3. Causal chains 

The central question is what are the proximal and distal causes in adolescents purchasing particular products and how does the process work.  Note that there is very little political interest in some products that may interest children such as books or clothes but tremendous interest in others such as fizzy drinks, alcohol and toys.  The products that excite most interest are nearly always proclaimed unhealthy or undesirable by certain groups: fast food (snacks); toys; alcohol and tobacco; computer games (that is products that protectionists support), particular sports or fashion wear.  Interestingly advertisements for "approved" products are never considered even when these may be state supported.  Thus if an advertising campaign for say eating fresh fruit conspicuously fails this is either ignored or put down to economic and social factors influencing consumption.  On the other hand if it conspicuously succeeds this is attributed to the power of advertising.  There are always those who remain most eager to over-emphasise the power of advertising; particularly to vulnerable young people.

          Though not always expressed as such it is possible to detect two types of "models".  The first is simple causal chains; the second multi-factorial models. Consider the following which are in effect simple causal chains: 

1.       TV commercials > specific wants > child-parent conflict > parental purchase 

2.       Child's peer group > specific wants > selective viewing of ads > requests > parental decision/rules > purchase 

3.       Parental values > child's income > media exposure > child viewing > options for purchasing 

The first model is the simple-minded protectionist model which sees a direct path from advertising to product purchase.  It asserts that advertisements are the primal cause of children and young people's product preferences.  The next suggests that peer groups are the starting point for they lead to children and young people having strong conformist needs to own specific products from clothes to consumables that are a requisite of group membership.  These desires lead them to seek out information about products, in part by selective television watching.

          The third model suggests that parental values lead to things such as rules at home about their pocket money/allowance as well as their access to the media.  The latter powerfully impact on television viewing which may be clearly restricted by quality and quantity (amount of time any specific channel is watched).  Thus in the first model television advertising causes parent-child conflict (called pester-power by protectionists) while in the third model parenting style is the primary cause of purchasing requests.

          The problem with simple causal chains is that they do not allow for the real complexity of the issue to be portrayed.  Even the most zealous protectionist admits that many factors influence adolescents' desire for, and purchase of, specific products from foodstuffs to clothes, entertainment to educational items.  Neither do simple causal chains allow for reciprocal causation: that is, the idea that causality can operate both ways (in virtuous or vicious cycles).  Thus parent child conflict may influence purchasing decisions, which in turn, influences conflict in possibly an escalating or pacifying way.  Thirdly these simple models do not allow for the possibility of moderating or intervening variables.  Thus a parent's personality may influence both his values/parenting style and his own media consumption which, in turn, influences the child.