Do I question what influencers sell me? Integration of critical thinking in the advertising literacy of Spanish adolescents

Advertising literacy has become increasingly critical in a digitized consumer journey where commercial information appears in diverse and hybrid formats that are hard to identify, such as influencer marketing. Beyond the cognitive recognition of persuasive intent, the attitudinal dimension (e.g., skepticism) is key for children’s accurate processing of digital messages. EU Kids Online data show Spanish adolescents (12–16) have among Europe’s lowest browsing and critical appraisal skills, underscoring the need to strengthen both cognitive and attitudinal aspects of advertising literacy. Given the “infodemic” and the personal nature of mobile screens, adolescents must learn to discern content, identify credible sources, and prevent misinformation. This study examines how critical thinking—specifically Van Laar’s five components (clarification, evaluation, justification, linking of ideas, novelty)—integrates into adolescents’ advertising literacy when facing influencer-generated branded content. Research question: RQ1. To what extent do adolescents' reactions to commercial content created by influencers encompass the components of critical thinking as defined by Van Laar (2019)?

The study situates advertising literacy within three dimensions: cognitive (recognizing selling intent, source, tactics, bias), attitudinal (liking/disliking, skepticism), and ethical (societal values/norms, laws). Hybrid formats (advergaming, branded content, influencer marketing) often trigger low-effort processing, so programs should foster critical attitudes and ethical reflection. Ethics has gained importance due to pressures and diversification of digital advertising, including tactics that may conflict with social norms or skirt regulation. Critical thinking in the digital context is a priority competency in the EU and comprises clarification, evaluation, justification, linking ideas, and novelty (Van Laar, 2019). Prior work indicates adolescents recognize sponsored influencer posts but experience tension between recognizing advertising and critically scrutinizing it. EU Kids Online consistently reports low critical information literacy among Spanish youth, justifying qualitative inquiries into how adolescents process influencer marketing and what strategies they use to navigate persuasive content.

Design: Qualitative study using 12 virtual focus groups (Zoom/Microsoft Teams) to explore adolescents’ use of critical thinking when exposed to influencer-generated content. Framework: Van Laar’s (2019) five critical thinking components. Participants: N=62 adolescents (ages 11–17; M=14.14, SD=1.9); 59.7% female, 40.3% male. Recruited via multiple Spanish schools across regions (South 41.9%, Levante 22.6%, North 19.3%, Canary Islands 9.7%, Central 6.5%). Sampling/segmentation: Non-probabilistic sampling in collaboration with schools. Four age bands: 6th grade (elementary), 1st cycle ESO (7th–8th), 2nd cycle ESO (9th–10th), Baccalaureate (11th–12th). For each age band, three focus groups by socio-economic profile (low, medium, high) based on school funding (public/charter/private) and neighborhood income (Spanish National Institute of Statistics thresholds: low <€11,450; medium €11,450–€30,350; high >€30,000). Total groups: 12 (3 per age band). Procedure: Sessions (~50 min) with 4–6 participants (one group had 3). Standardized protocol: AV checks, confidentiality assurances, voluntary participation and withdrawal rights. Discussion guide covered social media use, followed influencers and motivations, credibility/trust, and perceptions of brand collaborations. Ethical approval obtained from the International University of La Rioja Ethics Committee (PI:002/2021). Parental informed consent collected via schools. Analysis: Phase 1 verbatim transcription; Phase 2 identification of critical thinking dimensions by expert team; Phase 3 coding/categorization in NVivo 12 Plus using adapted Van Laar components for influencer content (clarification, evaluation, justification, linking ideas, novelty).

Platform use context: Instagram most popular overall (33.53% of mentions), followed by TikTok (23.87%), WhatsApp (14.05%), YouTube (12.54%). Younger groups favored TikTok/YouTube/Twitch/Discord; older groups gravitated to Instagram (47.10% of mentions in Baccalaureate). Entertainment remains a dominant motive. General perceptions: Across ages, participants recognized the commercial nature of influencer activity and saw product promotion as definitional of being an influencer. Critical thinking components observed: - Clarification: Adolescents, including 11-year-olds, questioned persuasive intent and authenticity (e.g., noticing filters or exaggerated language). Repetitive superlatives or over-insistence on a product triggered suspicion and recognition of economic interests. - Evaluation: Credibility judgments relied on influencer profile, perceived expertise/experience with products, and authenticity versus gossip/monetary motives. Emotional/inspirational resonance also influenced trust. Some participants erroneously used appearance as a proxy for credibility in diet/esthetic topics, though not universally accepted. - Justification: Participants justified following influencers despite “false” or exaggerated portrayals because it entertains. They cited platform economics (e.g., creating controversy for views/pay) via personal networks to explain influencer behaviors. - Linking ideas: Adolescents connected school-learned persuasion techniques to influencer strategies (e.g., authority endorsements, indirect calls to purchase). They critiqued repetitive sponsorships and linked unethical practices (e.g., bookmakers) to exploitation. - Novelty: Participants proposed limits on influencer recommendations in sensitive areas (e.g., health/diet), preferring qualified professionals (doctors, pharmacists) for advice, and suggested personalizing platform recommendations to reduce invasive content. Consequences/behaviors stemming from critical engagement: 1) Not following influencers to avoid negative effects on self-esteem/comparison; 2) Following and using influencer advice for purchases after evaluating profiles/content quality; 3) Following while selectively disregarding non-expert recommendations, favoring professional advice for health-related topics. Developmental trend: Older adolescents (2nd cycle ESO, Baccalaureate) showed more complex, nuanced critical discussions, better linking of influencer practices to outcomes (e.g., body image, mental health) and proposing solutions. Ethical dimension gap: While cognitive and attitudinal criticality was evident, explicit moral/ethical evaluation (normative/legislative considerations, moral appropriateness of tactics) was largely absent in adolescents’ discourse. Selected quantitative details: N=62; ages 11–17 (M=14.14, SD=1.9); platform mentions: Instagram 33.53%, TikTok 23.87%, WhatsApp 14.05%, YouTube 12.54%; Instagram mentions in Baccalaureate 47.10%.

Findings address RQ1 by showing adolescents do enact Van Laar’s five critical thinking components when processing influencer marketing. They recognize influencers’ persuasive roles, question authenticity, evaluate credibility based on expertise and consistency, justify engagement through entertainment value, link prior knowledge (school lessons, family experiences) to interpret tactics, and propose practical boundaries (e.g., deferring health advice to experts). This indicates integration of critical thinking into the cognitive and attitudinal dimensions of advertising literacy. However, the ethical dimension—moral appraisal and awareness of norms/regulation—remains underdeveloped. Older adolescents display more advanced abstract thinking, richer idea-linking, and concern for mental health/body image impacts. Adolescents often accept exaggeration/superficiality as part of the “game” of social media, sometimes maintaining dual profiles (public/private) to manage impressions, revealing adaptation to the commercialized digital environment without deep moral scrutiny. Enhancing the ethical dimension is necessary to complete the advertising literacy profile in hybrid digital formats.

Adolescents in Spain commonly encounter influencer marketing and, when prompted, apply critical thinking across clarification, evaluation, justification, linking ideas, and novelty, integrating these into their advertising literacy. They can identify persuasive intent, question authenticity, and propose practical limits (especially in health-related content), with older adolescents showing more sophisticated critical analysis. Nonetheless, explicit ethical reasoning about influencer marketing practices is limited. Digital competence initiatives should incorporate advertising literacy that includes cognitive, attitudinal, and ethical dimensions, emphasizing critical thinking to help youth identify, process, and understand the ethical implications of hybrid advertising formats. Future research should test whether similar critical thinking components are activated with other hybrid formats (advergaming, native advertising) and in diverse cultural contexts.

Qualitative, exploratory design with a non-probabilistic sample (N=62) limits generalizability. The study is context-specific to Spain and conducted via virtual focus groups in 2021. Cultural factors may influence recognition and evaluation of the ethical dimension. Further work should replicate/extend in other contexts, examine additional hybrid formats (advergaming, native ads), and investigate how home and educational environments shape the ethical facet of advertising literacy.