed in food advertisements can be used to promote unhealthy foods. This study provides preliminary evidence that there should be concern about normal-weight adolescents being receptive to unhealthy food advertisements. Longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate whether consistent exposure to advertisements for unhealthy foods, particularly if they are promoted with healthy behaviors such as being physically active, influences adolescents' food choices, and ultimately their BMI, over the long term.


This study was funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute (CA-94273 and CA-108918). Dr. Adachi-Mejia was supported in part through a New Connections grant from the Healthy Eating Research program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Healthy Eating Research ID 63147). The funding agencies did not play a role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; nor in preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. Thank you to Mary Ann Greene, Aaron Brooke Jenkyn, Kristy M. Hendricks, Susan K. Martin, Aurora L. Matzkin, and the telephone interviewing team for their work on the study. Thank you also to the study participants, their parents, and their schools for participating in the survey administration process.

Sources of Funding: This study was funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute (CA-94273 and CA-108918) and from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Healthy Eating Research ID 63147).


Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Institutional Review Board: The study was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects at Dartmouth College.


1. Byrd-Bredbenner C, Grasso D. What is television trying to make children swallow?: content analysis of the nutrition information in prime-time advertisements. Journal of Nutrition Education. 2000;32:187–195.
2. Taras HL, Gage M. Advertised foods on children's television. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995 Jun;149(6):649–652. [PubMed]
3. Folta SC, Goldberg JP, Economos C, Bell R, Meltzer R. Food advertising targeted at school-age children: a content analysis. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2006 Jul–Aug;38(4):244–248. [PubMed]
4. Kotz K, Story M. Food advertisements during children's Saturday morning television programming: are they consistent with dietary recommendations? J Am Diet Assoc. 1994 Nov;94(11):1296–1300. [PubMed]
5. Dibb S, Harris L. A spoonful of sugar. Television food advertising aimed at children: an international comparative study. Consumers International; London, UK: 1996.
6. Harrison K, Marske AL. Nutritional content of foods advertised during the television programs children watch most. Am J Public Health. 2005 Sep;95(9):1568–1574. [PubMed]
7. Lewis MK, Hill AJ. Food advertising on British children's television: a content analysis and experimental study with nine-year olds. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1998 Mar;22(3):206–214. [PubMed]
8. Gamble M, Cotunga N. A quarter century of TV food advertising targeted at children. Am J Health Behav. 1999;23:261–267.
9. Kelly B, Smith B, King L, Flood V, Bauman A. Television food advertising to children: the extent and nature of exposure. Public Health Nutr. 2007 Mar 5;:1–7.
10. Gantz W, Schwartz N, Angelini J, Rideout V. Food for thought: Television food advertising to children in the United States. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; Menlo Park, CA: Mar, 2007.
11. Batada A, Seitz MD, Wootan MG, Story M. Nine out of 10 food advertisements shown during Saturday morning children's television programming are for foods high in fat, sodium, or added sugars, or low in nutrients. J Am Diet Assoc. 2008 Apr;108(4):673–678. [PubMed]
12. Institute of Medicine . Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity? The National Academies Press; Washington, DC: 2006.
13. Jeffrey DB, McLellarn RW, Fox DT. The development of children's eating habits: the role of television commercials. Health Educ Q. 1982 Summer-Fall;9(2–3):174–189. [PubMed]
14. Borzekowski DL, Robinson TN. The 30-second effect: an experiment revealing the impact of television commercials on food preferences of preschoolers. J Am Diet Assoc. 2001 Jan;101(1):42–46. [PubMed]
15. Gorn G, Goldberg M. Behavioral evidence of the effects of televised food messages on children. Journal of Consumer Research. 1982;9:200–205.
16. Halford JC, Gillespie J, Brown V, Pontin EE, Dovey TM. Effect of television advertisements for foods on food consumption in children. Appetite. 2004 Apr;42(2):221–225. [PubMed]
17. Wiecha JL, Peterson KE, Ludwig DS, Kim J, Sobol A, Gortmaker SL. When children eat what they watch: impact of television viewing on dietary intake in youth. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006 Apr;160(4):436–442. [PubMed]
18. Boynton-Jarrett R, Thomas TN, Peterson KE, Wiecha J, Sobol AM, Gortmaker SL. Impact of television viewing patterns on fruit and vegetable consumption among adolescents. Pediatrics. 2003 Dec;112(6 Pt 1):1321–1326. [PubMed]
19. Coon KA, Goldberg J, Rogers BL, Tucker KL. Relationships between use of television during meals and children's food consumption patterns. Pediatrics. 2001;107(1):E7. [PubMed]
20. Veerman JL, Van Beeck EF, Barendregt JJ, Mackenbach JP. By how much would limiting TV food advertising reduce childhood obesity? Eur J Public Health. 2009 Aug;19(4):365–369. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
21. McGuire WJ. Attitudes and attitude change. In: Lindzey G, Aronson E, editors. Handbook of social psychology. 3 ed. Vol 2. Random House; New York: 1985. pp. 233–346.
22. Pierce JP, Choi WS, Gilpin EA, Farkas AJ, Berry CC. Tobacco industry promotion of cigarettes and adolescent smoking. JAMA. 1998 Feb 18;279(7):511–515. [PubMed]
23. Chen X, Cruz TB, Schuster DV, Unger JB, Johnson CA. Receptivity to protobacco media and its impact on cigarette smoking among ethnic minority youth in California. J Health Commun. 2002;7(2):95–111. [PubMed]
24. Henriksen L, Feighery EC, Schleicher NC, Fortmann SP. Receptivity to alcohol marketing predicts initiation of alcohol use. J Adolesc Health. 2008 Jan;42(1):28–35. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
25. Adachi-Mejia AM, Longacre MR, Gibson JJ, Beach ML, Titus-Ernstoff LT, Dalton MA. Children with a TV in their bedroom at higher risk for being overweight. Int J Obes (Lond) 2007 Apr;31(4):644–651. [PubMed]
26. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention A SAS Program for the CDC Growth Charts. [Accessed 11/9/08].
27. Barlow SE. Expert committee recommendations regarding the prevention, assessment, and treatment of child and adolescent overweight and obesity: summary report. Pediatrics. 2007 Dec;120 Suppl 4(4):S164–192. [PubMed]
28. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention About BMI for Children and Teens. [Accessed 11/9/08]. _childrens_BMI.htm#What%20is%20BMI%20percentile.
29. Gilpin EA, White MM, Messer K, Pierce JP. Receptivity to tobacco advertising and promotions among young adolescents as a predictor of established smoking in young adulthood. Am J Public Health. 2007 Aug;97(8):1489–1495. [PubMed]
30. Miles M, Huberman A. Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Sage Publications, Inc.; Thousand Oaks: 1994.
31. Wilson N, Signal L, Nicholls S, Thomson G. Marketing fat and sugar to children on New Zealand television. Prev Med. 2006 Feb;42(2):96–101. [PubMed]
32. Weber K, Story M, Harnack L. Internet food marketing strategies aimed at children and adolescents: a content analysis of food and beverage brand web sites. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006 Sep;106(9):1463–1466. [PubMed]
33. Rodd HD, Patel V. Content analysis of children's television advertising in relation to dental health. Br Dent J. 2005 Dec 10;199(11):710–712. discussion 713. [PubMed]
34. Ludwig DS, Peterson KE, Gortmaker SL. Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis. Lancet. 2001 Feb 17;357(9255):505–508. [PubMed]
35. Wiecha JL, Finkelstein D, Troped PJ, Fragala M, Peterson KE. School vending machine use and fast-food restaurant use are associated with sugar-sweetened beverage intake in youth. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006 Oct;106(10):1624–1630. [PubMed]
36. Sutherland LA, Beavers DP, Kupper LL, Bernhardt AM, Heatherton T, Dalton MA. Like parent, like child: child food and beverage choices during role playing. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2008 Nov;162(11):1063–1069. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
37. Titus-Ernstoff L, Dalton MA, Adachi-Mejia AM, Longacre MR, Beach ML. A longitudinal study of viewing smoking in movies and smoking initiation in children. Pediatrics. 2008;121:15–21. [PubMed]
38. Schultes B, Peters A, Kern W, et al. Processing of food stimuli is selectively enhanced during insulin-induced hypoglycemia in healthy men. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2005 Jun;30(5):496–504. [PubMed]
39. Pietrowsky R, Krug R, Fehm HL, Born J. Food deprivation fails to affect preoccupation with thoughts of food in anorectic patients. Br J Clin Psychol. 2002 Sep;41(Pt 3):321–326. [PubMed]
40. Epstein S, Levitt H. The influence of hunger on the learning and recall of food-related words. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1962 Feb;64:130–135. [PubMed]
41. Stewart SH, Samoluk SB. Effects of short-term food deprivation and chronic dietary restraint on the selective processing of appetitive-related cues. Int J Eat Disord. 1997 Mar;21(2):129–135. [PubMed]
42. Halford JC, Boyland EJ, Hughes GM, Stacey L, McKean S, Dovey TM. Beyond-brand effect of television food advertisements on food choice in children: the effects of weight status. Public Health Nutr. 2008 Sep;11(9):897–904. [PubMed]
43. Adachi-Mejia AM, Primack BA, Beach ML, et al. Influence of movie smoking exposure and team sports participation on established smoking. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009 Jul;163(7):638–643. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
44. Dalton MA, Sargent JD, Beach ML, et al. Effect of viewing smoking in movies on adolescent smoking initiation: a cohort study. Lancet. 2003 Jul 26;362(9380):281–285. [PubMed]
45. Sargent JD, Stoolmiller M, Worth KA, et al. Exposure to smoking depictions in movies: its association with established adolescent smoking. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007 Sep;161(9):849–856. [PubMed]
46. Goodman E, Hinden BR, Khandelwal S. Accuracy of Teen and Parental Reports of Obesity and Body Mass Index. Pediatrics. 2000 Jul;106(1):52–58. 2000. [PubMed]
47. Boutelle K, Fulkerson JA, Neumark-Sztainer D, Story M. Mothers' Perceptions of Their Adolescents' Weight Status: Are They Accurate? Obes Res. 2004 Nov;12(11):1754–1757. 2004. [PubMed]
48. Duffey KJ, Gordon-Larsen P, Jacobs DR, Jr., Williams OD, Popkin BM. Differential associations of fast food and restaurant food consumption with 3-y change in body mass index: the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Jan;85(1):201–208. [PubMed]
49. Malik VS, Schulze MB, Hu FB. Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Aug;84(2):274–288. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
50. Pereira MA, Kartashov AI, Ebbeling CB, et al. Fast-food habits, weight gain, and insulin resistance (the CARDIA study): 15-year prospective analysis. Lancet. 2005 Jan 1–7;365(9453):36–42. [PubMed]
51. Ad Council Coalition for Healthy Children. [Accessed 5/20/09].
52. Story M, French S. Food Advertising and Marketing Directed at Children and Adolescents in the US. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004 Feb 10;1(1):3. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
53. Kaikati A, Kaikati J. Stealth Marketing: How to reach consumers surreptitiously. California Management Review. 2004;46(4)