A content analysis of sports and energy drink advertising

Abstract

This study identifies constructs from key persuasion theories that are present in popular sports and energy drink advertising. A theory-driven content analysis was conducted on 315 popular television and social media sports and energy drink advertisements from top selling brands. The advertisements were analyzed for the presence of persuasive cues as per the Elaboration Likelihood Model (e.g, onscreen consumption, presence of celebrities) as well as Reasoned Action behavioral expectancies and normative beliefs Approach related to consumption. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Differences between sports and energy drinks were assessed and reliability statistics for all codes were calculated. Advertisements relied on peripheral cues like sports and celebrities that were not related to the drinks themselves. Theory-relevant beliefs about improved athletic performance and consumption of the drinks onscreen were common. Sports drinks were more likely to focus on mainstream sports; energy drinks featured extreme sports, and energy drink advertisements promoted the drinks for use beyond sports (e.g., work settings). The cues and beliefs identified in these ads help to clarify the role of advertising in beliefs about sports drinks being healthy and energy drinks being helpful to achieve goals. Future research is needed that links exposure to coded advertisement features to adolescents’ beliefs about sports and energy drinks.

Introduction

Scientific facts don’t sell products; stories do.¹

Reducing sugary drink consumption is a cornerstone of public health efforts to curtail obesity rates in the United States. Data that indicate declines in sugary drink consumption across all age groups² suggest that some of these public health efforts have been successful. However, youth continue to consume added sugar from sugary drinks, and these beverages remain an impediment to public health and anti-obesity efforts.³ In addition, excess consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes, as well as dental caries and enamel erosion.⁴ Caffeine intake from energy drinks, a specific category of sugar-sweetened beverage, is associated with worse sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, and reduced academic performance among children and adolescents^5,6, as well as anxiety and depression⁷, neurological and cardiovascular damage^8,9, victimization¹⁰, and substance abuse^11–14.

Adolescents consume more sugary drinks than any other age group,^3,15 with the highest consumption rates among lower-income youth as well as Black and Mexican-American children and teens.³ Despite some declines in the intake of soda and other sugary drinks, high consumption of sports and energy drinks persists.² Energy drink consumption rates among youth are increasing,¹⁶ and 50% of high school students in the United States reported drinking a sports drink at least weekly.¹⁷ More than one in ten (10.6%) adolescents report drinking sports drinks every day.¹⁷ Daily energy drink consumption is not as common (6%) as sports drinks, yet 27% report consuming energy drinks.¹⁸

Research demonstrates that there is confusion about the healthfulness of sport drinks compared to other sugary drinks such as soda,¹⁹ which may be related to the rise in sports and energy drink consumption while other sugary drink consumption declines. Studies show that adolescents and their parents consistently refer to the health benefits of sports drinks when making purchase and consumption decisions.^20–22 They do not, on the other hand, perceive any health benefits of soda.²⁰ Parents and youth also both tend to have misperceptions about the amount of sugar in sports drinks compared to other sugary drinks like soda.^20,21

One source of misperceptions and confusion is sports and energy drink marketing. U.S. youth are exposed to large amounts of advertising for sugar sweetened beverages, and these advertisements have a clear impact on their consumption and preferences^23–25, as does increased access through school vending machines²⁶ and convenience stores.²⁷ An analysis of television advertising airing in 2012–2013 demonstrated that the majority of channels with the highest amount of energy drink advertisements had a primary target audience of youth ages 12–17 years,²⁸ and television advertisements for sports and energy drinks, along with sugar sweetened iced tea, accounted for 43% of the sugary drink ads viewed by adolescents in 2018.³ In addition, although television advertising dominates ad expenditures by beverage companies, advertising on social media is becoming more popular²⁹ – likely a reflection of changes in adolescents’ media time and preferences.^30,31 In a survey of a national sample of adolescents, about 50% reported engaging with a sugary drink brand on social media, and engagement increased with television viewing time³², indicating an additive effect of advertising across media.

To better understand the role advertising may play in youth beliefs about sports and energy drinks, we analyzed drink advertisements on television and social media over a 4-year period. This analysis can inform the creation of effective counter-messaging that discourages sports and energy drink consumption among adolescents and identify what about the ads might appeal specifically to youth. We conducted a content analysis anchored in two key theories of persuasion: the Elaboration Likelihood Model of information processing (ELM)^33,34 and the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA).³⁵ Both predict how attitude and behavior change occur as outcomes of exposure to persuasive messages, through slightly different mechanisms.

The ELM focuses on global attitude change through the influence of persuasive cues. It is a dual process model that describes a spontaneous (peripheral) route and a deliberative (central) route to persuasion, with the route taken determined by motivation and opportunity to deliberate on a message.³⁴f Depending on which type of processing a message receiver engages in, they will rely on different kinds of cues to determine their evaluation of the message target. Central cues, which a message receiver pays more attention to when processing deliberatively, are based around the quality of the persuasive arguments. In the context of sports and energy drinks, this could include arguments about the ability of the product to increase hydration or mental focus. Attitude change brought about from the central route tends to be persistent and stable over time.³⁶ Peripheral cues, which the message receiver pays more attention to when processing spontaneously, tend to be heuristic in nature and focus on ancillary aspects in the advertisements that are nonetheless superficially appealing. These cues in sports and energy drink advertisements may include the attractiveness of models and special effects. Attitude change brought about from the peripheral route tends to be short-lived and unstable, and easily counter-argued with future messaging. Research indicates that adolescents are equally persuaded by advertising messages that rely on peripheral cues compared to those that encourage more elaboration.³⁷

The RAA focuses on behavior change through changes in underlying beliefs, emphasizing expectancies and norms around the behavior of interest (in this case, consumption of the advertised products). Behavior is predicted by behavioral intention, which is itself predicted by the three determinants of intention: attitude, normative pressure, and perceived behavioral control or efficacy. Each of those three determinants is predicted by corresponding beliefs. Many applications of RAA to the role of advertising in adolescents’ behavior focus on alcohol advertising,³⁸ however the general principles and findings from other areas apply to food and beverage marketing.

Attitudinal beliefs relate to expectancies of what the consequences of the behavior will be and the valenced evaluation of those consequences, for example, “Gatorade will improve sports performance.” This type of strategy is consistent with “image advertising”- to which adolescents are particularly susceptible- that suggests the advertised brands offers personal benefits.^39,40 Normative beliefs are what important people think one should do (injunctive norm) and what similar people do (descriptive norm). A normative belief about sports and energy drinks might be “A revered famous athlete drinks this beverage,” which positions the famous athlete as an important referent group. Additionally, in the digital marketing environment, the opportunity for social interaction in response to online advertisements helps strengthen behavioral norms in ways that are not possible through traditional advertising.⁴¹ Control or efficacy beliefs are beliefs about one’s ability or inability to enact the desired behavior, which here could be features that make it easier to purchase a sports or energy drink, such as “buy one get one free” sales or availability in local corner stores and gas stations. In this study, we focus on potential behavioral and normative beliefs that are reflected in the advertisements.

With these two persuasion theories in mind, this study asks: (1) What types of central and peripheral cues and (2) behavioral expectancies and normative beliefs are present in advertisements for sports and energy drinks? and, (3) Are there differences in the presence of cues and beliefs between these two types of drinks?

Methods

2.1. Advertisement Sample

Television ads.

Nielsen ratings were used to identify the ads seen by the largest broadcast audiences for six brands between 2015 and 2019: sports drinks (Gatorade, Powerade, Vitamin Water); and energy drinks (Monster Energy, Red Bull, and 5-Hour Energy). The brands were chosen because they are the top-selling brands in each drink category, according to Nielsen. We created a list advertisements from 2015–2016, 2016–2017, 2017–2018 given the ad description provided by Nielsen (Coke n=3,991, Gatorade n=2,723, Powerade n=181, Vitamin Water n=148, Red Bull n=1,373, 5-Hour Energy n=1,248, Monster n=69). We sorted by the ad description and removed duplicates based on the description and also removed descriptions like “incomplete video” and “no title available”. Then we searched for the actual ads matching the Nielsen descriptions using AdForum, iSpotTV, and YouTube, brand websites, Google videos, Vimeo, and Dailymotion. Of the original de-duplicated list, nine ads could not be located, four were for Coca Cola, four were for Red Bull, and one was for Gatorade.

Social media ads.

Social media videos were collected from YouTube and Instagram. Two additional brands were added to the sample later, Bang (energy drink) and Body Armor (sports drink). Neither of these two brands advertises outside of social media. An analysis of advertisements posted by the brands on Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, indicated that activity for most brands on Facebook was low, and that advertisements posted on that platform were also posted on Instagram and/or on YouTube. Duplicates posted on both sites were only coded once. We coded the universe of ads from these brands (Gatorade, Powerade, Vitamin Water, Monster Energy, Red Bull, 5-Hour Energy, and Body Armor). Due to the high volume of videos uploaded to the official Bang Instagram account between 2015 and 2019, we only sampled the first video that was uploaded each month, resulting in 57 Bang ads. Table 1 shows the number of ads coded for each brand, by medium.

Table 1.

Number of ads by category, brand, and medium (n=315)

Sports drinks				Energy drinks
Brands	Total	TV	Social media	Brands	Total	TV	Social media
Gatorade	33	15	18	5 Hour Energy	65	28	37
Powerade	32	5	27	Red Bull	37	24	13
Vitamin Water	19	1	18	Monster Energy	41	10	31
Body Armor	31	0	31	Bang	57	0	57
	115	21	91		200	62	138

2.2. Coding scheme and categories.

The objective was to develop codes based on the ELM (i.e., codes categorized as central or peripheral cues) and the RAA (i.e., codes categorized as behavioral or normative beliefs) that would allow for a comprehensive analysis of the messaging strategies used in the advertisements. The scheme included codes designed to account for production features of the ads, messaging strategies (e.g., use of celebrity), and outcome expectancies either mentioned or implied (e.g., you will get/stay hydrated). Data were entered using a Qualtrics instrument, which was developed to correspond with the codebook.

Central cues are those directly related to the arguments about purchasing the product, such as whether it was consumed onscreen, mentions of taste, and various health and/or nutritional claims (e.g., electrolytes, hydration, energy). These cues are not always explicit and require more elaborate cognitive analysis. Peripheral cues are those meant to be associated with the product but are not about the arguments for using the product directly, such as the use of sports or celebrities in the ads. Mainstream sports included those such as football, basketball, and golf; alternative or extreme sports included those like BMX racing, car racing, and snowboarding. Behavioral expectancies (e.g., Drinking this beverage will get me hydrated) and normative beliefs (e.g. Professional athletes are drinking this beverage) were also coded. All items were coded for presence or absence and are listed in Table 3.

Table 3.

Presence of behavioral expectancies and normative beliefs in sports and energy drink advertisements.

	Reliability statistics	Sports drinks	Energy drinks	X 2 (df), p value
		n=115	n=200
Behavioral Expectancies		%	%
If I drink this beverage, it will…
…make me an extraordinary athlete/ competitive/ better at sports/ achieve athletic success.	.68	70.4	26.0	X 2 (1)=59.10, p<.01
…get me hydrated.	.88	19.1	0.5	X 2 (1)=37.44, p<.01
…make me physically fit/healthier.	.67	18.3	8.5	X 2 (1)=6.56, p=.01
…make me happy/fun.	.72	4.4	13.5	X 2 (1)=6.70, p=.01
…help me be successful (non-athletic)/achieve goals.	.80	1.7	18.5	X 2 (1)=18.91, p<.01
…bring people together/help me connect with others.	.84	0.87	7.5	X 2 (1)=6.65, p=.01
…taste good	.84	0.87	6.0	X 2 (1)=4.85, p<.05
Normative Beliefs
Professional athletes are drinking this beverage.	.74	48.7	14.5	X 2 (1)=43.33, p<.01
Amateur athletes are drinking this beverage.	.72	13.9	3.5	X 2 (1)=11.70, p<.01
Adolescents are drinking this beverage.	.97	11.3	1.0	X 2 (1)=17.09, p<.01
Celebrities (not a professional athlete) are drinking this beverage	.87	5.2	3.0	X 2 (1)=0.98, ns
Regular, everyday people (in a non-athletic context; not adolescents) are drinking this beverage.	.59	2.61	49.0	X 2 (1) = 72.1, p<.01

Coding training and reliability.

After several iterations of the codebook development, five undergraduate coders were trained over the course of three sessions, and adjustments to the codebook were made. Reliability during training was determined using a quantitative measure of categorical agreement, Gwet’s AC, to standard of .80. At least three coders coded every advertisement and agreement was based on reliability of all coders who coded a particular advertisement. Reliability for each variable is included in the results tables (Tables 2 and 3).

Table 2.

Presence of central and peripheral cues in sports and energy drink advertisements

	Reliability statistic	Sports drinks	Energy drinks	X 2 (df), p value
		n=115	n=200
Central Cues		%	%
Product consumed	.92	50.4	43.0	X 2 (1)=1.63, ns
Taste	.87	30.4	26.5	X 2 (1)=0.56, ns
Nutrition/health claims
Electrolytes	.92	20.0	0	X 2 (1)=43.15, p<.01
Hydration	.90	23.5	0	X 2 (1)=51.36, p<.01
Vitamins	.83	12.2	16.0	X 2 (1)=0.86, ns
Energy	.54	0	27.5	X 2 (1)=38.31, p<.01
Peripheral Cues
Sports*		67.8	43.5	X 2 (1)=17.32, p<.01
Mainstream (n=165)		98.7	71.3	X 2 (1)=23.35, p<.01
Alternative/extreme		1.3	39.1	X 2 (1)=35.16, p<.01
Celebrity*	.87	53.0	23.0	X 2 (2)=29.44, p<.01
Athlete (n=107)	.90	91.8	82.6	X 2 (1)=2.08, ns

^*The variables in the table above were generated from 17 types of sports that were categorized into either mainstream or extreme. Reliabilities on the sports variables were calculated for each type of sport and ranged from .91–.99.

2.3. Statistical analysis.

Descriptive statistics were calculated for each coding category by type of drink. Chi-square statistics were used to test differences between sports and energy drinks in each category.

Results

3.1. Central and peripheral cues.

The prevalence of cues in the advertisements is shown in Table 2. The beverage products were consumed in half of the ads for sports drinks, and slightly less than half (43.0%) for energy drinks, with no statistical difference between the type of drinks. There was also no difference in mention of taste, which occurred more than a quarter of the time for energy drinks and 30% of the time for sports drinks. The nutrition and health claims mentioned in sports drinks ads included electrolytes, hydration, and vitamins; for energy drinks only vitamins and energy were mentioned. The peripheral cues of sports and celebrities were much more common than features of the beverage. Sports were frequently shown in both types of drinks but were significantly more likely to be shown in sports drink ads (67.8%) compared to energy drink ads (43.5%). There were differences, however, in the presence of extreme sports. Almost all of ads for sports drinks featured mainstream sports, which were also heavily featured in energy drink advertisements. However, 39% of energy drink ads also featured alternative or extreme sports compared to only 1.3% of sports drinks ads.

3.2. Expectancies and normative beliefs.

The presence of beliefs in the ads is detailed in Table 3. Expectancy beliefs related to athletic performance, hydration, and being healthier were much more prevalent in sports drinks ads compared to energy drink ads. For example, beliefs about athletic success/performance were the most common types of beliefs in both types of ads, but appeared much more frequently in sports drink advertisements (70%) compared to energy drink ads (26%). Beliefs about being happy/having fun, being successful in non-athletic goals, bringing people together, and tasting good, were more present in energy drink ads. Differences between the prevalence of each expectancy in sports and energy drink ads were all statistically significant.

Normative beliefs promoted by the ads focused on what type of groups were drinking each type of beverage. In sports drinks ads, the most prevalent normative belief was that professional athletes are drinking those beverages (48.7%). In contrast, the belief appearing most often in energy drink ads was that “regular, everyday people” are drinking them (49%). Only one normative belief was not statistically different between sports and energy drinks, and that is that non-athlete celebrities are drinking sports drinks (5.2%) or energy drinks (3.0%).

Discussion

Sports and energy drink consumption is common among adolescents and advertising for these beverages is targeted to young people. Findings from this study indicate clear patterns of persuasive strategies in advertisements that have implications for understanding the types information in the ads processed by viewers and ultimately how ad content is tied to consumption behaviors. The cues and beliefs identified in these ads demonstrate they are designed to foster misleading notions about the effects of these drinks on health and athletic performance (claims for which there is little evidence⁴²) as well as their promotion by influential elites.

One of the most potentially important cues that emerged in both sports and energy drink advertisements is the onscreen consumption of the beverage products. If onscreen beverage consumption operates in a way similar to smoking onscreen⁴³, depiction of the beverage and its consumption is a visual cue that can help to deliver the main argument of the ad, strengthening the extent to which the ad is persuasive. Studies on smoking cues in anti-smoking PSAs have found that such cues weaken the effectiveness of antismoking arguments.⁴³ It is unknown whether the same applies to beverage marketing and PSAs about reducing sugary drinks, but given the role of visual cues in tobacco messaging, it is important to document the extent which such cues appear and have implications for message development.

Other attributes of sports drinks, like electrolytes and hydration, were less likely to be explicitly mentioned in the ads and yet are commonly invoked as reasons for purchasing and consumption. Research indicates that parents, for example, cite hydration as at least one reason that they provide sports drinks to their children.²² A advertising strategy built on emphasizing the role of sports drinks in athletic performance through professional athletes⁴⁴ and a “rebranding” of sodium, phosphorus and potassium into “electrolytes,”^1,42 has resulted in these associations being embedded in the public understanding of sports drinks.⁴⁵ Thus, it may be that in the advertisements themselves, it is enough to make the association without specifically articulating drink features such as electrolytes, hydration, or even “energy” (for energy drinks). It is also likely that the use of sports and celebrities perpetuates these long-held beliefs, which may result in increased purchasing and consumption, although research has yet to draw direct conclusions. The frequent use of these peripheral cues is consistent with other research on food advertising that demonstrates peripheral cues are more commonly used than central cues in advertising for low nutrition products.

The behavioral expectancies and normative beliefs offer another theoretical perspective on persuasion. Improved athletic performance and athletic success is a common theme in sports drinks ads and appeared in more than a quarter of energy drink ads. It reinforces the association that these drinks offer a competitive edge and help one to achieve peak performance, as does the normative belief that professional athletes are drinking these beverages. Energy drinks also use sports as an advertising device, but unlike sports drinks, feature more extreme or alternative sports. Extreme sports participation is associated with increased energy drink consumption,⁴⁶ which some attribute to their sponsorship of extreme sporting events. Additionally, youth perceive energy drinks that use sports-themed advertising as promoting energy drink use during sports.^47,48

Although the emphasis on athletics in sports drink advertising is dominant, sports drink consumption is widespread among adolescents regardless of their involvement in athletics.⁴⁹ Energy drink ads seem to make an appeal for life beyond athletics, being consumed by “regular, everyday people”, which is consistent with reasons for energy drink consumption among youth, which includes the desire for alertness, taste, and perceived increased in energy. Future studies should to address how exposure to these advertisements may differentially affect Black and Hispanic youth who are disproportionately targeted in sports and energy drink marketing³, and how low- or no-calorie beverage options are marketed as well.

Although this study is limited to observations about advertising content, and does not examine how such content affects youth, there is ample evidence that food and beverage advertising affects purchasing and consumption behaviors and related health outcomes^25,50–52. Adolescents tend to trust food advertising and have positive perceptions (e.g., about taste, desirability), both of which result in increased consumption of nutrient-poor food and beverages.⁵³ In one study, exposure to advertising for soft drinks that was measured using gross point ratings (GRPs), which is tied to expenditures, was associated with increased soft drink consumption among 6 to 11 year old youth.⁵⁴ The evidence base on the effects of marketing to younger children has led to regulations on food and beverage marketing; in response, marketing has shifted to focusing on adolescent consumers. And although there is a gap in the literature for studies on beverage marketing specifically to older adolescents and on the effects of social media marketing in particular,²⁵ as Harris et al(2021) point out, “Companies’ increased investment in marketing to adolescents presents perhaps the most convincing evidence that junk food marketing to adolescents works.²⁴”

4. 1. Limitations.

There are several limitations to this study that should be considered when interpreting the findings. First, interrater reliability on some variables is lower than a typically acceptable threshold. This is likely due to conceptual complexity, but also potentially due to the operationalization in the context of sports and energy drinks marketing. It is also possible that we misclassified cues as either peripheral or central based on how audiences might process them. Regardless of the classification, the prevalence of the cues within those categories is informative. However, although the analysis provides important information to understand strategies used by these drink manufacturers, future research is needed to draw conclusions on how exposure to these advertisements affect beliefs and behaviors associated with sports and energy drink consumption.

Sports and energy drink consumption account for a significant amount of added sugar in youth diets and is associated with several poor health outcomes such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and dental caries. Advertisements to promote the purchase and consumption of these products rely on associations that reinforce carefully constructed associations that have been cultivated by beverage companies on the athletic and health benefits of sports drink and to a lesser extent of energy drinks. Normative cues also play a large role, particularly norms stemming from celebrity athletes (both sports and energy drinks) and descriptive norms for what regular people do (energy drinks). Findings from this study increase our understanding of the persuasive strategies in these advertisements and provide an evidence based through which potential counter marketing messages can be developed.