Fashion Psychology｜Should Kids Have a Moschino Barbie?
An Analysis of the Moschino Barbie Doll Advertisement from a Cognitive Perspective
Luxury fantasy not only existed in adult society but also gradually entered children’s world. In 2015, luxury brand Moschino teamed up with Barbie to lunch two dolls dressed in classic Moschino pieces such as a leather jacket, a slogan t-shirt, and a cross-body bag (Moschino & Barbie — Luxury RetailLuxury Retail, 2015).
In the commercial, a boy appeared in a Barbie advertisement for the first time ever. In a group of kids playing with the Moschino Barbie, this boy stands out with a doll in hand and shouts ‘Moschino Barbie is so fierce!’ Most people commented positively on Moschino breaking the stereotype by featuring a boy in a Barbie advertisement.
However, the messages underlying this advertisement go beyond the stereotype. Studies show that young children playing with Barbie dolls have raised some issues, such as body dissatisfaction and eating disorders (Anschutz, & Engels, 2010; Dittmar et al., 2006; Harriger et al., 2019; Jellinek et al., 2016; Rice et al., 2016). Regarding exposing children to brand concepts early in life may lead to materialism issues (McAlister & Cornwell, 2010).
Consequently, this essay aims to unravel the cognitive layers of the Moschino Barbie advertisement from three perspectives: advertising, branding, and Barbie dolls, to address two questions. First, at what age will these three factors affect children? Second, what are the potential impacts of the Moschino Barbie? Finally, this essay offers an overview of the implications and limitations for educators and future research.
▍Literature Review
- Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory:
The cognitive development theory of Piaget is used to explain the development of different cognitive structures in children. According to Piaget, children’s cognitive development has four stages: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
- In the sensorimotor stage (zero to two years old), intelligence is shown through movement without using symbols (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). Since infants learn about the world through physical interactions and experience, their understanding is limited but growing (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
- The preoperational stage (two to seven years old) is characterised by a growth in language ability, the use of symbols, an egocentric perspective, and limited logic (Ojose, 2008).
- During the concrete operational stage (seven to 11 years old), intelligence is displayed by the logic and application of symbols that correspond to concrete objects (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). Additionally, their egocentric thought decreases (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
- In the formal operational stage (11 years and older), intelligence is displayed through the logical application of symbols associated with an abstract concept, including forming hypotheses and deducing possible consequences (Huitt & Hummel, 2003; Ojose, 2008).
- Advertisement Information Processing:
The purpose of advertising is to influence the mental state of consumers, such as by informing them of the desirable features of a product or attempting to deceive them with one-sided information about the product. Ultimately, convincing consumers to purchase it (Moses & Baldwin, 2005).
To understand how children perceive the product message from the advertisement, the information-processing theory is applied. According to Eysenck and Kesenck (2020), when a commercial is presented, it is stored in short-term memory (STM), which has a limited storage capacity. If this information lacks rehearsal or is subject to interference, it may deteriorate over time (Eysenck & Kesenck, 2020).
In contrast, if the information is practised and retrieved, it will be transferred to long-term memory (LTM) for a very long period of time (Eysenck & Kesenck, 2020). In other words, how children respond to the subject of commercial campaigns is based on the commercial information and the retrieved information represented in STM (Roedder, 1981).
However, due to the complicated meanings underlying advertisements, children’s responses to advertising vary according to their age-related cognitive storage and retrieval capacities (Roedder, 1981). Therefore, the question of to what extent children understand the intentions and messages behind advertisements is raised.
▍Discussion
1. Advertising
The Development of Children’s Ability to Understand Advertisement
The closest analogy to what occasionally occurs in advertising is when children realise that they are being tricked. According to Devries (1970), preschoolers did not comprehend the tricks when playing hiding games, indicating that children at this age may not understand the intention of advertisers to persuade them to purchase a product. Therefore, it is hypothesised that preschoolers may not be able to identify advertising’s purpose.
The ability to recognise that appearances can be deceiving is another aspect of determining whether children can comprehend advertising. According to the appearance-reality distinction study (Flavell et al., 1983), four- and five-year-old children could recognise when they have been misled. In other words, children between these ages may distinguish between informative and deceptive product information within advertising.
Similar findings can be found in Pillow and Henrichon’s (1996) study. They state that advertising is motivated by desire, which typically results in a biased or one-sided presentation of the product’s information, emphasising positive features and ignoring negative ones. Their study shows that it is not until children are six years old that they begin to identify biased interpretations, meaning that children at age six may recognise that the advertiser is attempting to sell the product by producing positively biased information.
key takeaway: In summary, this essay suggests that children under the age of four may not be able to identify the purpose of advertising. At ages four and five, children begin to recognise that advertisements are deceiving them. Not until the age of six can children’s conceptions of the intentions underlying advertising be fully formed.
2. Branding
The Development of Children’s Brand Concept
To measure children’s brand concept, ‘brand symbolism understanding’ should be applied. According to McAlister and Cornwell (2010), brand symbolism understanding refers to knowing the meaning that the brand name carries, which involves the user’s quality (e.g., status or user image) and the information about the product (e.g., opinion of brand usage).
As Piaget’s theory shows in the literature review, children in the preoperational stage cannot differentiate their ideas from those of others due to their egocentric orientation. When children reach the concrete operational stage, their egocentric thinking diminishes (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). That is, children in this stage may develop the capacity to comprehend the symbolism of brands worn by others.
Aligned with Piaget’s theory, John (1999) indicates that children in the preoperational stage may infer product types based on salient perceptual cues (e.g., small versus large objects), rather than abstract concepts (e.g., popular, exclusive, or new). While by the second grade (seven to eight years old), children’s understanding of the social implications of consumption decisions grows significantly and reaches maturity by the sixth grade (11–12 years old) (Belk et al., 1982).
Similarly, Achenreiner (1995) indicates that second graders showed no preference for owners who wear prominent or non-prominent brand-name shoes. In contrast, sixth graders and high school students (14–18 years old) had different impressions of the two types of shoe wearers.
key takeaway: In summary, second graders (7–8 years old) begin to develop an understanding of brand concepts, and sixth graders (11–12 years old) reach a sophisticated level of comprehension. Furthermore, as the children grow older, the brand concept will become more mature and complete.
Children’s Relationship with Brands
According to Guest’s (1964) findings, early childhood experiences have influenced children’s later brand-purchasing behaviour. In the context of this essay, children as a current market (e.g., Moschino Barbie Doll) will influence them as a future market (e.g., Moschino products).
Similar findings can be observed in the ‘nostalgia theory,’ which posits that people tend to feel nostalgic for things they were familiar with as children and form relationships with brands during childhood (Holbrook & Schindler, 1991). In other words, as children grow up, they may become loyal consumers of Moschino since they have had connections with Moschino in the past.
3. Barbie Dolls
The Development of Children’s Self Concept in Relation to Barbie’s Image
- Piaget’s self-cognition theory
According to Boultwood and Jerrard (2000), the first step in the development of Piaget’s self-cognition theory is infants’ understanding of the ‘objects concept’, which includes the infants’ awareness of their body as a distinct object. They further state that as children can control their bodies, they start to separate ‘self’ from ‘non-self’ and realise that separate objects have an independent existence. That is, they can see the world from a different angle.
Supporting evidence shows that infants demonstrate self-recognition by touching and exploring the marked region on their faces between the ages of 18 months and 2 years, but not before (Meltzoff, 1990; Nielsen, & Dissanayake, 2004). Therefore, we may conclude that infants in this stage may be equipped with the concept of self.
- Barbie as a role model
After children have developed a sense of self and non-self, they may view their toys as distinct objects and even, as role models. According to the ‘object relations theory,’ toys can serve as children’s role models by communicating certain elements of society to children, such as social norms, cultural values, and adult regulations (Rochberg-Halton, 1984).
Additionally, these values can be internalised through imaginative play (Kuther & McDonald, 2004; Rochberg-Halton, 1984). Taking Barbie as an example, according to Coyle (2010), Barbie is a silent role model for young children, which implies that children may view — long legs, big eyes, blond hair, and a slim waist — as their values and develop personal standards (i.e., a beauty standard) through play activities.
As for the perspective of ‘social cognition theory,’ personal standards form who we are. According to Bandura (1991), personal standards serve a significant role in self-directedness by evaluating and directing one’s actions. Similarly, Smith et al. (2014) state that self-regulation requires self-knowledge, which encompasses important personal standards that we aspire to and conceptions of who we are. That is, personal standards posit great involvement in forming self-concept during development.
- Empirical research
Empirical research reveals that Barbie could influence young children’s self-concept. Dittmar et al. (2006) state that young children first imitate and identify Barbie’s image as a personal standard in an unreflective guide during distinct phases of play. As they grow, they internalise the image of Barbie (e.g., thinness) as a defining characteristic of beauty. Once children have finished internalising the ideal image, this image has become part of their self-concept (Dittmar et al., 2006), which aligns with Kuther and McDonald’s (2004) finding that playing with toys could impact the formation of self-concept. Similarly, Rice et al. (2016) discovered that five- to eight-year-old girls exposed to Barbie increased thin-ideal internalisation.
A study found that children as young as six to eight years old who played with full-figured dolls (Tracy) expressed less dissatisfaction with their bodies than those who played with thin-figured dolls (Barbie) (Jellinek et al., 2016). Similar to the findings of Jellinek et al., Musher-Eizenman et al.’s finding is even younger. According to Musher-Eizenman et al. (2003), children between the ages of four and six believe that being overweight is unacceptable, indicating that children as young as four are capable of comprehending the concept of thinness. Another study by Cramer and Steinwert (1998) asked children to choose between three body types: thin, average, and chubby. None of the four- and five-year-olds in their sample chose the ‘chubby’ figure as the one they most wished to resemble, while one-third of the three-year-olds did. This study indicates that three-year-olds may not understand the concept of thinness, but four-year-olds do.
key takeaway: In conclusion, the age at which Barbie’s image may influence young children is determined. This essay hypothesises that children form a sense of self between the ages of 18 months and 2 years old. As young as four years old, children may exhibit an internalising ideal image in their self-concept, which may become more extreme as they age. In other words, Barbie may influence children’s self-perception as early as the age of four, and this effect becomes stronger as they grow.
4. The Influence of the Moschino Barbie Doll on Children’s Emotions
Relationships between children and inanimate objects are a form of attachment or an enduring emotional bond (Ji, 2002). Such bonds could be displayed through ‘play’ and be a fun experience for young children’s cognitive development. However, it can also bring negative emotions to them.
- Impact of exposing brand concepts to young children
From the perspective of a brand concept, the main concern is materialism. According to McAlister and Cornwell (2010), preschoolers can judge their peers based on the brands they use. For instance, children may determine whether peers are popular or unpopular, interesting or dull, based on the brand they use. In other words, children at an early age place a high value on using branded products to cultivate and promote their self-image. In turn, it may cause problems such as peer pressure and competition (Holloman et al., 1996; Richins, 2017).
- Impact of exposing Barbie dolls to young children
As previously stated, exposing young children to Barbie’s thin body image can lead to body dissatisfaction, which has been linked to the development of eating disorders (Jellinek et al., 2016), and such exposure at an early age is believed to contribute to future indicators of mental distress, including low self-esteem and depressive symptoms (Goossens et al., 2017).
- Impact of exposing Moschino Barbie to young children
Therefore, this essay hypothesises that playing with Moschino Barbie dolls may potentially instill a brand concept in young children when they are particularly vulnerable to comparisons and rely on consumer goods to define themselves. This, in turn, may influence how they judge their peers. This peer pressure may cause children to experience negative emotions such as envy, inferiority, insecurity, a lower sense of self, and greater self-doubt (Richins, 2017). Additionally, due to the thin image young children are exposed to with Barbie, they may experience body dissatisfaction, eating disorders, and negative emotions such as depression, anxiety, stress, low self-esteem, and depressive symptoms (Goossens et al., 2017; Neumark-Sztainer et al., 2006).
▍Conclusion
This essay has applied a cognitive lens to unpack the Moschino Barbie Doll advertisement into three factors (advertising, branding, and Barbie dolls) to understand at what age children will be affected by these three factors, and it has further revealed the potential impacts of being exposed to the Moschino Barbie Doll. To determine the effective age range for Moschino Barbie doll advertising, three components should be considered.
From the standpoint of advertising, children between the ages of four and five begin to recognise that advertisements are deceiving them. However, children’s conceptions of the intentions underlying advertising are not fully formed until the age of six. As for the brand perspective, children start to develop an understanding of brand concepts around the ages of seven to eight and reach a sophisticated level of understanding around the age of 11 to 12. Finally, Barbie may influence children’s self-perception as early as the age of four. Additionally, as children get older, all three factors will grow mature and more complete.
In conclusion, this essay hypothesises that children around the age of four may have an immature understanding of this Moschino Barbie doll advertisement, which may not have a significant effect on them. At seven, when children can comprehend the three components of this advertisement, it may have a deeper effect on their worldview. These three factors will have a greater impact on children over the age of seven, as they are more sophisticated.
▍Limitations and Contributions
This essay mainly deconstructs the Moschino Barbie doll using Piaget’s cognitive structures as a framework for studying children’s limited information-processing abilities. However, some scholars argue that Piaget’s theory does not explain how or why children have these limitations (Roedder, 1981) and the lack of individual differences in children’s social development (McAlister & Cornwell, 2010). According to Moses and Baldwin (2005), Piaget’s age stages are helpful in explaining ‘general’ development, whereas an enhanced model would account for differences ‘within’ the stages. Future research could therefore include the ‘theory of mind,’ which is defined as ‘knowledge and awareness of mental states in oneself and others’ (Hofmann et al., 2016, p. 1), to close this knowledge gap and present a more comprehensive understanding of the social aspect of children’s development.
This essay has made some contributions. First, it informs parents and educators about how advertising, brands, and Barbie may influence young children’s cognitive development. Furthermore, this essay has identified potential consequences that young children may face, which educators should be aware of and try to avoid before they arise. For instance, parents should recognise the body types of dolls they purchase for their children and the advertising their children are exposed to on a daily basis.
Overall, this essay has shed light on children’s cognitive development in three areas: advertising, branding, and Barbie dolls. Using this essay as a basis, future researchers could conduct studies to confirm the essay’s hypothesis and provide conclusive evidence.
▍References
Anschutz, D. J., & Engels, R. C. M. E. (2010). The Effects of Playing with Thin Dolls on Body Image and Food Intake in Young Girls. Sex Roles, 63(9–10), 621–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9871-6
Bandura, A. (1991). Social Cognitive Theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287.
Belk, R. W., Bahn, K. D., & Mayer, R. N. (1982). Developmental Recognition of Consumption Symbolism. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1086/208892
Boultwood, A., & Jerrard, R. (2000). Ambivalence, and Its Relation to Fashion and the Body. Fashion Theory, 4(3), 301–321. https://doi.org/10.2752/136270400778995480
Coyle, E. F. (2010). Barbie as a model of gender nontraditional career possible self content for preschool and kindergarten girls. [Honor thesis, Washington and Lee University]. Washington and Lee University Library. http://hdl.handle.net/11021/16290
Cramer, P., & Steinwert, T. (1998). Thin is good, fat is bad: How early does it begin? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 19(3), 429–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-3973(99)80049-5
Devries, R. (1970). The Development of Role-Taking as Reflected by Behavior of Bright, Average, and Retarded Children in a Social Guessing Game. Child Development, 41(3), 759. https://doi.org/10.2307/1127222
Dittmar, H., Halliwell, E., & Ive, S. (2006). Does Barbie make girls want to be thin? The effect of experimental exposure to images of dolls on the body image of 5- to 8-year-old girls. Developmental Psychology, 42(2), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.2.283
Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2020). COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY: a student’s handbook. Psychology Press.
Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R., & Green, F. L. (1983). Development of the appearance-reality distinction. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(83)90005-1
Goossens, L., Van Durme, K., Van Beveren, M.-L., & Claes, L. (2017). Do changes in affect moderate the association between attachment anxiety and body dissatisfaction in children? An experimental study by means of the Trier Social Stress Test. Eating Behaviors, 26, 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2017.01.011
Guest, L. (1964). Brand loyalty revisited: A twenty-year report. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48(2), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046667
Achenreiner, G. B. (1995). Children’s Reliance on Brand Name Heuristics. University of Minnesota.
Harriger, J. A., Schaefer, L. M., Kevin Thompson, J., & Cao, L. (2019). You can buy a child a curvy Barbie doll, but you can’t make her like it: Young girls’ beliefs about Barbie dolls with diverse shapes and sizes. Body Image, 30, 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.06.005
Hofmann, S. G., Doan, S. N., Sprung, M., Wilson, A., Ebesutani, C., Andrews, L. A., Curtiss, J., & Harris, P. L. (2016). Training children’s theory-of-mind: A meta-analysis of controlled studies. Cognition, 150, 200–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.006
Holbrook, M. B., & Schindler, R. M. (1991). Echoes of the Dear Departed Past: Some Work in Progress on Nostalgia. ACR North American Advances, 18, 330–333. https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/7181/volumes/v18/NA-18/full
Holloman, L. O., LaPoint, V., Alleyne, Sylvan I, Palmer, R. J., & SandersPhillips, K. (1996). DressRelated Behavioral Problems and Violence in the Public School Setting: Prevention, Intervention, and PolicyA Holistic Approach. The Journal of Negro Education, 65(3), 267–281. https://doi.org/10.2307/2967344
Huitt, W., & Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development. Educational Psychology Interactive, 3(2), 1–5. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/49688242/Piagets_Theory_of_Cognitive_Development-libre.pdf?1476800318=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DPiagets_Theory_of_Cognitive_Development.pdf&Expires=1684272822&Signature=WXm0Sw4WnGUuINT24sE~pgij4HZgs7lP4v5CHgiGDHPryCQ9Iq2qp56Vbu3Dzjf0Q6hHCZeW2eiJHixjXqL78GmOvpl2krmtNnCWaOeLUR7Kyo2CzAr9dA~vZ6GGgGisiB9cybrShtHSASvJvGlo0qSXw0z4qUbkLuZKAxaiMWVRulYStj6wtqEcvGcrVa3SQHxR4lGzVjNO7qgOar27WbsEXDoH~s2Ai50ZEdapMQGM2I2sBdkOJuXX~SQBNWcTNBqPeRAHtjmZI2eX8OODN55m-aUei6XTS0QF9YnA6FGqmkhBBOrevczEEG2dYlcW3iJeW1sgQpvaq92wm5ZQwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA
Jellinek, R. D., Myers, T. A., & Keller, K. L. (2016). The impact of doll style of dress and familiarity on body dissatisfaction in 6- to 8-year-old girls. Body Image, 18, 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.05.003
Ji, M. F. (2002). Children’s relationships with brands: ?True love? or ?one-night? stand? Psychology and Marketing, 19(4), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10015
John, D. (1999). Consumer Socialization of Children: A Retrospective Look At Twenty‐Five Years of Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1086/209559
Kuther, T. L., & McDonald, E. (2004). Early adolescents’ experiences with, and views of, Barbie. Adolescence, 39(153), 39–51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/8478668_Early_adolescents'_experiences_with_and_views_of_Barbie/citations
McAlister, A. R., & Cornwell, T. B. (2010). Children’s brand symbolism understanding: Links to theory of mind and executive functioning. Psychology and Marketing, 27(3), 203–228. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20328
Meltzoff, A. N. (1990). Foundations for developing a concept of self: The role of imitation in relating self to other and the value of social mirroring, social modeling, and self practice in infancy. In D. Cicchetti & M. Beeghly (Eds.), The self in transition: Infancy to childhood (pp. 139–164). University of Chicago Press.
Moschino & Barbie — Luxury RetailLuxury Retail. (2015, November 23). JustLuxe . https://luxuryretail.co.uk/moschino-barbie/
Moses, L. J., & Baldwin, D. A. (2005). What can The Study of Cognitive Development Reveal about Children’s Ability to Appreciate and Cope with Advertising? Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24(2), 186–201. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.2005.24.2.186
Musher-Eizenman, D. R., Holub, S. C., Edwards-Leeper, L., Persson, A. V., & Goldstein, S. E. (2003). The narrow range of acceptable body types of preschoolers and their mothers. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(2), 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0193-3973(03)00047-9
Neumark-Sztainer, D., Paxton, S. J., Hannan, P. J., Haines, J., & Story, M. (2006). Does Body Satisfaction Matter? Five-year Longitudinal Associations between Body Satisfaction and Health Behaviors in Adolescent Females and Males. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39(2), 244–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.12.001
Nielsen, M., & Dissanayake, C. (2004). Pretend play, mirror self-recognition and imitation: a longitudinal investigation through the second year. Infant Behavior and Development, 27(3), 342–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2003.12.006
Ojose, B. (2008). Applying Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development to Mathematics Instruction. The Mathematics Educator, 18(1), 26–30. https://ojs01.galib.uga.edu/tme/article/view/1923
Pillow, B. H., & Henrichon, A. J. (1996). There’s More to the Picture Than Meets the Eye: Young Children’s Difficulty Understanding Biased Interpretation. Child Development, 67(3), 803. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131862
Rice, K., Prichard, I., Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2016). Exposure to Barbie: Effects on thin-ideal internalisation, body esteem, and body dissatisfaction among young girls. Body Image, 19, 142–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.09.005
Richins, M. L. (2017). Materialism pathways: The processes that create and perpetuate materialism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(4), 480–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2017.07.006
Rochberg-Halton, E. (1984). Object Relations, Role Models, and Cultivation of the Self. Environment and Behavior, 16(3), 335–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916584163003
Roedder, D. L. (1981). Age Differences in Children’s Responses to Television Advertising: An Information-Processing Approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2), 144. https://doi.org/10.1086/208850
Smith, E. R., Mackie, D. M., & Claypool, H. M. (2014). Social psychology : Fourth edition. Taylor & Francis Group. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ual/detail.action?docID=1864763#
