Chapter 2

Reviewing the Literature

Abstract

The overall aim of this chapter is to attempt to provide the necessary background information to address Research Issue 1. It will offer a review of how gender is located in the media and in ‘childhood’, together with a possible framework or model to demonstrate how gender is manifested in society.

The chapter is divided into the three broad yet interrelated issues of ‘identity’, ‘play’ and ‘advertisements’, where gender is seen as the common denominator and central focus in each. Gender identity formation is discussed in terms of cognition and social learning theory, together with consideration of the socially generated notion of ‘appropriate gender behaviour’.

Toy advertisements provide the primary example to illustrate how ‘childhood’ and ‘play’ are represented in the media, and play-types and play-functions are introduced. Gender is once again brought to the fore when the concept of ‘gender differentiated play’ is discussed. A brief introduction to the advertising industry then facilitates a study of how gender is conventionally represented in both adult- and child-targeted advertisements. This is followed by a basic overview of research findings that indicate how young children interpret the mass media. Summarising the main research findings in this context is intended to provide the foundations for the overall shape and direction of this investigation, where the theoretical underpinnings of media-and-identity are diagrammatically summarised for the purpose of clarity.

2. Gender, advertising and children

The fields of mass media effects and audience reception have often positioned children as impressionable creatures who are particularly vulnerable to persuasion and ‘unsuitable’ influences. ‘Children’, as a homogenous mass, have become a popular subject of academic debate and research with particular emphasis placed on the ‘effects’ of media violence (cf. Buckingham, 1996; Gunter, 1985). Many media theorists have argued that television pervades the ‘norms’ of daily life to an extent where its presence in the home is almost ‘invisible’ and taken-for-granted (Hollenbeck & Slaby, 1979: 41, in Lindlof, 1987: 33). Television ‘impact’, by association, works on multiple levels ranging from obvious ‘effects’ (laughter, tears) to subtle psychological ‘effects’ (attitudes, beliefs).

As a television genre, advertising is often perceived as a so-called unsuitable influence in the sense that children might succumb unquestioningly to the often-exaggerated sales messages because they are not yet equipped to look upon such images and claims with an objective eye (Winick et al., 1973: 7-8). The potential influence of television advertising on children was recently reviewed. In December 1999, the AEF (Advertising Education Forum) published reports filed by the European Commission on the proposed banning of advertisements targeted at young children, in line with Swedish broadcasting policy. One might argue that such ‘concerns’ are demonstrative of the perceived power of advertisements to corrupt young children.

One question driving this investigation is whether young children, negotiating many processes of socialisation, might use media images as a convenient means of establishing schemata or theories about themselves and others. Emphasis will be placed on children’s (acquired) perceptions of gender in terms of constructing their own gender identities and understanding the social position of the significant other. Advertisements were selected because one could argue that the genre leans heavily on socially generated notions of gender as a means of targeting products at appropriate consumer sectors, appealing to the individual and casting the product in the image of the user (cf. Williamson, 1978: 41). Additionally, advertisements often contain compact narrative structures that introduce characters, motivations and outcomes without the added complication of the ‘history’ of other television genres such as soap opera. Toy advertisements formed a particularly strong focus in this investigation because they promote goods that arguably contribute to a gender-based construction of the self and the adoption of so-called ‘appropriate gender behaviour’. Researchers have also noted that toy advertisements are often a prominent source of product information for young children (cf. Gunter & McAleer, 1997: 145).

Advertising is saturated with images of idealised human beings (cf. Fowles, 1996: 156/7), while the issue of self-identity in a materialistic environment is both complex and intriguing. The strict dictionary definition of ‘identity’ includes reference to ‘who or what a person or thing is’, but Fowles (1996) argued that it is more complex than being simply a matter of the ‘individual’. He suggested that our self-conceptions are grounded in the history of society. ‘The imagery depicts young people because youth is the stage most given over to the formation of self-identity... leisure activities, because those are the hours dedicated to the self... gender-ridden, because gender lies at the core of self-identity’ (ibid.). This investigation addresses the possible correspondence between the issues of ‘identity’ where children are young and need to learn about themselves and their place in society, ‘leisure’ (play) and ‘gender’ in terms of being a ‘typical’ boy or girl and the depiction of gender in toy advertisements. It is arguable that investigating how young children negotiate advertisement texts and interpret media images may consolidate these interlocking issues.

The so-called interrelated issues of gender identity, play and advertisements can be represented in simple diagrammatic form, echoing the Text-Producer-Receiver triangle introduced in Chapter One, to demonstrate how significant and intrinsic the whole question of gender in (children’s) society really is. The diagram below also illustrates the theoretical approach taken in this particular chapter, where each of the aspects will be considered in turn and also as an interactive ‘whole’. It is possible to argue that these issues make a significant contribution to the ways in which young children develop and mature within (Western) materialistic societies.

(Gender) Identity 

                                     (Gender in) Play  (Gender in) Advertisements

Essentially, the gender-children-advertising literature review is intended to address Research Issue 1 in terms of how gender is located in the media and in ‘childhood’, as well as whether it is possible to construct a framework or model to demonstrate how gender is manifested in society.

This chapter will address a number of issues based on how gender manifests itself within the psyche of the individual and within society at large. Initially, gender development will be considered in terms of cognition and social learning theory, followed by a discussion of gender in society and the notion of so-called ‘appropriate behaviour’. With a research focus on the presentation of toys in the marketplace, play-types and play-functions will then be discussed. This will be followed by illustrations of how children tend to make gender stereotyped toy choices and engage in gender differentiated play, often in line with family and peer group cultures. A brief introduction to the advertising industry will provide a context for the discussion of gender representation and stereotypy in both adult- and child-targeted advertisements, based mainly on content analysis findings. Finally, this will be followed by a discussion of some of the many considerations that influence the way in which young children might interpret the mass media. This approach will demonstrate how the broader issue of gender can be considered in terms of identity formation, play culture and advertisements.

2.1 Gender identity formation

‘What are little boys made of?

Slugs and snails and puppy-dogs’ tails…

What are little girls made of?

Sugar and spice and all things nice’

(Nursery Rhyme)

Gender identity formation is frequently discussed in terms of the behaviour patterns or roles exhibited by individuals. Durkin (1985: 9) used the term sex role or gender role to refer to the collection of behaviours or attitudes that a given society regards as ‘appropriate’ for members of a particular sex. Further, he emphasised that sex roles are within the public sphere of observable behaviour patterns. Sex role stereotypes, on the other hand, are defined as the more rigid expectations about the capabilities and preferences of each sex (ibid: 11) which also include particular character traits for each sex and variations within each sex. Durkin (ibid.) argued that individuals must make use of the ‘cognitive guidelines’ or ‘blue-prints’ of established gender roles to anticipate the behaviour of others.

The development of gender roles in individuals is more complex than a single-stage process in which children suddenly decide whether they are boys or girls. Indeed, the developmental process has sometimes been divided into three related aspects detailed by Eisenberg (in Liss, 1983: 46), and summarised below:

·         Sex role identification or orientation – ‘the actual incorporation of the role of a given sex and to the unconscious reactions characteristic of that role’.

·         Sex role preference – ‘the desire to adopt behaviours associated with one sex or the other, or the perception of such behaviours as either associated or thought more desirable’.

·         Sex role adoption – ‘the actual adoption of behaviour characteristic of one sex or the other, not simply the desire to adopt such behaviour’.

At a basic level, the theory of gender role development parallels the issues raised in the classic nature/nurture debate (Aitkinson et al. 1993: 72 ff.), incorporating the theories of cognitive development and social learning both in isolation and in interaction. The theory of cognitive development (‘nature’) considers the child’s growing perception of the world and how things and people are categorised. Social learning theory (‘nurture’), in contrast, utilises the principles of conditioning and reinforcement to explain the complexities of human development (Bigler & Liben, 1992: 1351; Hargreaves, in Hargreaves & Colley, 1986: 30/32; Ruble et al., 1981).

2.1.1 Cognitive development and social learning theory

Cognitive development refers to the child’s growing construction of the self, with an implicit assumption that s/he knows which role to develop (Durkin, 1995: 179) because of biological determinism or some other powerful instinct. Kohlberg (in Durkin, ibid.: 180) proposes a three stage developmental process, as follows:

·         Gender labelling (2- to 3-years-old approx.) where the child slowly becomes aware that s/he is a member of a particular sex.

·         Gender stability (3- to 4-years-old approx.) where the child becomes aware of the durability of his/her gender and can predict the sex they will be when they grow up yet is generally still dependent on the physical concept of gender.

·         Gender constancy (4- to 7-years-old approx.) where children come to understand the permanency or constancy of their own and other people’s gender, even if outward indicators such as clothing suggest something contrary.

The gender constancy stage is, according to Ruble et al. (1981) (in Van Evra, 1990: 120), a key point in the developmental process because the child’s new sense of gender increases their interest in same-sex models. This interest may be seen as a major component in the re-enactment and enduring qualities of ‘gender appropriate’ roles, where children are more likely to recall same-sex models (Courtney & Whipple, 1983: 47). Ruble et al. (in Van Evra, 1990: 120) suggest that children actively seek information about gender behaviour and, using play styles and sex-typed toys as their experimental equipment, learn how to behave in a manner that society deems acceptable.

Martin & Halverson (in Durkin, 1995: 182) propose a slight variation on Kohlberg’s notions of gender discovery (ibid: 180) by applying it to the child’s wish to discover more about the values and behaviours of their own gender group. They propose that interest in same-sex models is sparked at the earlier stage of gender stability, where the child becomes aware of his/her own sex. Durkin (1995: 182) argues that, because children are likely to notice same-sex models at this earlier age, it gives something of an explanation for the resilience of their gender beliefs and attitudes. That is to say, if gender awareness happens at an early stage in an infant’s life, s/he will have prolonged opportunity to internalise and negotiate what it means to be a ‘boy’ or a ‘girl’. In a sense, this would explain the notion of gender schema, where inconsistent gender information is disregarded in favour of the search for ‘stereotyped’ reinforcement of what the child already understands.

One could argue that the gender models seen in toy advertisements form a base for modelling and imitative behaviour, contributing to the way that children learn the characteristics of their own sex (cf. Courtney & Whipple, 1983: 47), whilst also providing examples of the ‘props’ available to enhance this role-playing. Indeed, both the cognitive development and social learning approaches to sex-role development attach considerable importance to the imitation of same-sex models (Manstead & McCulloch, 1981: 178). This emphasises the need to study toy advertisements in the context of gender roles and ‘childhood’, since past research in the field of children and television has tended to neglect the potential link between toys and (gendered) behaviour.

Albert Bandura, perhaps the most famous social learning theorist, provided an initial glimpse into the social dimensions of gender role acquisition. His research on the idea of children modelling or imitating the behaviour of others focussed on the imitation of violence (Bandura & Walters, 1963: 62-3), but can arguably be applied to the imitation of gender roles (Smith, 1994: 325). Bandura (1977) (in Salomon, 1979: 129) described the process of imitation as enabling ‘people to acquire large integrated patterns of behaviour without having to form them gradually through trial and error’. One can begin to understand the potential power of the media in general and television in particular to provide many readily available behaviour models. Indeed, it may be argued that television is one of the main socialising agents in children’s lives (cf. Winick et al., 1973: 58). The specific focus on toy advertisements should further demonstrate the kinds of gender models that young children might observe and imitate during and after a television viewing session.

2.1.2 Gender in society

Baslow (1986) (in Jones, 1991: 231) argued that messages about ‘appropriate gender behaviour’ permeate our language, school systems, working life, religion and media. While Thorn (1986) (in Lafky et al., 1996: 379) further stressed that gender perception involves a complex process of family experience, cultural conditioning and education. Yet the influence of the mass media cannot be ignored in a world saturated with manufactured images. Furnham & Bitar (1993: 297) argue that television can and does influence both children’s and adults’ perceptions of their own and others’ sex roles. Indeed, Loudal (1989) (in Furnham & Bitar, 1993: 308) reviewed various studies that empirically demonstrated a positive relationship between exposure to gender-stereotyped media content and stereotyped perceptions, attitudes and behaviours. 

As with any perceived ‘norm’, one could argue that the perception of gender is an important component in the construction and subsequent maintenance of models of so-called ‘appropriate gender behaviour’ and in turn the structure of societal roles. When one considers, for example, the early age at which children begin to experience the medium of television, the gender models encountered along the way will invariably form part of their ‘conceptual gestalts’ in terms of what it means to be male or female. One could argue that the models encountered are merely stereotypes and therefore of little consequence. However, in the majority of television genres, one rarely encounters positive reinforcement of real alternatives to these prescribed roles. In addition, the force of repetition (in advertisements at least) is a significant factor in the lasting impact of particular images. One could therefore argue that the perceived ‘reality’ of gender is established at a young age and will remain relatively ‘static’ throughout the developmental stages of childhood.

Culturally, there are often pressures on boys to be brave and manly, while girls are expected to be ladylike (Shipman, 1972: 36). Barry, Bacon & Child (1957) (ibid: 38) reviewed 110 different cultures and found similar ‘stereotyped’ gender expectations, in that girls were normally taught to look after others and be obedient while boys were encouraged to be self-reliant and assertive. Rosenkrantz et al. (1968) (in Durkin, 1995: 164) studied the attitudes of undergraduates about the personalities of ‘typical’ men and women, finding widespread stereotypes in their answers. Men were considered more aggressive, independent, competitive and self-confident, where women were seen as emotionally expressive, more nurturing and gentle. Wolff (1989: 40) also described how sex differences in temperament were notable from infancy, where girls were seen as more sensitive and boys as more active. Whether this is actuality or adults ‘seeing what they want to see’ within a gendered society remains a point of contention.

It seems that the differences between men and women have only little to do with inherited physical features since the main definitions of gender roles are deeply embedded in culture, folklore and etiquette (Shipman, 1972: 37). These gendered portraits have endured over time and are notable cross-culturally so it is little wonder that children are faced with a ‘packaged world’ (Shipman, 1972: 28) and must learn their place within it. Shipman (ibid.) argued that the child regards the established patterns of behaviour around him/her as unalterable fact and can therefore play no part in the actual production of such expectations (cf. Chapter Seven). Instead, the social child has little alternative but to ‘internalise this world in order to interact with those who are already in it’ (ibid.), and make the established social patterns an aspect of his/her own persona so as to be accepted. Indeed, young children may actually be very comfortable with their re-enactments of predictable gender behaviours when making sense of the world (cf. Brown, in Moyles, 1994: 60) because of the social ‘acceptance’ attached to being conformist.

2.2 Gender, play and toys

Since this investigation is grounded in a specific form of product marketing to children, it is important to consider how toys might contribute to or function in their lives and in the processes of gender role formation. Sutton-Smith (1986: 26, in Corsaro, 1997: 110) explained that ‘The predominant nature of play throughout history has been play with others, not play with objects’. This may have been the essence of play centuries ago but the status of toys, according to Mergen (1992: 82) (ibid.), changed considerably in the 1870s. The possession of playthings was regarded as indicative of the status and identity of their owner as well as a reflection of the nature of childhood. Since that time, the toy industry has grown into a world wide, highly lucrative business with the use of increasingly sophisticated persuasive devices and concepts to capture the imagination of the target consumers.

2.2.1 Play types and functions

Play is very characteristic of children between the ages of two and six (Smith, in Moyles, 1994: 15). A number of researchers have attempted to classify different kinds of play, all of which appear to be inter-related and to a certain extent rather problematic. Piaget (1951) (ibid.) identified three different types of play and these corresponded with his theories of cognitive development. He firstly identified ‘practice play’ between six months and two years, referring to sensorimotor and exploratory play. This was followed by ‘symbolic play’ from two- or three- to six-years-of-age, referring to fantasy and socio-dramatic play, and finally ‘games with rules’ from about six- or seven-years on. Smilansky (1968, in Moyles, ibid.: 16) suggested an additional category of ‘constructive play’ to refer to play in which objects are manipulated to create something new. Added to these are physical-activity play and rough-and-tumble play, which further characterise the conduct of young children (Takhvar & Smith, 1990, in Moyles, ibid.). 

Essentially, a combination of these play types functions in a way that allows the child to acquire developmental skills. As Smith argued (in Moyles, ibid.: 16/7) play is predominantly social, it has intellectual benefits, it can foster language and role-taking skills, and may even encourage cognitive development and concept formation. Hislam (ibid.: 47), in referring to how children play in the ‘Home Corner’ provided in most primary school classrooms, argued that interesting insights are possible into the formation of ideas about gender appropriate behaviour through a creative re-enactment of familiar situations. It is this idea of play as a reflection of gender that is of particular interest here. In a materialistic society, toys might serve as important tools in the re-enactment of gender roles and the way that they are presented in advertisements may perpetuate the stereotypes. This again stresses the need to research toy advertisements in detail since they provide examples of how to interact both with the product and with one’s peers.

Essentially, children seek to determine what is appropriate and acceptable for their genders (Hislam, in Moyles, 1994: 38). As Davies (1989, in Corsaro, 1997: 151) explained, ‘as children learn the discursive practices of their society, they learn to position themselves correctly as male or female, since that is what is required of them to have a recognisable identity within the existing social order’. One could argue that play is an integral aspect of childhood where toys are an important component of the play act. Numerous studies suggest that children’s play is a reflection of gender stereotyped socialisation patterns (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Serbin et al. 1979; Schwartz & Markham, 1985) while Dixon (1990) even argued that toys are important in shaping the ideological outlook of children (all cited in Corsaro, 1997). Concern has often been voiced about the messages in children’s toy advertisements, as well as their content and construction (Greenfield, 1984, in Berry & Asamen, 1993).

2.2.2 Gender stereotyped toy choices and differential play

Eisenberg (in Liss, 1983: 57) illustrated how cognitive development and social learning theories can be applied to gender-stereotyped toy choices in children. The mechanisms of reinforcement, punishment and imitation may influence the way that children behave with toys, where positive reinforcement ensures the continuation of a particular behaviour. According to the cognitive development theorists, however, children perceive sex-stereotyped behaviours as appropriate and because they wish to appear socially competent in themselves they will adopt those roles.

The assumption seems to be that children will only use toys within a play situation, so the gender differentiation in play styles may well be one explanation for the stereotypical themes seen in toy advertisements. In a sense, the manufacturers may simply be ‘meeting’ (rather than ‘creating’) the ‘requirements’ of children. Hargreaves & Colley (1986: 123), for example, reviewed a number of studies that produced generally consistent findings regarding toy preferences in children (cf. Kline, 1993: 195). Boys tended to prefer transportation toys and block play while girls preferred dolls and domestic play. Goldstein (1994: 115) observed a similar trend in toy choice. He also referred to themes of adventure, fantasy characters, superheroes, spacemen and television-inspired roles in the games played by boys, while girls exhibit a preference for family roles, ‘house games’ and clothes to dress-up in. 

Hislam (in Moyles, 1994: 38) explained how children attempt to ‘make sense’ of their gender positions in the world by stressing that they do not simply soak-up gender stereotypes like ‘sponges’ (an analogy that is often misused in explanations of child media use). Five- or six-year-old children may appear to take on roles that adults would regard as ‘worryingly exaggerated’, but what they are actually doing is trying out different roles and ideas to place themselves within a structured society that is only just beginning to make sense to them. Paley (1984) (in Moyles, 1994: 43/4), in observing the world of five-year-olds, illustrated that children are acutely aware of sex differences and enjoy experimenting with stereotypical gender roles. Paley (1984) argued that children exhibit an active desire to explore and embrace their gender differences to establish a strong gender identity of their own (cf. later discussion on ‘gender performativity’).

Maccoby & Jacklin (1974, in Corsaro, 1997) reviewed the differential play styles exhibited by boys and girls, concluding that girls tend to play intensively with one or two ‘best friends’ while boys tend to play in larger groups (Archer, in McGurk, 1992: 35). The same study also stressed that play styles move beyond the restrictions of social relations into a realm that appears to rely on (gendered) temperament. They found, for example, that boys engage in rougher games, fighting with one another and competing for dominance. Girls, in contrast, were more co-operative and abided by the convention of ‘turn-taking’ (cf. Corsaro, 1997: 149-50). Freedman (1980, in McGurk, ibid.: 37) also viewed temperament as one of the main reasons why boys and girls prefer to play in same sex groups. Maccoby (1988) (ibid.) observed how four-and-a-half-year-old boys and girls played separately, even when the play equipment was the same for each sex, while Maccoby & Jacklin (1987) suggested that bringing boys and girls together increases rather than decreases same-sex preferences in the play situation (ibid.). Hislam (in Moyles, 1994: 46) also noted that the same toy is likely to be played with differently, depending on whether it is placed in front of a boy or a girl.

2.2.3 Children’s gendered judgements

Children’s understanding of what is ‘gender appropriate’ appears to emerge at a young age. Hartup & Zook (in Shipman, 1972: 36) claimed that in the USA three-year-old children were well aware of the external differences between boys and girls, and that they had adopted different gender roles to be visibly acting like boys and girls by the time they entered school. Hislam (in Moyles, 1994: 37) referred to past research work that illustrated how children’s choice of play style and play equipment often appears to be gender related. Paley (1984) also stressed that, by the age of five, children have very distinct ideas about gender roles (ibid.).

Kolbe & Muehling (1995) considered the effects of gender roles in children’s television advertisements, concentrating on the impact of the gender model, judgements of gender appropriateness in behaviour, and the effect of voiceover on gender evaluations. They reported that boys seem quite rigid in their rejection of female models. Girls, on the other hand, reacted most positively to same-sex models, but did not rule out the merits of same-sex models and male models performing ‘male’ behaviours, perhaps indicating that girls are more flexible in their attitudes towards ‘appropriateness’ (cf. Singer & Singer, 1990: 80, in Goldstein, 1994: 117). From this premise, Kolbe & Muehling (1995: 50) were able to refer to girls as having ‘degrees of acceptance’ while boys’ attitudes were ‘categorical’ in accepting same-sex models and rejecting opposite-sex models (cf. Kline, 1993: 192). One wonders whether this is simply a female tendency, or whether girls are more adept than boys in identifying, out of necessity rather than choice, with given images in a male-dominated environment.

Bullough (1974: 1382, in McGurk, 1992: 44) goes back to Christian myths and legends to explain social tolerance of ‘masculine’ behaviour in females, as it was regarded as the woman’s way of striving to be a ‘better person’ and more like men! In order to avoid loss of social status it is believed that men go through three stages of male role development. These roles include an avoidance of ‘femininity’, acting out the physical role of boyhood and taking on the adult male role based on achievement (David & Brannon, 1976; Archer, 1984, both cited in McGurk, 1992: 49).

In terms of judging the gender appropriateness of a particular product, Kolbe & Meuhling (1995: 56) found that boys who viewed advertisements with female characters were more likely to deem the product suitable for a mixed audience. Those boys, however, who viewed the same product being advertised by a male actor, deemed it suitable for boys only. This contrast in attitude was not seen to such a degree with the girls in the study. Therefore, it would be reasonable to suggest that in this instance the nature of the toy was not foremost in the minds of the children, but that the characters in the advertisements guided their judgements. In addition, only 74% of the children correctly identified the gender of the voiceover. Those who incorrectly identified the sex of the female announcer assumed that she was male and this was true of both the boys and girls in the study. Perhaps ‘male’ was considered the norm or ‘default’.

2.2.4 Peer group and family influences

Children’s judgements about gender are never stand-alone but are closely related to the social worlds of which they are a part. Two important elements within this social world are peer group and family. Each is discussed in turn here to illustrate how gender is often manifested in social construction and interactions. While children themselves may have distinctive ideas about gender and gender appropriateness, it is arguable that other aspects of their social worlds reinforce these notions. The childhood peer group, for example, has a powerful influence over the behaviour and attitude of individuals because it is a vital both in terms of acceptance and in the development of social skills. Corsaro (1997: 95) defined children’s peer culture as ‘a stable set of activities or routines, artefacts, values and concerns that children produce and share in interaction with peers’.

It is arguable that the pressures of being accepted by a peer group will often impinge on the toy choices made by children. For example, Berndt & Heller (1986) and Moller et al. (1992) (both in Goldstein, 1994: 115) argued that during and immediately following play with certain sex-typed toys children are more likely to be approached and accepted by their peers. Shell & Eisenberg (1990, in Goldstein, ibid.: 125) even suggested that the need for peer group acceptance may be one of the reasons why children choose to play with particular toys. It has even been suggested that peer groups determine whether a toy is more suited to boys or girls. Shell & Eisenberg (1990) (ibid.) noted that four- and five-year-old children tended to regard a toy as being mainly for boys if they had observed boys playing with it, and vice-versa for girls.

Perhaps peer groups constrain play activities in their self-styled construction of toy-play scenarios and situations deemed inappropriate for particular genders. Single-sex peer groups may be another example of how individual children seek to interact effectively within their social world, behaving ‘appropriately’ and learning to understand and enact the roles of ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ (cf. Corsaro, 1997: 149/50). It may be argued that a function of the peer group is to ‘check’ or ‘police’ behaviour and ensure that there is no deviation from the ‘norm’ (cf. Chinn, 1997: 298).

Archer (in McGurk, 1992: 42) referred to a study by Smetana (1986) in which three-and-a-half-year-old children were shown line drawings of children crossing gender-role boundaries – a boy wearing nail-varnish and a girl with a crew cut. The result showed stronger reactions to masculine as opposed to feminine role transgressions. Thorne (1986) (ibid.) noted that ‘feminised’ boys were teased, ridiculed and shunned by other boys. These findings seemed to suggest that peer groups most rigidly enforced the male gender role. The female gender role, however, was more flexible, using the legitimate term ‘tomboy’ for a ‘masculinised’ girl. The rigidity of masculine roles is emphasised in that there is no male-equivalent term for ‘tomboy’ (cf. Chapter Seven). This trend was recognised by Hartup, Moore & Sager (1963) and Edelbrock & Sugawara (1978) (ibid.). 

According to Corsaro (1997: 115), children’s peer cultures are affected in two ways, by adults and by adult-child routines within the family. Firstly, important features of peer cultures arise and develop as a result of children’s attempts to make sense of and even resist the adult world. Secondly, children’s experiences of the family prepare them for entry into initial peer groups. It becomes clear that peer group and parents are inextricably linked, so one could argue that the notions of gender appropriateness within the family eventually manifest themselves within the peer group and, by association, child-culture. Clearly, parents have a significant contribution to make in terms of gender-role perception and augmentation within wider society, since they are the first ‘point of contact’ children have with the world. Even before children begin to sit upright, many parents are proudly displaying them to the world using powerful gender markers such as clothing colour, to establish their children’s positions within society as ‘boys’ or ‘girls’. The persistent use of such markers illustrates the importance of signifying and displaying gender as soon as possible (Durkin, 1995: 187).

Goldstein (1994: 126) suggested that parents pass their own sex role attitudes to their children, which are subsequently reflected in the kinds of toys they choose to purchase and encourage their children to play with. While toy choices are visibly obvious, the possibly unconscious differential way in which parents play with their children may be a more subtle consideration. Bunker (1991, in Goldstein, 1994: 127), for example, observed that American fathers spend 50% more time playing with their sons than with their daughters. Fagot (1978, in Liss, 1983: 170) found that parents of boys encouraged them to play with blocks and discouraged them from playing with dolls or asking for/offering help. Girls, in contrast, were encouraged to play with dolls, ask for help and follow their parents around the house, while being discouraged from running, jumping or climbing. In this way, parents seem to both encourage and accentuate gender differentiated play and behaviour.

The position of children within the family unit also appears to be structured in terms of traditional gender roles. In a study of families with young children, Fagot (1978, in Durkin, 1995: 187) found that the parents differentially reinforced traditional gender traits. Smiles, praise and greater attention were given to children who behaved ‘appropriately’. Negative feedback was noted when children performed ‘gender inappropriate’ actions. Berger & Luckmann (1966, in Shipman, 1972: 29) argue that adults pass to their children what they regard as the objective truth and that adults will frequently regard it as ‘absurd’ if children fail to show awareness of such ‘truths’.

It is arguable that the main domain occupied by the child in the family home, which becomes increasingly more important into adolescence, is their bedroom. Perhaps it is here more than anywhere in the home that differences in decoration and content indicate the gender of the occupier (cf. Chandler & Roberts-Young, 1998). Rheingold & Cook (1975, in Durkin, 1995: 187) examined the content of one- to five-year-old children’s bedrooms. Perhaps predictably, boys were noted to have more vehicles, machines, weapons, animals, sports’ equipment, educational and scientific toys, while girls had an abundance of miniature domestic appliances and dolls. The main argument posited by Rheingold & Cook (1975) was that children spend a great deal of time in their rooms and engage in gender stereotyped behaviours with the ‘props’ their parents provide, further reinforcing the socially generated notions of ‘appropriate gender behaviour’.

In the established traditions of schema theory and Piaget’s stages of cognitive development, it is clear that one must work to understand one’s place in the surrounding environment and how ‘ideologies’ fit into the existing structure (cf. Livingstone, 1990: 139; Aitkinson et al. 1993: 83 ff.). Althusser defined ideology as ‘that new form of unconsciousness called ‘consciousness’’ (Hall, in Curran et al. 1996: 326). It is arguable that the desired behaviour encouraged in children may become a self-fulfilling prophecy since ideas become deeply embedded in the individual psyche through years of reinforcement (by family and peers). ‘Gender appropriate behaviour’ is encouraged, while many parents and teachers believe any deviation from this ‘norm’ is unnatural. Gender representations have been studied in many mass media genres from soap opera and drama to documentaries and news reporting. However, gender is arguably nowhere more prevalent and well-utilised than in the world of both magazine and television advertising.

2.3 Advertising

‘Children, like everyone else, must learn the marketplace’

Seymour Banks, Vice-President of Leo Burnett, USA

(Clark, 1988: 163)

Advertising was deemed the fourth fastest growing service industry in 1994 (Bignall, 1997: 32). Rossiter & Percy (1987: 3, in Forceville, 1996: 67) described advertising as a means of persuading customers to buy products and services through informing them about availability. The Advertising Association (UK) further defined advertisements as ‘messages, paid for by those who send them, intended to inform or influence people who receive them’. A strict dictionary definition places a great deal of emphasis on the public nature of advertisements. The industry appears to function with two intentional outcomes in mind – that communication occurs, and that marketplace consumption is achieved (Fowles, 1996: 13). Accounting for greater subtlety, Williamson (1978: 11-12) stated that advertising ‘…has another function... It creates structures of meaning’. These ‘structures of meaning’ might arguably include what it ‘means’ to be male or female.

Manca & Manca (1994: 60) inspired by Hall’s study of ‘Culture, the Media and the “Ideological Effect”’ (1977) argued that advertising functions in three ways. Firstly, it provides and selectively constructs social knowledge and social imagery through which we come to understand and interpret our social world and experiences, where gender might play a key role. Secondly, it classifies and orders different types of ‘social knowledge’ according to preferred meanings and interpretations, where ‘appropriate gender behaviour’ might be one form of knowledge. Thirdly, the ideological functioning of advertising works to ‘organise, orchestrate and bring together that which it has selectively represented and selectively classified’ in such a way that, despite the possibility of many meanings, a particular meaning is produced. This notion might be applied to the representation of gender where ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ are portrayed in stereotyped ways.

Gender representations in the media can be applied to the abstract concept of ideology as one way of explaining how they are manifested in society. Althusser (in Strinati, 1995: 153) defined ideology as comprising three features – that it represents the imaginary relationship between people and their real conditions of existence, that it is a material force, and that it ‘interpellates’ in terms of conferring social identities upon individuals (cf. Chandler, 1994b). Ideology is seen as a key to establishing a chain of universally recognised equivalencies, and this can be seen through studying the way in which children identify gender stereotypes. Children may neither agree nor disagree with such portrayals, but they offer a ‘yard-stick’ against which to measure social ‘reality’ (see Hall, in Curran et al., 1996: 22). Somehow, the very acknowledgement of the existence of stereotypes is enough to ensure their survival in social thinking. In a sense, to allude to gender stereotypes is to collude in the acceptance of their regular usage. It is therefore interesting to consider the findings of advertisement-based studied which suggest that gender is presented in very stereotyped ways.

2.3.1 Gender in adult- and child-directed advertisements

Content analysis has often been used as a means of studying advertisements and many researchers have identified a distinctive pattern of limited gender portrayals using the methodology. Since this investigation focuses on the formulation of gender stereotyped role-play models in toy advertisements and the overall gendered ‘appeal’ of the advertisement form, a review of content analysis findings will focus on gender-based studies only. Indeed, advertisement makers often link the meaningful form or style of advertisements to gender connotations (Messaris, 1997: xv). Reviewing such findings will hopefully offer insight into how gender is represented in the media in general and within the specific genre-context of advertisements.

Generally, the gender-based content analysis findings tended to focus on the gendered activities depicted in the advertisements and the stereotyped roles enacted by the on-screen characters, day-part variations in gender depiction, and the use of particular formal features to create a given ‘atmosphere’ in the advertisements. Each of these points will be discussed in turn. The findings of the content analysis studies will then be summarised in order to formulate a theoretical model of (social and media) gender perception 

2.3.1.1 Gendered activities and stereotyped character traits

Courtney & Whipple (1983) provide a useful overview of the findings from a number of content studies and list some of the most significant trends regarding the portrayal of gender in advertisements. They cite the results of a 1972 study, commissioned by the National Organisation for Women in the USA, as reported by Hennessee & Nicholson (in Courtney & Whipple, ibid.: 16). A total of 1241 advertisements were studied over a period of one-and-a-half years, focusing specifically on the portrayal of women. They found that 42.6% of women were shown doing household chores, while the accompanying men were depicted as incompetent but very good at advising. 37.5% of the women were shown as adjuncts to men, while only 0.3% were seen as autonomous and a further 16.7% were shown as sex objects. The main stress of the report was placed on the force of repetition of such images as having a profound effect upon the self-images and behaviours of both men and women.

Similarly, Dominick & Rauch (1971, in Courtney & Whipple, ibid.: 17) in a study of 1000 New York advertisements, found that 75% of the products being advertised by women were for the kitchen or bathroom, and that 38% of women (compared to only 14% of men) were shown inside the home. Over 50% of women were shown as housewives and were depicted in only 18 different occupations, compared to a choice of 44 different occupations for men. Perhaps predictably, women were over-represented in advertisements for cosmetics and personal hygiene products, and under-represented in advertisements for cars, petrol and oil. McArthur & Resko (1971) (ibid.) added to these findings by noting that 70% of men were presented as authorities while only 14% of women were shown as such. In contrast, women were seen as product users 86% of the time, compared to only 30% of men (cf. Manstead & McCulloch, 1981: 171).

Peirce (1989, in Fowles, 1996: 201-2) made the link between the adult oriented research and the way that children’s genders were depicted throughout the media. As part of a research project, the gender attributes of all characters under the age of twenty, broadcast on three major network channels in the USA over a period of one week, were categorised by individuals that Peirce described as ‘naïve coders’. The coders noted the activities that the children were engaged in and these emerged as strikingly characteristic of ‘typical’ gender stereotypes. For example, girls were shown playing with dolls, dressing up, helping in the kitchen and talking on the telephone, while boys participated in sports, played at fighting and behaved mischievously. Peirce summed up the situation in a succinct sentence by suggesting that ‘the girl’s place is in the home, and the boy’s place is wherever he wants to be’ (ibid.) (cf. Smith, 1994: 333).

Chulay & Francis (1974, in Gunter, 1986: 25) found that the stereotyping of the toys and the on-screen characters were closely associated. They found that girls were more likely to appear in advertisements for food, games and dolls while boys were mainly in advertisements for games, toy cars and toy planes. The role-play seen in these respective advertisements was also identified as highly stereotyped. For example, girls were often seen playing housewife or mother, while boys were soldiers, pilots or racing drivers. Barcus (1975, in Courtney & Whipple, 1983: 22)  found that males outnumbered females 2:1. Winick et al. (1973: 27) noted a gender imbalance, with 58% of their children’s advertisements containing boys, 35% contained boys exclusively, while girls only appeared 36% of the time (19% of advertisements showing females exclusively). McArthur & Eisen (1976, in Winick et al., ibid.) found a similarly male-dominated situation, with boys (and men) occupying 80% of the main characters in their sample of advertisements. Smith (1994: 331) also found that, of the 82 advertisements she studied, only 27 were aimed at girls while 55 were aimed at boys, perhaps once again echoing a sense of male domination.

Other researchers have noted stereotypical character traits. For example, women (71%) were far more likely to be smiling than their male counterparts (49%), said to indicate amiability and acquiescence (Choe, Wilcox & Hardy, 1986: 125, in Fowles, 1996: 153). Indeed, this was extended further so that the main characteristics to shine through in pictures of women in advertising was most likely to be ‘niceness’ or ‘tenderness’, while male characteristics were more likely to be linked to ‘toughness’ or ‘expertise’ (Andern, 1978: 128, ibid.).

The almost subliminal nature of gender stereotypes often go unnoticed by advertisement audiences. Jones (1991: 231 ff.) showed her college students a series of twenty slides, for 15 seconds each, and made them classify the gender depiction in terms of Goffman’s (1979) ideas of function ranking, relative size, ritualisation of subordination, the ‘feminine touch’ and family. While only 40% of the students recognised the themes, the most intriguing findings emerged from their oral responses, since the students expressed amazement at not having previously noticed the existence of such gender themes. A similar reaction was noted from a number of adult coders during this investigation (cf. Content analysis). Indeed, Gunter (1986: 26) observed that it may only be those gender depictions that go ‘against the grain’ that hold any real perceptual impact. If such images are ‘invisible’ to the eye of eager minded college students, as in Jones’s study, one wonders what the effect of gender stereotypes are likely to have on young children.

The published research on child-targeted advertising was rather limited and based predominantly on work conducted in the USA. However, many of the emergent gender patterns were interestingly similar to those noted in adult-targeted advertisements. For example, Barcus (1971, in Courtney & Whipple, 1983: 22) studied advertisements for toys shown on Saturday mornings, and found them to be identifiable in terms of sex-roles. Thematically, those advertisements directed at girls were concerned mainly with issues of beauty and popularity, while those advertisements aimed at boys placed importance on power, poise and speed. Similarly, in a previously described study of the gender attributes and personality traits of young characters appearing on network channels in the USA, Peirce (1989, in Fowles, 1996: 201-2) noted that his ‘naïve coders’ perceived young male characters as more active, aggressive, rational and unhappy compared to their female counterparts.

2.3.1.2 Day-part variations in gender depiction

A number of North American studies have also found that the portrayal of gender varies with the time of day that advertisements are broadcast (cf. Harris & Stobart, 1986: 162). Pesch et al. (1980, in Courtney & Whipple, 1983: 20) studied 1631 advertisements and divided them into the two time-slots of daytime thought to be directed predominantly at women (housewives), and primetime when the whole family was likely to be watching television (after 6 p.m.). The results of the study revealed that 92% of the voiceovers used in daytime slots were male; a higher percentage than the 90% of male voiceovers heard during primetime viewing. This pattern might imply that men give women instructions and advice throughout the day as the so-called voice of authority and credibility.

In his investigation of differing portrayals, Craig (1992: 200) gave an interesting insight into how advertisers view the ‘needs’ of their target audiences at various times of day. He found that, even though the percentages of male and female characters were about equal during primetime advertisements, those featuring all adult male characters were more than twice as likely to be found during the weekend (33%) than daytime (14%) advertisements. Similarly, women were more likely (20%) to feature in daytime advertisements (ibid.: 202). During daytime hours, only 40% of the primary visual characters were male, but this figure rose to 80% during the weekend (ibid.: 203). These findings reflect the predicted audience demographics in that women are more likely to be at home watching television during the day, while men are more likely to view at weekends.

2.3.1.3 Technical features

One of the most widely quoted differences in the portrayal of men and women is the use of voiceovers in advertisements. Lovdal (1989: 716) defined a voiceover as a voice that is heard where no person is present. Mareck et al. (1978: 161, in Manstead & McCulloch, 1981: 172) elaborated on this by noting that the voiceover ‘typically imparts information to the viewers and, by implication, holds the role of the expert’. It is therefore, perhaps, not surprising that many research findings indicate an overwhelming number of male- compared to female-voiceovers. Dominick & Rauch (1971, in Courtney & Whipple, 1983: 17) found that 87% of advertisements used male voiceovers, while only 6% used female voiceovers, with the remaining 7% as chorus. Verna (1975) also noted a trend for male dominance in voiceovers, and British studies have identified similar patterns in advertisements generally (Livingstone & Green, 1986; Manstead & McCulloch, 1981). Even though the percentage of female voiceovers increased in use during the 1970s and 1980s, possibly in accordance with pressure from Women’s Rights groups, as much as 80% of advertisements are still thought to be voiced by males (Fowles, 1996: 208-9).

Barcus (1977: 29) found the use of voiceovers in children’s advertisements paralleled adult advertisements in that 90% of the commentary and narration was male (cf. Smith & Bennett, 1990: 102). Smith (1994: 331) argued that there was a definite correspondence between the sex of the voiceover and the target audience for the advertisement. Verna (1975) concluded that the actual style of children’s television commercials was stereotyped. That is to say, those advertisements directed at boys contained numerous cuts with loud music and displays of aggressive behaviour. In contrast, those advertisements directed at girls contained fades, dissolves and gentle background music (cf. Smith & Bennett, 1990: 99; Welch et al., 1979: 207).

While many content studies tended to focus on the more obvious observable gender themes running through children’s advertisements, a classic study by Welch et al. (1979) chose to concentrate on the more subtle issue of post-production techniques. These techniques included cuts, zooms and animation, together with auditory features such as music, sound effects and narration. The basis of their investigation was the assumption that, if there were differences in the levels of pacing and camera techniques used in certain advertisements, then subtle messages about gender stereotypes were being disseminated to the audience.

The Welch et al. (1979: 203) study was based on Goffman’s theories of the portrayal of gender stereotypes in advertisements. Goffman (1979) suggested that messages about authority and dominance could be implied through features such as the arrangement of characters, visual and body orientation, and other cues that relate only indirectly to the product being advertised. Amongst their research objectives, Welch et al. (1979) set about trying to determine whether or not presentational differences existed and whether or not messages about masculine and feminine behaviours were implicit in the content of the advertisements in their sample. They compared the differences between targeting boys, girls and mixed audiences in a sample of twenty toy advertisements. Each of the advertisements was considered in terms of action, pace, visual effects, and auditory features (ibid.: 204).

Overall, the results emphasised that the advertisements directed at boys contained a higher level of activity, particularly activity by toys that would otherwise be inanimate. Interestingly, they found that there was little difference between their sample advertisements in terms of the degree to which the characters moved, so disproving the conception that boys are generally shown participating in more action-packed activities than girls (cf. Smith, 1994: 332). Rather it was the products aimed at boys and not the boys themselves that were action-packed (Welch et al., 1979: 205). In terms of pace, the advertisements for boys contained more cuts and the cutting rate was often seen as being of high-speed. This pattern was reversed in advertisements aimed at girls, in which more fades and dissolves were noted (ibid.: 205-6).

A male spoken narrative occurred most frequently in neutral advertisement and those directed specifically at boys. A female narrative (spoken and sung) occurred primarily in advertisements directed at girls. Female characters were found to do little talking in neutral advertisements where boys were also present. The sex of any adult voiceover tended to correspond with the sex of the children in the advertisements. The narrators in so-called neutral or mixed appeal advertisements were, however, found to be predominantly male. Welch et al. (1979) labelled sound effects and any music as ‘noise’ and their conclusions were perhaps a little predictable in that the boys’ advertisements were found to contain more ‘noise’ than those advertisements aimed at girls. The latter were found to contain a greater level of soft music that is generally used as background to dialogue or narration (ibid.: 207).

Welch et al. (1979) stressed that the formal features seen in advertisements convey and reinforce some of the messages in the content but at a subtle, pervasive and arguably ‘dangerous’ level (ibid.: 208). For example, some formal features might convey images that reinforce gender stereotypes, where females are soft, gentle, predictable, and inactive and males are portrayed in exactly opposite ways. This study was relevant to my own investigation in terms of defining the foundations from which children might begin to perceive their own and others’ positions in a society continually stratified by gender (cf. Research Issue 5).

The Welch et al. (1979) study has been widely cited despite the fact that the findings were based on an extremely small sample of only twenty toy advertisements. Perhaps even more surprising is the fact that the study does not seem to have been replicated by other researchers in the field. Hence, the content analysis included in this investigation (Chapter Four) is intended to be UK-based update of a twenty-year-old American study, with the aim of noting whether the patterns seen in a small sample would emerge in a more substantial collection of toy advertisements. If the same patterns emerge within a larger sample, one could argue that their potential influence on the processes of textual interpretation by viewers would be greatly strengthened.

2.3.1.4 Theoretical model of gender perception in society and the media

So far, a number of interlocking gender issues have been considered, including: theories of gender identity formation and gender in society, play styles and gender differentiated toy selection, individual, peer group and family perceptions, and the depiction of gender in television advertisements. It is arguable that a basic framework can be formulated from the existing research findings to offer a summary of how (stereotyped) gender tends to be perceived. Clear framework summaries of ‘conventional’ gender representations seem to be rare in published research (cf. William, 1982, in Bringham, 1991: 472). For the purpose of this investigation and as a way to formalise the implicit ideas that bind each of the chapters together, the identifiable depictions of gender in society and the media are presented as a series of binary oppositions (cf. Semiotic analysis), as follows:

2.3.1.4.1 Summary of stereotypical ‘male’ and ‘female’ traits

It is with these various (stereotyped) oppositions in mind that the whole notion of gender identity and representation is considered in the context of this investigation.

2.3.2 Functions of gender stereotypes

From a review of content analysis findings of both adult- and child-targeted advertisements, observable patterns of gender stereotypy have been noted and are clearly significant in the overall construction of advertisement texts. These patterns can be both obvious and subtle, and their persistent use has often been criticised. It is, however, important to consider why advertisers choose to utilise such images and how they might function within society and the commercial marketplace.

The humanisation of consumer products and the enhancement of self-identity are very effective tools in the pursuit of audience attention (Hart, 1991: 96). Stereotypes are a succinct way of attracting attention, inferring the ‘right’ message, and persuading the viewer to identify or empathise with the on-screen characters. Goffman (1979: 84) referred to the portrayal of stereotypes as being part of a ‘hyper-ritualisation’ of society, which is often seen as especially prevalent in terms of gender. This, however, seems justified by the advertisers who argue that images of people ‘as they are in society’ would draw very little attention from the consumer public and that highly stylised paragons will always attract fascinated gazes (Fowles, 1996: 152).

Dyer (1993: 11 ff.) discussed the issue of stereotypes at length. Lippmann (1959: 96, in Dyer, ibid.) saw stereotypes as serving four main functions, as an ordering process, as a ‘short cut’ to meaning, as an effective reference to ‘the world’, and as an expression of ‘our’ values and beliefs. Dyer (1993: 12) argued that the whole process of ‘ordering’ acknowledges how societies make sense of, as well as reproduce themselves. To refer to a ‘short cut’ is thought to indicate the manner in which stereotypes are a simple easily-grasped form of representation, whilst still being able to condense a great deal of complex information and many connotations (ibid.). Perhaps the core of Dyer’s discussion on stereotypes is his reference to how they invoke consensus; that ‘this is what everyone – you, me and us – thinks members of such-and-such a social group are like’ (ibid.: 14). It implies that all individual members of society independently agree on these conceptions of certain social groups. This is rather ironic, since Dyer (ibid.) emphasised that it is from such stereotypes that individuals often obtain their ideas.

For the content of advertisements to hold meaning for the general public, representations of ‘typicalities’ are an essential tool. Pesch et al. (1980, in Courtney  & Whipple, 1983: 21) stressed that the stereotyping of women will generally go hand in hand with that of men. Millum (1975: 51, in Manstead & McCulloch, 1981: 171) noted that ‘The need to represent typical people and typical situations leads to the production of compromises or composites or of stereotypes’. Lafky et al. (1996: 380) argue that the presentations used in advertisements are idealised and stereotyped portrayals of individuals, and that stereotypes have become an essential and convenient method of communicating the product category and the target audience.

Perhaps one of the most obvious explanations for such blatant stereotyping in advertisements is the brevity of commercial texts. To effectively promote a product in thirty seconds or less, advertising companies must rely on the use of stereotypes to ensure instant recognition of the advertisement ‘appeals’ by the intended target audiences for given products. Perhaps the most impressive aspect of stereotyping is that it pervades our society almost naturally and invisibly, carrying with it many connotations. Even the subtlest representations in advertisements can carry with them far reaching implications. Goffman (1979: 7) argued that gender is ‘something that can be conveyed fleetingly in any social situation’. What is important in this investigation is to attempt to understand how gender stereotypes manifest themselves in advertisement texts and how young children interpret stereotyped gender portrayals.

2.3.3 The gender ‘problem’

The constructionist theory of gender roles and stereotypes was popular in the ‘70s and early ‘80s but despite its relevance as an interpretative framework for this investigation, it is no longer the only (or best) way to view gender. The last fifteen years have seen a shift away from this rather formulaic and structural approach towards something more problematic and dynamic. Given the current climate of the gender debate, it is therefore vital that one should address the post-modernist theory of ‘gender performativity’. This debate, more than any other, stresses that gender should never be used as a ‘bottom line explanation’ because it is of itself a social construction than requires explanation (cf. Cameron, 1992).

The key shift in thinking seems to have come from the feminists who were initially responsible for the introduction of the notions of gender roles and stereotypes (Segal, 1999: 39-40). Gender began to be theorised as a tool for understanding so-called cultural reality (ibid.: 42), and with this came the acknowledgement that patterns of representation were shifting, fragmentary, dynamic and contradictory, rather than static and easily definable in terms of the polarised or binary oppositions of ‘male’ and ‘female’ (Butler, in Morton, 1996: 184).

‘Gender performativity’ was a term first coined by Butler (1990). By ‘performativity’, she referred to the ways in which a body acquires its gender identity through certain ‘acts’ – ‘speaking’ and ‘performing’ the so-called norms of heterosexual discourse (Ebert, in Morton, 1996: 356). In her deconstruction of gender identity, Butler argues that a subject’s actions are ‘not expressive’ in the sense of some essential nature, but rather ‘performative’ in the sense that identities are ‘acted out’ (Butler, 1990: 141). Butler perceived ‘performativity’ as a means of inhabiting a gendered identity, together with a certain level of agency and knowingness about the fact that all (gender) representations are a form of social playacting (Chinn, in Medhurst & Munt, 1997: 294). Her theory originated from a study by the philosopher J. L. Austin, who referred to ‘performative language’ and the so-called ‘naturalness’ of speech acts, which can be effectively applied to the whole idea of ‘gender’ as a social construct (ibid.: 295 ff.; Parker & Sedgwick, 1995: 1). Butler (in Tripp, 2000: 155) stressed that such speech acts are authoritative and, when uttered, perform an action as well as exercise a binding power.

It is interesting to trace the origin of ideas on (gender) performativity. Chinn (in Medhurst & Munt, 1997: 294 ff.) discussed the work of a number of key philosophers as a way to locate and illustrate Butler’s seminal work on gender. Derrida, for example, built on Austin’s work by questioning why certain (speech) acts appeared to be ‘natural’ (ibid.: 296). He concluded that they must conform to pre-existing models in order to make any kind of sense when operating in society, but that these models existed ‘outside’ the immediate worlds of and must be learnt by those who perform them. It is arguable that individuals conform to certain gender ‘performances’ as a way to be understood by and accepted in society, adopting known and definable positions as either male or female. Derrida, however, did not suggest any reason why these models appeared ‘natural’ to those who performed them.

The question of ‘naturalness’ was addressed by Althusser (ibid.: 297) who argued that there were social mechanisms or Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) in place to uphold the status quo and make social constructs (among other things) appear ‘normal’. One could argue that there must be established ISAs in place to structure gender behaviour, defining masculinity and femininity both singly and in interaction. Perhaps one of the key points relating Althusser’s theories to the concept of gender performativity in children and childhood is the notion of ‘policing’ and the fact that we are all interpellated into gender roles from birth (ibid.: 299). Society (or peer group, in the context of children) is said to ‘police’ gender activities, ‘punishing’ those who break the norms, conventions or established ISAs and hence maintaining a highly defined structure. Butler (in Morton, 1996: 180) alluded to this idea of ‘policing’ by describing (gender) identity categories as ‘instruments of regulatory regimes’. Sedgwick (1993, in Medhurst & Munt, ibid.: 302) equates the idea of policing with that of ‘shame’, to produce much the same constraining effects. Matters become increasingly complex with reference to Foucault (ibid: 298-9), who argued that gender identities are far from fixed or ‘normal’ because their very existence is locked in a system of power and gender practices, as part of a so-called ‘discursive structure’.

Butler combined all these theories as a way to emphasise that there is nothing ‘natural’ about gender. Based on Austin’s theories of speech acts, Butler argued that once a child is pronounced ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ at birth s/he is compelled to ‘perform’ that given role through acts, gestures and desires (Butler, 1990: 136). That is to say, children are ‘boyed’ or ‘girled’ and tend to behave accordingly and unquestioningly. It is further arguable that all these ‘acts, gestures and desires’ are reinforced by individuals within the child’s immediate social world (parents, teachers, other adults, peers) as well as through the models appearing on television.

Butler further argued that the performance of gender is merely an illusion, where the notion of ‘self’ becomes entangled in this performance (ibid.). The identity (or identities) of subjects are only a mirage, which the interplay of signifiers ‘act out’ or ‘perform’ (Morton, 1996: 14). Furthermore, Butler, (in Morton, 1996: 187) stressed that a performance is not something an individual can elect to do, but is ‘compulsory’ within a given social framework. The idea of a compulsory performance of gender, in turn, feeds back into the binary system of (stereotyped) gender roles, outlined previously. It is the ‘performance’ that makes such a binary system intelligible (ibid.: 190), through the production and maintenance of ‘boyed’ and ‘girled’ positions within society, where the main social ‘effect’ is one of positive acceptance through adherence to the established ‘norms’.

On occasion, the children in my sample school playfully performed their roles as either ‘boys’ or ‘girls’ by satirising their positions and exaggerating their ‘likes and dislikes’ within an established gender framework (cf. Chapter Seven). This playfulness (or acknowledging of the stereotype) might be one example of performativity. Another example of performance might arguably be that of a child unconsciously behaving in a gendered way. While s/he may be unaware of playacting behaviour patterns, it is occurring nonetheless. In this sense, it is arguable that the notion of ‘performance’ is closely aligned to that of ‘appropriate gender behaviour’.

The interplay between the polarised construction of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ in the toy advertisements and the subsequent gender performances exhibited by the children who participated in this investigation are extremely interesting and revealing. The relationship between the traditionally prescriptive theory of gender stereotypes and the more dynamic notions of gender performativity will be discussed later in this investigation (Chapters Seven & Eight).

2.4 How children interpret the media

One should consider some of the broader issues of audience interpretation regarding mass media reception before considering the specific position of children and their understanding of advertisements. Williamson (1978: 41) believes that each individual becomes ‘subject’ and that s/he is not only a receiver but also a creator of meaning. Yet the individual is only a creator of meaning because s/he is called upon to do just that. Advertisements do not allow us to be passive, but require us to be ‘active receivers’ in making meaning applicable to ourselves. This complicated notion implies a mutual dependency between semiology (the sign system of an advertisement, within the broader sign systems of the mass media and ‘society’) and psychology (the thoughts and feelings of the individual) as formalised in the theoretical model of Text-Producer-Receiver described in Chapter One.

Yet, one must also acknowledge that advertisers strongly prescribe a ‘preferred meaning’ within their advertisement texts, so that the intended message is conveyed to the audience as effectively and effortlessly as possible, restricting the process of meaning making for the audience (cf. McQuail, 1994: 239/242). To build a ‘preferred meaning’ into an advertising campaign requires an over-determination of the process of encoding, making the desired conclusion about the product more obvious than any other reading (cf. Hall et al.,1980: 128 ff.). This involves careful structuring and format, to instruct the viewer in how to interpret the meaning of the advertisement (Fowles, 1996: 83; Goldman, 1992: 124), and one could argue that such practice could also be applied to the construction of models of ‘appropriate gender behaviour’. Ideologically, such ‘closed’ texts are thought to have greater impact because they offer fewer interpretational possibilities (McQuail, 1994: 239/242). Therefore, one could argue that if a child accepts the way in which s/he is defined as either ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ in televised toy advertisements, then the advertisement would be more influential.

Hall et al. (1980: 134) also argued, however, that dominant ideologies are typically inscribed as the ‘preferred reading’ in the media text but may not automatically be adopted by the readers. Hall et al. (ibid.: 136), noted the three hypothetical positions regarding the decoding of televisual messages. Those individuals whose social situations favour the inscribed preferred meaning might make ‘dominant’ readings. Those who inflect the preferred meaning to take account of their social position, on the other hand, might make ‘negotiated’ readings, while those individuals whose social position puts them into direct conflict with the preferred meaning might make ‘oppositional’ readings of the media text. This kind of explanation could well account for the way in which boys and girls view their own versus opposite sex advertisements in vastly different ways. Winick et al. (1973: 84) also noted that children’s ages may influence how they perceive media messages.

However, it is dangerous practice to be caught in the search for one ‘true’ meaning, since the ambiguity of signs is de-emphasised and underestimated. As Cook (1992: 29) suggested, advertisements are parasitic on many situations, occurring within as well as imitating other discourses, so intertextually the advertising message can ‘mean’ different things to different people. For example, a child sees only an Action Man advertisement, while an adult may well liken it to a war film; Barbie may be a child’s fashion doll, but she is also a ‘sex symbol’.

Bignall (1997: 47) argued that the whole idea of an individual being positioned by a text has its drawbacks, because it cannot account for the different ways in which individuals read advertisements. To posit that all receivers will respond to advertisements in the same way is to naturalise the dominant ideology of consumerism – that we all ‘need and desire’ the same things in order to become socially integrated and fulfilled. The meanings that are negotiated within and around an advertisement cannot be viewed in isolation, since there are also a number of intertextual relationships between the advertisement and wider society, and between the advertisement and other media genre. One could argue that a consideration of child as receiver would be particularly interesting because they are in the process of building their knowledge of society and mass media, so the way in which they negotiate or decode media texts might be indicative of their unique positions.

2.4.1 Audience reception theories and other ‘effects’ considerations

Many formalised theories of media ‘effect’ have been posited and one can acknowledge that they do, at least in part, relate to the possible impact on and interpretation of television advertising by young children. The ‘hypodermic’ model of effects, for example, might describe how an idea could be ‘injected’ into impressionable (young) minds (cf. Dyer, 1982: 76). Unnikrishnan & Bajpai (1996: 55) emphasised that advertisements must grab and maintain attention whilst simultaneously embedding a seed of desire. In addition, one might argue that young children could ‘use’ televised (toy) advertisements to ‘gratify’ their desire for product ownership in a materialistic society (cf. Berger, 1991: 85). Advertisements may, in turn, ‘stimulate’ young children to purchase (or persuade others to purchase on their behalf) goods in the marketplace, in ‘response’ to the appeals or promises made (cf. McQuail, 1994: 338). Furthermore, as suggested in this investigation, advertisement texts may serve as ‘learning’ material for social behaviour where (gender) models are seen and subsequently imitated (cf. Harris, 1994: 19; Smith, 1994: 324). Finally, the ways in which young children ‘decode’ the ‘encoded’ advertising messages may be significant in terms of how the overall sales message is interpreted or ‘influential’ (cf. Hall et al., 1980: 128 ff.).  

Perhaps social learning theory and the encoding/decoding model of audience interpretation are most pervasive in this investigation, in terms of considering how the children react to the commercial images and messages, along with how they negotiate an understanding of the (media) texts (cf. Research Issue 5). However, the processes of audience interpretation are more complex that a simple linear process, as posited in the encoding/decoding model. One should not underestimate the consumer. Williamson (1978: 174) emphasised that the myth of advertising is not naïve or a means of ‘ideological brain-washing’. One must always allow for the fact that people’s conscious attitude towards advertising is likely to be sceptical, and this scepticism should arguably extend to the underrated social group ‘children’.

McQuail (1994: 327) noted that there is little agreement as to the nature or extent of the assumed media effects. Perhaps the main problem is the fact that television is unlikely to be the only source of influence in a child’s life since family, school and community will have considerable powers. Dyer (1982: 76) stressed that age, gender, class and family relations are also important factors in determining the impact of the media and the degree of (lasting) influence. Buckingham observed (1993b: 5) that the media actually play a significant role in the relationships that young people have with their families and peers, as well as within the forming of their own identities. Television may be used to ‘reflect’ as well as ‘re-shape’ the child’s perception of ‘reality’, but the actual nature of the overall effect is notoriously difficult to measure. People respond differently to advertisements, in accordance with language, imagery, modes of address, and whether or not they feel it fulfils a particular need.

Perhaps the impact of advertising on children depends predominantly on two major issues – the child’s knowledge of the world and the child’s knowledge of the medium (cf. Condry, 1989: 166). Buckingham (1996: 36) employed the linguistically derived term ‘modality’ to refer to the relationship between a statement or text and ‘reality’. That is to say, all texts have some kind of link with and are derived from the so-called ‘real world’, particularly in terms of codes and conventions. Individuals must negotiate a way through these social structures in order to understand the foundations of the text and make it meaningful for themselves. Perhaps it is fair to suggest that young children must work harder than adults to make these modality links because they are still in the process of forming fundamental cognitive schemata.

While knowledge of the world might be built upon through active experimentation in the child’s immediate environment, knowledge of the medium might depend not simply on experience but also on cognitive processing capabilities. Noble (1975: 82 ff.), for example, argued that Piaget’s theory of chronological age could also explain how children view television. After extensive discussion of Piaget’s pre-operational stage (18 months to 6- or 7-years-old), Noble (1975: 94) provided a summary of how children of this age view television. He referred to the difficulties they might encounter when trying to interpret plot sequences, due to their inability to reverse constituents within a chain of reasoning. He also noted that egocentrism and binary thought processes lead to the inability to perceive events from another point of view. Added to this is the tendency for children of this age to imaginatively read into the plot or add incidents, using television programmes as a basis for highly stereotyped social play. Noble (1975: 104) also discussed the refinement of television viewing style as the child moves into the stage of concrete operations (6- to 11-years-old), with the realisation that films and programmes have a story line and that characters have motives and feelings (even though these may not be understood). Once children reach the formal operations stage (11- or 12-years-old and onwards) (ibid.: 105), their comprehension of television is close to that of adult viewers (cf. Davies, 1989: 12-22).

Both Durkin (1984, 1985) and Calvert & Huston (1982) stressed that it is also important to consider what children bring with them to the viewing situation. These considerations include their existing stereotypes and gender schematic processing biases (Durkin, 1995: 181), as well as conditioning and reinforcement, and other environmental factors that serve to initiate, perpetuate and/or maintain sex-differentiated behaviour patterns (Sprafkin et al., in Liss, 1983: 169; Hargreaves & Colley, 1986: 30; Durkin, 1995: 174).

2.4.2 Attention, genre recognition, comprehension and recall

Even though a television may be switched on for several hours a day in the average household, it does not automatically command a high level of attention. The degrees to which individuals actively attend to the screen are certainly important determining factors in the potential for television influence. Gunter & McAleer (1997: 136), referring to a study by Ward et al., note the differences in attention levels between older and younger children, where the latter were believed to pay less attention to televised advertisements. Children between the ages of five and eight gave full attention to the screen about 67% of the viewing time, compared with an average of 75% of full attention for children aged nine- to twelve-years. 

However, contradictory findings emerged in other studies regarding children’s attention to the television screen. The differences in attention are thought to be closely associated with the viewing context. For example, Wartella (in Palmer & Dorr, 1981: 309/10) noted that when older children were observed within the home environment, the levels of attention shown towards televised material dramatically decreased. In school-based studies, however, their attention levels rose, perhaps as a result of the demands for attention generally required in schools. Bechtel et al. (in Gunter & McAleer, 1997: 136) observed similar changes in the level of attention amongst older children after placing video cameras in the family home. They found that children up to ten years of age only watched television advertisements 40% of the time, while nine- to eleven-year-olds watched them 55% of the time. The data must be carefully interpreted, however, because even though the child may not be directly attending to the screen, they may ‘monitor’ the content of television by attending to the audio features (cf. Rolandelli, 1989, in Gunter & McAleer, 1997: 139).

One of the most obvious ways to determine whether children are aware of the formal features in advertisements is to test whether they have the ability to distinguish between advertisements and the programmes in which they are embedded. Wartella & Hunter (in Meyer, 1983: 149) found that younger children, particularly pre-schoolers, had difficulty distinguishing between the two genres when compared with older children. Young children’s ability to perceptually discriminate between the two genres is said to occur somewhere between the ages of three and five (ibid.: 150). One study suggested children as young as 3.0 to 3.6 years of age were capable of recognising advertisements (Jaglom & Gardner, 1981: 42, in Chandler, 1997a) (cf. Kline, 1993: 169).

As well as levels of attention and genre recognition, there are though to be certain television features that children comprehend and recall more easily than others. Rice et al. (in Meyer, 1983: 31) reviewed a number of studies on different types of programmes (Anderson et al. 1979; Anderson & Levin, 1976; Bernstein, 1978; Susman, 1978; Wartella & Ettema, 1974; Wright et al. 1980; Rubinstein et al. 1974, all cited in Meyer, 1983). A number of common production features stood out as holding the most appeal for and the attention of young children. Auditory features such as lively music, sound effects, children’s voices, peculiar voices, non-speech vocalisations and frequent changes of speaker are very effective in attracting and holding children’s attention. It is arguable that (toy) advertisements utilise many of these techniques. Conventional visual features such as cuts, zooms and pans, however, were less influential than anticipated; special visual effects were more effective. High levels of physical activity and action are though to maintain attention, while changes in scene, characters, themes and auditory events were effective but did not maintain attention over a prolonged period.

A number of studies have emphasised the significance of audio features in advertisements, with emphasis on music as a method of non-verbal communication. Winick et al. (1973: 37) note that music is a universal language for children because it tends to elicit spontaneous body movements, stimulates individualised association, encourages clapping and requires no knowledge of language. Calvert & Scott (1989) (ibid.) also claimed that the use of attractive music increases the likelihood of repeat viewing and listening every time the advertisement appears on the screen, enhancing the potential impact as a whole. Macklin (in Hecker & Stewart, 1988: 225) argued that music is the most effective attention-grabbing device and that the advertising message may well be ignored without it. She also explained that it provides a platform for ‘rehearsal’, where the viewer may hum the catchy tune, so enhancing the memorability of the advertisement. Many of the children I spoke to often used music as a point of reference for the advertisements that they enjoyed watching. Carl (age 11), for example, could not recall the product name but sang the complete soundtrack for Galaxy chocolate.

The only contrary argument undermining the power of music in advertising is the supposition that it may sometimes act as a distracter, impeding effective emphasis on the advertising message. Macklin (in Hecker & Stewart, ibid.: 144) referred to a study by Wakschlag, Reitz & Zillman (1982) who claimed that rhythmic, fast tempo background music significantly reduced visual attention to and information acquisition from the educational programme they showed to a group of children. Perhaps this finding was more indicative of the unusual inclusion of fast background music in an educational programme. Perhaps the children in the study instinctively found it unsettling because it was contrary to their established schemata for such programme genres.

Finally, Gunter & McAleer (1997: 137) highlight the fact that young children have a tendency to recall single elements from advertisements such as music, characters or a ‘funny bit’, while older children were able to recall more product and plot-line information. In my own research findings, for example, Susan (age 5) recalled the ‘sloppy ice-cream bit’ from the Safeway advertising campaign, while John (age 8) had near-perfect plot and content recall of the John Smith’s bitter advertisement featuring the comedian, Jack Dee, strolling unawares through life-threatening (computer generated) situations of danger!

Having reviewed the major theoretical underpinnings and the classic research findings regarding the complex interrelationship between gender, advertising and children, it is possible to formulate a simple flow diagram to represent the links between these issues. The diagram below serves to illustrate the circularity of the process of media interpretation and how television (with particular emphasis on the genre of advertising) can feed into an individual’s conception of (‘self’ and ‘other’) gender identity. It should be noted, however, that ‘gender identity’ as shown in this model, does not imply that it is a single identifiable and definable concept or ‘entity’. It is in and of itself dynamic and shifting, where the concept may be broken down into many different components. The intention here is to produce a relatively simple interpretative structure in which to locate this infinitely complex issue.

Since this investigation will focus on a group of children between seven- and eleven-years of age, the issues discussed above are likely to be invisible or ‘natural’ to them. Consequently, the initial aim of the investigation must be to establish exactly what gender patterns are formulated in toy advertisements and targeted directly at children in the form of powerful commercial messages (cf. Research Issues 2-3). Once these patterns are identified, the second stage must to consider how the children themselves perceived the (gendered) images in the advertisements (cf. Research Issue 5). In order to achieve such diverse objectives within a single study, the use of multiple interlocking research methodologies was essential.

Summary

The literature was divided into various sections as a way to try and impose structure on an otherwise complex and confused mix of theories and considerations. The published research was considered within the broad spheres of (gender) identity, (gender in) play and (gender in) advertisements.

Gender identity formation was viewed as a series of stages within the contexts of cognition and social learning theory. The stage of gender constancy emerged as most crucial within the developmental process because it increases the interest that young children have in same-sex behaviour models and the subsequent tendency to mimic gendered behaviour. A number of studies have revealed that there is pressure on individuals to behave in stereotyped ways and that these behaviour patterns are generally equated with social acceptance. These socially constructed gender patterns are often reflected in the ways that children play with toys, the toys they choose and the way that they interact with one another. Such behaviour patterns are often influenced by the social mechanisms of reinforcement, punishment and imitation. In addition, young children generally embrace gender differences as they forge strong social identities for themselves. A great deal of importance is attached to peer group and family approval, although girls are often allowed more flexibility in their re-enactment of ‘appropriate gender behaviour’ because they are able to align themselves with ‘male’ as well as ‘female’.

It is arguable that advertising creates ‘structures of meaning’ within society, where these structures might include what it ‘means’ to be male or female. To illustrate how gender is conventionally portrayed in advertisements, a number of content analysis studies were reviewed. Significant gender differences were noted in terms of on-screen activities, the stereotyped roles re-enacted by on-screen characters, ‘day part’ variations in gender depiction, and the use of particular formal features. In each instance, gender depictions tended to follow traditional stereotypes and were summarised as a series of classic binary oppositions. It is also arguable that gender stereotypes have a strong purpose and function within the advertisement context, since they are easily recognisable, stylised representations of ‘types’ which facilitates an understanding of product category and target audience.

The postmodern theory of ‘gender performativity’ was then introduced as a way to demonstrate that gender issues have been ‘problematised’ by academics in recent years. Rather than perceiving the idea of ‘gender’ as fixed and definable in the context of stereotypes, the theory of ‘performativity’ emphasises the need to consider it as shifting, dynamic, fragmentary and contradictory within a regulated social framework. Within this context, (gender) identities are ‘acted out’ or ‘performed’ by individuals who have been either ‘boyed’ or ‘girled’ and re-enact gender norms.

It is arguable that media interpretation is restricted, to a certain extent, by the preferred meanings incorporated into the texts. Children, however, are still called upon to draw on their knowledge of the world and their knowledge of the medium in order to interpret these implicit meanings, with the freedom to either accept or reject the suggested interpretation. Other considerations regarding how young children interpret the media might include social predicament, attention, genre recognition, comprehension and recall, as well as viewing purpose and context. The basic proposition is that the complex interrelationship between gender, advertisements and children is one of cyclic, mutual reinforcement.

▲