Historique
Article de Périodique
European longitudinal study on the relationship between adolescents' alcohol marketing exposure and alcohol use (2016)
Auteur(s) :
DE BRUIJN, A. ;
TANGHE, J. ;
DE LEEUW, R. ;
ENGELS, R. ;
ANDERSON, P. ;
BECCARIA, F. ;
BUJALSKI, M. ;
CELATA, C. ;
GOSSELT, J. ;
SCHRECKENBERG, D. ;
SLODOWNIK, L. ;
WOTHGE, J. ;
VAN DALEN, W.
Année
2016
Page(s) :
1774-1783
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Refs biblio. :
51
Domaine :
Alcool / Alcohol
Discipline :
EPI (Epidémiologie / Epidemiology)
Thésaurus géographique
EUROPE
;
ALLEMAGNE
;
ITALIE
;
POLOGNE
;
PAYS-BAS
Thésaurus mots-clés
ALCOOL
;
ETUDE LONGITUDINALE
;
MARKETING
;
ADOLESCENT
;
CONSOMMATION
;
ABUS
;
MODELE
Note générale :
Commentary: Effective alcohol marketing policymaking requires more than evidence on alcohol marketing effect - research on vested interest effects is needed. O'Brien K.S., Carr S.M., p. 1784-1785.
Résumé :
Background and aims: This is the first study to examine the effect of alcohol marketing exposure on adolescents' drinking in a cross-national context. The aim was to examine reciprocal processes between exposure to a wide range of alcohol marketing types and adolescent drinking, controlled for non-alcohol branded media exposure.
Design: Prospective observational study (11-12- and 14-17-month intervals), using a three-wave autoregressive cross-lagged model.
Setting: School-based sample in 181 state-funded schools in Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland.
Participants: A total of 9075 eligible respondents participated in the survey (mean age 14?years, 49.5% male.
Measurements: Adolescents reported their frequency of past-month drinking and binge drinking. Alcohol marketing exposure was measured by a latent variable with 13 items measuring exposure to online alcohol marketing, televised alcohol advertising, alcohol sport sponsorship, music event/festival sponsorship, ownership alcohol-branded promotional items, reception of free samples and exposure to price offers. Confounders were age, gender, education, country, internet use, exposure to non-alcohol sponsored football championships and television programmes without alcohol commercials.
Findings: The analyses showed one-directional long-term effects of alcohol marketing exposure on drinking (exposure T1 on drinking T2: beta = 0.420 (0.058), P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.324-0.515; exposure T2 on drinking T3: beta = 0.200 (0.044), P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.127-0.272; drinking T1 and drinking T2 on exposure: P > 0.05). Similar results were found in the binge drinking model (exposure T1 on binge T2: beta = 0.409 (0.054), P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.320-0.499; exposure T2 on binge T3: beta = 0.168 (0.050), P = 0.001, 95% CI = 0.086-0.250; binge T1 and binge T2 on exposure: P > 0.05).
Conclusions: There appears to be a one-way effect of alcohol marketing exposure on adolescents' alcohol use over time, which cannot be explained by either previous drinking or exposure to non-alcohol-branded marketing.
Design: Prospective observational study (11-12- and 14-17-month intervals), using a three-wave autoregressive cross-lagged model.
Setting: School-based sample in 181 state-funded schools in Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland.
Participants: A total of 9075 eligible respondents participated in the survey (mean age 14?years, 49.5% male.
Measurements: Adolescents reported their frequency of past-month drinking and binge drinking. Alcohol marketing exposure was measured by a latent variable with 13 items measuring exposure to online alcohol marketing, televised alcohol advertising, alcohol sport sponsorship, music event/festival sponsorship, ownership alcohol-branded promotional items, reception of free samples and exposure to price offers. Confounders were age, gender, education, country, internet use, exposure to non-alcohol sponsored football championships and television programmes without alcohol commercials.
Findings: The analyses showed one-directional long-term effects of alcohol marketing exposure on drinking (exposure T1 on drinking T2: beta = 0.420 (0.058), P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.324-0.515; exposure T2 on drinking T3: beta = 0.200 (0.044), P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.127-0.272; drinking T1 and drinking T2 on exposure: P > 0.05). Similar results were found in the binge drinking model (exposure T1 on binge T2: beta = 0.409 (0.054), P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.320-0.499; exposure T2 on binge T3: beta = 0.168 (0.050), P = 0.001, 95% CI = 0.086-0.250; binge T1 and binge T2 on exposure: P > 0.05).
Conclusions: There appears to be a one-way effect of alcohol marketing exposure on adolescents' alcohol use over time, which cannot be explained by either previous drinking or exposure to non-alcohol-branded marketing.
Affiliation :
European Centre on Monitoring Alcohol Marketing (EUCAM), Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
Cote :
Abonnement