This study is based on the socio-psychological, phenomenological and sociocultural theoretical paradigms ofR. Craig (1999).

Within the framework of the socio-psychological tradition, communication is considered as a process of interaction between individuals in which they influence each other. This causes cognitive, emotional and behavioral effects. Communication occurs both directly and indirectly: for instance, it influences subconsciously, with the help of attitudes and stereotypes. The exposure can be either personal, group, or media.

Within the framework of the sociocultural tradition, communication is a symbolic process, by which social reality can be created, maintained and transformed. Socio-cultural environment is obtained from the outside and determines the individual's behavior nature and his or her world perception. The study examines the brand effect on children and parents' perception, which means brand's interaction with consumers and creation of particular consumer vision.

The phenomenological tradition determines communication as a process of an intersubjective dialogue, where signs are perceived subjectively and can be interpreted in different ways. In other words, the understanding depends on the perception of communicative signs. The outcome of communication cannot be planned as communication is a dialogue and the effect of feeling experience of the others but the symbols can be interpreted in different ways. In this study, the role of the subjects of the dialogue is assumed by a brand and the consumer and the signs are the brand's readable information by consumer, it is associative and intuitive perception.

What is more, the study is based on the theory of symbolic interactionism by G. Mead (1934), H. Blumer (1969). Within the framework of this theory, communication is interpreted as a continuous dialogue through which a person interprets reality via symbols, analyze the others' actions, try to live and feel the experience of others by putting themselves into the others' place; a person observes, interprets the others' intentions and react to them. The meanings of symbols are not that much formulated in advance, they are modified in the process of communication. In summary, values are the interpretational result of an individual in a particular communicational context. The development of a unified system of values, standards of behavior, attitudes towards authorities and each other unites people in groups and at interpersonal level of communication.

Significant contribution to the issues of brand interaction with children as a target group as well as interaction between children and parents, was made by researchers: B. Љramovб, P. Valkenburg, Y. Hsieh, H. Chiu, C. Lin, K. Ekstrom, A. Sharma, McNeal, M. Patti, T. Valkenburg, M. Buijzen, S. Opree, McLeod and Chafee. Their works contain the foundations of interpersonal communications in the family, patterns and factors for making family consumer decisions, the perception of marketing impact depending on the mode of communication in the family, demographic and socio-cultural characteristics, as well as the impact of the brand on the purchase decision and on family relationships. However, their works do not address the relationship between family mode and marketing communication in the Russian market as part of the impact of commercial advertising. In addition, the correlation of the relationships studied in this research, has not been studied yet.

The study is also based on the theories related to the cognitive aspect of child development which was researched within the influence of marketing. Among the theories there are: Theory of cognitive development (Piaget, 1952; Flavell, 1993), Theory of the interaction development between parents and children (Kochanska & Kuczynsky, 1990); Marketing communication models (Acuff, 1997; McNeal, 1992), Consumer development theory (Roedder, 1981, 1999; Valkenburg, 2001), Consumer socialization theory (Moschis, 1987); Advertising effects tradition (Buijzen, 2003; Vaklenburg, 2004).

In addition, as a theoretical base several sources were taken. They can be thematically divided into the two groups.

The first group of research studies in this area is focused on defining theoretical basis of how advertising affects children. The majority of scholars have come to the conclusion that there is a need to strictly control advertising aimed at children (Emond, Longacre, Drake, Titus, Hendricks, MacKenzie, Harris, Carroll, Cleveland, Langeloh & Dalton, 2019) and that the viewers' age limits should be increased in order to teach children media literacy (Љramovб, 2015). Children are sensitive, they form an idea of how the world works based on what they see, including advertising. The cognitive ability of eight-year-old and younger children to recognize advertising intentions is insufficient (Љramovб, 2014). Aggressive marketing impact, stereotypes, new media impact formats (product placement, viral and guerrilla marketing, animation, interactive games) affect the development of children's consumer competence, cognitive and moral abilities. The high level of materialism in advertising negatively affects self-esteem, value orientation, habits and attitudes. To protect the consumer, media literacy should be taught at schools and family.

Another research group studies models of the development of consumer behavior and factors that influence consumerism and materialism among children. Children of all ages try to understand their physical and social position. Family concept is changing, the age of becoming a parent increases, which leads to liberalization of relations between children and parents, the “children's market emancipation” (Valkenburg & Cantor, 2001). All this determines their preferences regarding brands, information, products, entertainment and consumer behavior. Children with different level of development and social position differ in their attention and susceptibility to various psychological forces (commercial media, peer pressure) which affect their behavior and consumer values.

Based on these frameworks, the role of child socialization has been studied (Nicholls & Cullen, 2004). Critical statement turned into a controversial point that advertising actually teaches children to be consumers and it plays an important role in their socialization process. Another crucial process is parents' re-socialization: when they get influenced by their children's opinion. This happens when, for example, children have more knowledge about a brand or a product than their parents do (Ekstrom, Tansuhaj & Foxman, 1987).

Moreover, scientists have studied the methods of child's influence on family purchases (Sharma & Sonwaney, 2014). Such influence differs depending on several aspects: the model of family communication, socio-economic status of the family, family structure, age and number of children in a family, family resources, involvement and capabilities of a child within family relationships, the importance of the product to the child or family, knowledge about brand or product in the family.

Empirical studies basic to this study can as well be divided into several blocks.

First, children's loyalty has been analyzed. Researchers suppose that in order to increase sales you can just have an immediate impact on children (Nicholls & Cullen, 2004) (Reijmersdal, Jansz, Peters & Noort, 2010). But when both parents and children admit they are being under marketing control, it cannot turn into the long-term loyalty. Strong relationships with the brand are not based on autobiographical memory which means subconscious memories of brand interaction in childhood (Haryanto, Moutinho & Coelho, 2016). Researchers assume that child's loyalty could be connected and even influenced by their parents' loyalty to the brand, so that the stronger brand's relationship with parents is, the higher the loyalty level of their child as an independent buyer is.

Secondly, it has been studied how children of different ages (from 2 to 14 years old) change their attitude towards brands. It was revealed that the brand awareness is already developed at the age of 2-3 years (Patti, Valkenburg & Buijzen, 2005). Then, at the age of 7, children already have the ability of remembering brands' logos. At about 8 years, children start evaluating brands as conceptual symbols: abstract features of a product can be recognized and distinguished (Achenreiner & Roedder, 2003). After the age of 8 years, brands are perceived as a single holistic product. By the age of 12, the lifestyle of the brands' users can be recognized and evaluated.

Thirdly, it is proposed that the attitude to the brand passes on from generation to generation (Hsieh, Chiu & Lin, 2006). Nevertheless, it depends on the influence methods of father and mother. They are different in terms of the family and communication mode. The majority of fathers sampled is socially-oriented, for mothers the main frame is a conceptually-oriented one. This means that fathers influence children's perception of certain brands by imposing norms and standards, while mothers encourage two-way communication and a feedback in order to give their children the ability to independently evaluate, so they try to take into account their children's opinion on the decision about family purchases. In addition to parents', the peers' attitude towards brand as well influences recognition and attitude of a child (Patti, Valkenburg & Buijzen, 2005).

Moreover, the factors affecting children's purchase requests are analyzed. A child's influence on the purchase is usually more successful if the desired product can be used in the store or if it is situated within the free access zone of a child (Elbster, Wagner & Neumueller, 2019). Also, parents are more likely to respond positively to the child's purchase request, if the family income is high and the product price seems to be low for parents. Furthermore, the children's inquiry patterns for purchase are studied. The more polite the call to purchase is (the less it looks like a demand), the more possible parental purchase is. Among the factors affecting children's desire of buying, there is the frequency of advertisement interaction (Opree, Buijzen, Reijmersdal & Valkenburg, 2014). Children who had more interactions with the brand's advertisements, showed a greater desire for the product. As a result, they became more materialistic than children with less desire.

In addition, the influence of advertising on interaction and relationship between children and their parents is actively studied. It is revealed that mothers who are aware of marketing control over their children, demonstrate more control and self-confidence when shopping with their children than mothers whose children do not interact with advertising. This can lead to global changes in family relationship (Stoneman & Brody, 2008).

The scientific novelty of the research is that, despite the fact it is theoretically based on a set of the previously marketing and communicational theories, the topic hasn't been studied in the Russian market yet. Moreover, all the findings of the previous studies that are the basis of this study, that have an individual impact, are now interrelated and operate in a common system which forms a complex theoretical model.

The scientific significance of the work consists in the study of marketing models related to the marketing activities' influence on children and their parents that can lead to long-term loyalty.

The theoretical significance of the work consists in the generalization of the results of other theories and research obtained earlier.

The practical significance lies in the fact that the results can be used in the study of the ethical component of marketing strategies and tactics aimed at children in order to make them and their parents loyal to the brand in the future.

This research consists of two parts. The first chapter is theoretical framework, it represents theoretical aspects of child-parent interaction, child materialism and ethical issues. The second one provides a detailed description of the empirical research conducted.

1. Theoretical framework

1.1 Advertising influence on child-parent communications

Communication patterns between children and parents and consumer decision making in families

Parents allow their children to take part in family decisions making including consumer ones (McNeal, 1992). Children are not only consumers but also play a great role in the process of family decisions making (Pecheux & Derbaix, 1999). Besides the fact that parents do directly influence their children's preference in the process of the in-family socialization, it was researched that interaction between children and parents results in the longitude impression of a child in the context of brand preference (Moschis, 1984). This means that children adopt parental behavior and this depends on the inner interaction processes in a family (Bandura, 1962). Consequently, parental models of consumer behavior can as well be adopted by children and children while growing up will demonstrate the same behavior preferences, habits, materialistic orientation, attitude towards brands, loyalty (Moore & Lutz, 1988; Moore et al., 2002; Viswanathan & Moore, 2000). In other words, consumer orientations, brand perception and behavior are similar between the following generations. That is why it is so important to study the extent to which children take part in the family processes, family communication patterns, how family decisions are made and factors that can as well be crucial.

Researchers divide the structure of the inner family communications into two types: conceptually-oriented and socially-oriented communication (McLeod & Chafee, 1972; Moschis & Mitchell, 1986; Rose et al., 2002). The concept of these two types is rather similar to the one that can be defined as liberal and conservative types and the definition of each type depends on the same-called types of parental upbringing inside the family (Roberts et al., 1981). So, the extent to which a child influences family consumer decision making, depends on the type of how parents communicate while upbringing their children. By this categorization researchers describe how a parent teaches his or her child in the aspects of parental control, child's attitude towards any authority (from parental and teachers' one till governmental one, specifically to any authority as a social institution), how parents teach children to behave in conflict situations, to express opinion and judge about the surrounding society and environment, the quality of argumentation and communication, openness, expression point of view or new ideas (Hsieh, Chiu & Lin, 2006).

By defining a family as having conceptually-organized structure of family communication, it is supposed that due to the parental influence, a child gets accustomed to criticize open and directly, to express opinion fully and without feeling fear about others' opinion, to assess any situation critically and find a rational behavior, not emotional one, to constantly seek and propose new ideas, to be independent of any external authority (Moschis, 1985). This assumes that children in families with such principles of education are more liberal in their opinion and behavior, can independently assess situation, respond and reflect both critically and emotionally to any issue. Children in such families shape their brand preferences independently, aside from their parents' point of view. Children's influence on parental behavior in conceptually-oriented families will be significant.

Members of a family with socially-oriented communication structure are expected to be more conservative. It is also defined by parental mode of communication and children upbringing: parents encourage control and obedience both inside and outside the family. Children are taught how to avoid conflicts but not to manage them. They get used to listen to the others' points of view, stick to it and not to be “the black sheep” among peers and surrounding society, to be equal to the others, not to comment or express opinion. Parents restrict their children's actions including restrictions in patterns of consumer behavior, they impose their own opinion frameworks on children and control children's decisions. Family members who have socially-oriented mode of communication will tend to delegate tasks. Children in such families are expected not to take part in family arguments because the decision processes and solutions are beforehand assigned to parents or elder relatives. Then, such children are used to avoid argumentation because their parents do not teach them to behave the other way. Thus, children in socially-oriented families are afraid to offend others. It is difficult for them to learn how to think independently and how to express a point of view that is controversial or contrary to others' one. That is why they adopt adults' or other authorities' preferences while growing up more often that produce own point of view.

Researchers expand the subdivision of the two types of family communication mode into four subtypes: Laissez faire, Protective, Pluralistic, Consensus(Table 1) (McLeod & Chaffee, 1972). The first subtype is connected with low level of social and high level of conceptual orientation, the second one - with high level of social and low level of conceptual orientation, the third subtype represents low social and high conceptual level of orientation and the last one - both high social and conceptual communication orientation.

Table 1

The model of family communication orientation

Parents in socially-oriented families are supposed to influence children's opinion and preferences the most significantly. Children in conceptually-oriented families are generally more independent in their point of view and preferences. Besides, children are encouraged to take part in the processes of family decision making in the conceptually-oriented frame, parents value their opinion. On the contrary, in socially-oriented families children will be less ambitious in the processes of group decision making (Moschis, 1985). That is why the share of child influence on parental purchase decision in socially-oriented families tends to be minimal.

Provided that inner-family communication types are subdivided, children who grow up in the Pluralistic mode, have more experience in the aspects of demand and supply economics and consumer communication. In the Laissez faire mode they are less rational in the questions of decision making. The other two types are transitional and can be characterized as also more and less conservative and liberal in the purchase behavior.

In the matters of children's opinion and desire influence, specifically purchase execution and best consumer solution finding, there are also several factors that would have a significant impact on parental purchase intention (Elbster, Wagner & Neumueller, 2019). The question under discussion is not only about direct child's request in the point of sales but also indirect, when a child takes even a small or insignificant part in the family decision making processes and supposedly influences parental mind.

Thus, among such factors are: the liberty of child's actions and motion, his or her accessibility to the information about brands and products, as well as the stage of child's consumer development or the level of consumer maturity. This all influences the number and the quality of purchase requests. Then, researchers claim that there are factors, the consequences of which can lead to parental concession in the matter of their brand or product choice. In accordance with Paul Lewin theory, the factors that influence these two processes, should be divided into the internal and external ones: the first factor is inner-individual and it can be applied to a child likewise a parent (Paul Lewin, 1951). The second factor implies the effects of environmental features, and the personal desire or intentions should not be applied as the foundation of this factor.

The attributes of the first, inner type factors, are the degree of child's consumer development or consumer socialization level, the frequency of family purchasing and the extent to which a child is likely to influence family purchasing, how significant and as well frequent it happens. Besides, among the inner factors is children's influence awareness. Finally, it is the form of statement of how a child makes requests and how a parent responds to it, accepts or denies the majority of requests. Among the factors that refer to the inside-ones there are marketing source and medium, ways and methods of information transmission, product placement and accessibility, its price and quality. The products that are disposed in the free accessibility area as well as children's eye-zone should cause increased children's intention to make a purchase request.

Moreover, the results of the previous research show that the gender structure of the family also influences the children's and parents' communication type and brand perception. Generally, fathers' and mothers' communication style differs in its orientation and directivity. That means that father's and mother's communication mode does not frequently coincide. Meanwhile, mothers with conceptually-oriented communication mode and fathers with socially-oriented one will have more significant impact on child's attitude towards brand (Hsieh, Chiu & Lin, 2006). This happens because fathers tend to communicate with children less than mothers. Fathers more often play the role of the family supervisor: they set the rules, norms and standards and encourage subordination. Mothers tend to communicate more commonly with their children under 18 years old (Shek, 2000). They encourage honest and direct communication, fresh ideas proposition and views argumentation. Therefore, mothers support children's beliefs and contribute to the inclusion of children's opinion in the process of family decision making. Besides, mothers are more often connected with brands than fathers do, that is why altogether mothers influence child's attitude towards brands more, and this does not depend on the child's gender (Carlson&Grossbart, 1988).

Other researchers maintain the fact of correlation existence between the type of communication and children gender. The relations with parents are considered to be tighter when the genders are identical: for instance, father - son or mother - daughter (Hsieh, Chiu&Lin, 2006). What is more, relations in the “father - son” dyad are based on support and maintenance, while the “mother - daughter” dyad assumes mutual agreement and diversified discussions (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992). Nevertheless, the mode of communication influences more than the type of gender dyad (“father - son”, “father - daughter”, “mother - son”, “mother - daughter”) in terms of brand preference and attitude transmission and the inner-family socialization processes (Hsieh, Chiu & Lin, 2006).

The transmission of attitude towards brands and decision-making processes depend also on the number of parents in a family. Children in incomplete family type (with one parent) are likely to influence the inner-family relations (Hsieh, Chiu & Lin, 2006). When there is one parent in a family, his or her responsibility is twice as much as in a full family. A parent would seek for support among his or her children in an incomplete family, in order to independently reconstruct the family to the traditional type and to distribute the roles between family members, including the absent one: father's or mother's. That is why the level of participance in group decisions making in such families is rather high.

Nevertheless, even if the type of family is full one, but both parents work full time or more and rarely communicate with their children, the roles in such families change and child's consumer behavior may change as well (Glasser&Navarre, 1965; Haynes et al, 1993). Children in the families where parents have full-time jobs, spend more time at shops because parents are accustomed to compensate lack of time spent with children by giving them pocket money. Children in such families purchase more often. Meanwhile, the number of decisions, made in the process of purchasing, increases and this contributes to the accelerated consumer socialization process of the children. Parents also tend to listen to their children opinion while decision making, therefore children play greater role in the family purchasing.

In the previous research the pattern of the family size was connected with family purchasing processes. The less the number of children is, the more time spent together parents would provide each child with, the more consumer skills would each child acquire (Shim et al, 1993). Besides, the more children are there in a family, the less they will learn from their parents about money economics (Shim & Snyder, 1995).

Then, socio-economical level of a family also significantly influences family decision-making processes (Moschis&Churchill, 1978). By socio-economical level is implicated parental social class and the level of family income. This variable is related to the way of information consumption: in the families with higher socio-economical class level children use more sources for seeking and consuming information, they often find it by themselves. In the families with lower socio-economical class level information is not often put under discussion or its formats are forged by local media sources and is rather limited. This influences on parental awareness of brands and products and consumer knowledge as well as behavior. Consequently, child's ability to self-learning depends on the socio-economical level, then also on media literacy and consumer socialization (Moschis&Churchill, 1978).

So, child's influence in a family gets more significant as its income increases (Moschis&Churchill, 1978). This means that the higher socio-economical level of the family is, the more opportunities to learn and self-learn children have, the more flexible their consumer thinking is. In addition, the higher this level is, the more valuable each family member opinion is and the more approvingly parents refer to the cooperative decision-making processes (Jenkins, 1979). The other point is that high revenue indicates parental knowledge existence in the issues of rational choice, money management and distribution (Kourilsky&Murray, 1981). Such parents tend to reflect on family economics collectively and settle money affairs by argument, not by emotions. Children with such parents would possess higher level of economical knowledge regarding money and expenses, consumerism and choice rationality while purchasing. One more reason for considerable child opinion influence in families with high socio-economical level is that the more the income is, the more the level of financial risks for important and expensive purchases increases and vice versa: the less is the level of financial risks for insignificant, unimportant and cheaper purchases.

In other words, during the process of making a significant purchase, a parent with a high level of income will rather listen to the child's opinion than to the side opinion due to the fact that side opinion does not define full understanding of an issue as it can be an opinion of a person with a lower income.

Another factor that may produce an effect on a child's purchase decision influence, in a greater or lesser extent, is considered to be child's personal resources (Ekstrom, Tansuhaj&Foxman, 1987). By personal resources many things can be defined, such as: money or child's conditions inside and outside the family that distinguish a child among his family members. For instance, it is position of a child in regard to his or her brothers and sisters. If a child is born as the first family child, his communication with parents can be tighter. Firstborn children are highly considered to discuss the varieties of purchase decision making with their parents, as a result they can socialize into the role of consumer having a more independent point of view relatively acquisition. For this reason, the first child in a family is commonly supposed to earn own money earlier than the younger children, therefore this child is as well independent in his or her consumer decisions.

The results of the other studies showed that the more actively the family consumption of a product is, the higher level of influence children have in the matters of family decision making (Roberts et al, 1981). This happens dependently on the frequency of the product acquisition. The products that are consumed more often are characterized as less critical ones for parents. It was estimated that parents are more open to the child's product preferences or criticism if this product is less important among the others. It is of greater value to the products that are targeted at children's usage, in this case parents are proposed to be highly open to the child's opinion and with the higher probability will accept child's terms and make a purchase. Simultaneously, a child will be more active in the manifestation of the initiative regarding choice of a product if he or she possesses enough knowledge of a product for desiring it or if the product is the one of high importance (Ekstrom, Tansuhaj&Foxman, 1987). On the contrary, the importance of a product for a child and the extent to which a child is going to use the product, contributes to the quality of child influence on the general family consumer decision (Watne et al, 2011).

What is more, family decision making can positively affect the communication processes between children and parents owing to the factor of obtaining of satisfaction from the process of group decision making (Berns, 1976). Group decision making enhances the degree of self-satisfaction because in these situations each member of the argument feels and perceives the power of self-influence and the value of the proper opinion beyond the group. The other significant point is that the more the group and personal economic interests are satisfied, the more psychological satisfaction group decision making brings to each member of the argument. Nevertheless, there are several exceptions. The first exception is that the condition of making a person unsatisfied with the group decision making assumes that a person can be not well-informed about the terms of the probable decision making. Another exception is when a person feels how low power he or she possesses inside the group. The less power leads to the less share in the group decision. The third exception is when people having an argument set different aims or interests. Obviously, in this situation they are not to come up with a compromise or to the common decision (Kourilsky&Murray, 1981).

Furthermore, children satisfaction in the group decision making processes has also studied. The results of the previous analysis revealed that the older a child is and the more qualitative family relations are, the more important the measure of a child's opinion and the degree of influence for the psychological balance of a child is, especially if child's opinion is the winning one.

Concluding this part, it is necessary to sum up that children are the active members of the processes of family consumer decision making. Parental decisions and attitude towards brand largely depend on the mode of family communication, the level of education, social and economic status of a family, time spent with children, child personal resources and the level of satisfaction from the process of decision-making of each group member.

Consumer socialization of children and re-socialization of parents in the context of brand

Any child seeks to realize his position in a society (Valkenburg&Cantor, 2001). It is transformed by the surrounding physical, social and cultural world which determines the views, values, tastes, consumer preferences and behavior of a child and the choice of brands and products as a result. The value of a product or a brand is significantly influenced by the brand image than its functional component (Achenreiner & Roedder, 2003). As a result of interaction with the environment, a child acquires the symbols of consumption.

Consumer socialization is the process by which a person learns how to behave as a consumer while acquiring attitudes, values, knowledge and skills from his environment (Ward, 1974). Initially, a child is socialized into a consumer with the help of parents, family, peers, and advertising by learning aspects of consumption (Moschis, 1985; Douglas, 1983; Filiatrault, 1980; Moschis & Churchill 1977, 1978; Szybillo et al, 1977).

Researchers identify the two theoretical models of learning that are basic to the process of consumer socialization. They are: a social and a cognitive type of learning (Moschis & Moore, 1979, 1984).

While being socially educated, a child interacts with the social environment which consists of parents, peers, the media. A child also acquires consumer values and skills as a part of the learning process through such interaction. This can be concluded into a model of one-sided influence directed at a child, the formation of his or her consumer judgments and skills, in other words, into a model of asymmetric causality (Cromwell & Olsen, 1975).

During cognitive education, a child learns on his or her own how to receive information from different sources, how to analyze and make personal judgments, how to adjust to the surrounding reality.

The quality of socialization depends on the quality of communication within the family (Dotson & Hyatt, 2005). In case when there prevails high or moderate frequency of interaction in a family, a child socializes into a consumer more qualitatively as a result of both social and cognitive types of education. In case when there prevails a lower level of interaction frequency in a family, the involvement into the inner-family communication processes is reduced, a child learns mainly cognitively and the source of social learning as a family has its minimal impact (Bronfenbrenner, 1975). At the same time, a child as a consumer gets less rational skills and values while learning from more commercialized content.

Children possess the power in the processes of in-family communication (Cowell, 2001). They are actively involved into the decision-making processes on the issues of in-family purchases to the categories of all extent: from daily consumption to luxury products (Neuborne, 1999). Consequently, a child's consumer interaction with a parent (as well as peers and environment) cannot be unidirectional. In this case, one-way communication is considered to be narrow and unnatural and cannot be divorced from the general process that affects both sides of communication (Grusec&Kuczynski, 1980). This is a two-way communication, both parties are to some extent always involved into it. In this case, all the agents of consumer socialization which influence the consumer picture of a child's world are a common social organism, a social consumer system (Bell, 1971). Inside this system, children as well as parents function in the both roles: students and teachers (Tallman et al, 1983).

That is why, besides the fact that parents influence children's consumer behavior, parents can expand, update or re-acquire their consumer behavior skills through their children. These processes are common and are called consumer re-socialization: it means that parents acquire new skills of market functioning as a consumer due to the influence of children's behavior, so that children are intermediate agents of parental re-socialization between a brand and a parent (Sharma&Sonwaney, 2013). In other words, parents re-learn how to make purchasing decisions, receive new knowledge about brands and brand characteristics while interacting with their children. For instance, re-socialization occurs when a child has more knowledge about a brand or product than a parent does.

Parental re-socialization occurs due to the two types of interaction: through indirect expression of preferences (when a child makes judgments about a brand or a product) and direct expression of preferences (when a child wants to buy brand's products by requesting or discussing purchase decision with a parent) (Ekstrom, Tansuhaj, Foxman, 1987). At the same time, a child may affect the holistic parental perception of a brand or group of brands and products which can result in a complete and long-term change in parental consumer values, evaluation and preferences of products and brands, changes in consumer behavior (Moschis et al, 1984). On the contrary, changes in parental judgment of a brand can be one-time or temporary: in a form of an instant concession that does not affect parental values or consumer behavior (Roberts et al, 1980).

It was also revealed that children are aware of their influence on the parental consumer behavior, which is called the Theory of social consumer power (Easterling& Miller, 1995). On the other hand, parents also admit their children's influence power over them.