This study, published in the online journal Appetite, says yes.
The study consisted of two parts, the first of which surveyed a child’s “sugar/fat/salt palate” (SFS palate) and how it related to a child’s food choices. The second part examined how a child’s knowledge of branded foods related to the SFS palate. The investigators concluded that “brand knowledge is a significant predictor of SFS palate, and SFS palate is a significant predictor of a child’s choice of foods that provide ‘flavour-hits.'”
In other words, the more a child knew about branded junk and fast foods, the stronger his or her SFS palate, and the more likely he or she would choose foods that were high in salt, fat and sugar.
I don’t suppose that this result is surprising to parents. We’ve probably all had the experience of a child who rejects a previously-accepted healthy food after eating a more processed, additive-laden version outside the home. I’m thinking here of my daughter who was fine with our whole grain cold cereals until, at age four or five, she encountered the Froot Loop in preschool. When I came to pick her up that day, she was breathless with excitement: “Mommy, do you know about Froot Loops? They’re like Cheerios but they’re colored! Have you seen them? We have to get them. [Dragging me by hand.] Here, come look at the box!” She couldn’t imagine that the absence of Froot Loops in our pantry was attributable to anything but my own sad ignorance.
Even as an adult, I find that when I indulge in a lot of salty, fatty stuff (my personal weakness), it’s that much harder to retrain my palate to go back to whole foods that can’t always compete with laboratory-engineered flavor.
Do the study’s findings ring true to you?
Karen says
Well, hmm. Kids are exposed to high salt/fat/sugar foods many times each day. It is in their comfort zone, reinforced by print and broadcast advertising, and most importantly, their friends. I don’t doubt that most kids choose to stay in their comfort zone when given a choice btwn a branded, brightly colored “friendly” food and something new, possibly more healthy.
In my little scientific study, 50% of the adults in my house add salt to whatever they are served, snack regularly on salty junk food and seem to need a lot of flavor punch in their meals. Same with 50% of the children. My personal conclusion is that palate is genetically determined to a significant extent (and is related to sensitivity in the nose and on the tongue).
On the other hand, no one in my house eats fried pork rinds, the kids have never seen them and I bet they wouldn’t try it if it was placed in front of them, despite the fact that this snack is definitely high salt & fat. So exposure matters, yes.
bettina elias siegel says
True enough. It did seem like this study was proving the obvious. 🙂
jenna Food w/ Kid Appeal says
thanks for sharing this. always looking good studies that back up observations.
can relate to the fruit loop story and karen’s “scientific study.”
I raised my toddlers and preschoolers on fresh raw fruit at home. they only ate canned fruit when it was served at occasional family gatherings. once they started public school and ate in the cafeteria once a week, my older one didn’t care for the canned fruit claiming a “chemical” taste as the reason, my younger one was enthusiastic about spiced apples, mandarin oranges and pineapple tidbits and requested the same at home.
nature and nurture are both at play with taste preferences and aversions. if we took all the canned fruit cocktail and packaged snack foods and sunk them to the bottom of the ocean, no one would actually be deprived because of their absence.
i would have outgrown my “picky” tendencies way earlier if potato chips weren’t available in my lunch box every day.
Renee says
I think the scary part of this study is the branding part. I think there are many parents who think it’s cute when their 3 year old knows brands. I, on the other hand (and quite obnoxiously, I realize), was proud that my 5 year old only knew of McDonalds as “that restaurant with the big yellow arch”. That’s not because she never ate McDonalds food –she’s had her share of junk food that I’d rather she didn’t eat. However, she doesn’t watch any commercial television. She is certainly familiar with lots of brands, now that she’s older and can read, but she still isn’t exposed to any television commercials, which has cut down significantly on how “branded” she is for junk food and other things.
I’ve probably said this in some other comment on this site already, but I really think marketing to kids is evil. Corporations should be prosecuted for it, and parents should work hard to protect their children from it. It’s a significant public health hazard.
bettina elias siegel says
Renee – I agree. My kids are also pretty well insulated from most kids’ advertising, compared to most, anyway, and I think that makes a big difference. And I certainly don’t try to shelter them too much. In fact, when they ask about McDonald’s, I admit up front that some of the food served there is really tasty and, like everything else, is OK in moderation. But when I finally took them to a McDonald’s so they could try for themselves, they hated it! I was surprised, to be honest, but secretly pleased!