Issue

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April

Copyright (c) 2026 Sayed Basir Ahmad Ayoubi, Assadullah Sadiqi

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Brand Attitudes in Generation Alpha: Social Media Marketing Exposure and the Moderating Role of Parental Mediation

https://doi.org/10.62810/jssh.v3i2.137
Sayed Basir Ahmad Ayoubi
Jami University, Department of Economics, Herat, Afghanistan
Assadullah Sadiqi
Jami University, Department of EconomicsHerat, Herat, Afghanistan
https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7889-3147

Corresponding Author(s) : Sayed Basir Ahmad Ayoubi

b.ayubi@jami.edu.af

Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April

Abstract

Children in Generation Alpha are growing up in algorithm-driven social media environments where branded content is seamlessly integrated into entertainment, creator culture, and influencer endorsements. While prior research has examined the effects of digital marketing among adolescents and Generation Z, limited empirical evidence explains how platform-based marketing shapes younger children’s brand-related evaluations and how parental mediation influences these effects. This study therefore investigates (1) the relationship between exposure to marketing content on TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram and children’s brand awareness, attitudes, and loyalty, (2) the relative effectiveness of different content formats, (3) the influence of influencer type on trust formation, and (4) the moderating role of parental mediation. A mixed-methods design was employed, combining survey data from 500 parent–child dyads (children aged 8–12) with six focus groups involving both parents and children. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, ANOVA, and regression analysis, while qualitative data were examined through thematic analysis to provide deeper contextual insights. Findings indicate that TikTok is associated with the strongest brand-related responses among children, while short-form and gamified content produce higher recall and emotional engagement than other formats. Micro-influencers generate greater perceived credibility and stronger loyalty than macro-influencers. Importantly, active parental mediation, particularly through discussion and contextualization, reduces children’s susceptibility to persuasive content. These findings contribute to digital marketing and child media research by clarifying key mechanisms shaping early brand socialization and offering practical, ethically informed insights for marketers and parents.

Keywords

Brand attitudes Gamification Generation Alpha Influencer marketing Parental mediation Short-form video Social media marketing
Ayoubi, S. B. A., & Sadiqi, A. (2026). Brand Attitudes in Generation Alpha: Social Media Marketing Exposure and the Moderating Role of Parental Mediation. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(2), 468–481. https://doi.org/10.62810/jssh.v3i2.137
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, social media & technology 2018. Pew Research Center. Link
  2. Avison, W. R. (1981). [Review of Conceiving the Self, by M. Rosenberg]. The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie, 6(2), 212–214. Link
  3. Ayoubi, S. B. A., Fazl, S., & Araam, J. (2024). Examining how consumers’ perceptions of themselves affect their brand preferences and purchasing behavior. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 9(8), 4. Link
  4. Ayoubi, S. B. A., & Naweer, M. (2024). The influence of social media marketing on consumer purchasing decisions. Pearson Journal, 8(28), 1512–1524. Link
  5. Boyd, d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press. Link
  6. Byrne, S., & Livingstone, S. (2015). Parents’ mediation of children’s internet use: A critical review of the literature. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 9(1). Link
  7. Chau, C. (2014). YouTube as a participatory culture. New Directions for Youth Development, 2014(128), 65–74. Link
  8. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Link
  9. Deloitte Insights. (2023). Connecting with Generation Alpha: Trends in digital marketing for younger audiences. Link
  10. De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through Instagram influencers: The impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of Advertising, 36(5), 798–828. Link
  11. Goh, K. Y., Heng, C. S., & Lin, Z. (2013). Social media brand community and consumer behavior: Quantifying the relative impact of user- and marketer-generated content. Information Systems Research, 24(1), 88–107. Link
  12. Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. Bantam Books. Link
  13. Holloway, D., Green, L., & Livingstone, S. (2021). Regulating children’s data and privacy in the digital age. New Media & Society, 23(6), 1131–1148. Link
  14. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. Link
  15. Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54(3), 241–251. Link
  16. Kim, K., & Johnson, K. K. P. (2021). The power of visuals in digital marketing: Emotional and behavioral responses to online campaigns. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(3), 562–576. Link
  17. Li, C., & Bernoff, J. (2008). Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies. Harvard Business Press. Link
  18. Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2007). Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people, and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 9(4), 671–696. Link
  19. Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 52(4), 357–365. Link
  20. Montgomery, K. C., Chester, J., & Kopp, K. (2017). Children’s privacy in the big data era: Research opportunities. Pediatrics, 140(Supplement 2), S117–S121. Link
  21. Nathanson, A. I. (2001). Mediation of children’s television viewing: Working toward conceptual clarity and common understanding. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 25, pp. 115–135). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Link
  22. Oberst, U., Wegmann, E., Stodt, B., Brand, M., & Chamarro, A. (2017). Negative consequences from heavy social networking in adolescents: The mediating role of fear of missing out. Journal of Adolescence, 55, 51–60. Link
  23. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. Link
  24. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. Link
  25. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Link
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Received 2025-07-10
Accepted 2026-04-28
Published 2026-04-30
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 2 Download : 0