Day 065 - 09 Dec 94 - Page 66

     
     1        effect of advertising, and not also the indirect effects.
     2        As we have already discussed or I have mentioned, and
     3        indeed references here point out, that the indirect effect
     4        of advertising is certainly a major one which may, in fact,
     5        possibly be more influential than the direct effect.  This
     6        is going to operate within families and also outside
     7        families.
     8
     9        So, for example, where other children are classified as an
    10        influence, we do not know whether they themselves were
    11        influenced through advertising.  It is highly likely, for
    12        example, the research that I have already quoted -----
    13
    14   MR. RAMPTON:  Ms. Dibb, I am afraid I must stop you there. You
    15        are not being fair to the authors of the report.
    16        A.  I am reporting the criticisms that were raised at the
    17        Peterhouse seminar.
    18
    19   Q.   But, Ms. Dibb, they recognised that themselves.  You have
    20        read it, have you not?
         A.  Yes, indeed I have.  When this was presented at the
    22        Peterhouse seminar it did not include that.  There has
    23        been, it seems, some belated acknowledgement that they did
    24        not recognise that.
    25
    26   Q.   What they say is -----
    27        A.  But if one is looking at the effect of advertising, one
    28        has to measure -- and it is questionable about whether this
    29        really did measure the true influences -- you have to look
    30        at the indirect effects as well.  And, as we have pointed
    31        out, it is extremely difficult to measure that.  The
    32        researchers here do point out some of the limitations of
    33        this research.  They say:  What we are measuring, of
    34        course, is not the influence itself but how family members
    35        perceive that influence.  So, they are not actually (as
    36        they themselves acknowledge) even measuring that influence,
    37        albeit in a limited way.  These are serious concerns.
    38
    39        This is interesting research and certainly not in any way
    40        saying that there are not some interesting things here, but
         I think this research cannot possibly be considered to
    42        stand alone without also being aware of some of these other
    43        factors that, as I say, were raised very broadly and from a
    44        diverse number of people with different backgrounds at the
    45        Peterhouse seminar.
    46
    47   Q.   Never mind all of that, Ms. Dibb, and it is all very
    48        interesting.  My purpose in asking about it, you see, was
    49        quite different.  Two of your criticisms of the methodology
    50        and, more particularly, the results of this piece of 
    51        research were and are, are they not, that people are not 
    52        necessarily accurate in their reported assumptions and 
    53        attitudes and that their verbalization is often at variance
    54        with their actual behaviour.  Do I summarise two of the
    55        criticisms you made at Peterhouse correctly?
    56        A.  In relation to this particular piece of research?
    57
    58   Q.   Yes.  How do you apply those criticisms to the results of
    59        your MORI survey?  You see, that is my question.
    60        A.  I think they were quite different in that people were