IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v120y2014icp1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of comparative claims in prescription drug direct-to-consumer advertising on consumer perceptions and recall

Author

Listed:
  • O'Donoghue, Amie C.
  • Williams, Pamela A.
  • Sullivan, Helen W.
  • Boudewyns, Vanessa
  • Squire, Claudia
  • Willoughby, Jessica Fitts

Abstract

Although pharmaceutical companies cannot make comparative claims in direct-to-consumer (DTC) ads for prescription drugs without substantial evidence, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration permits some comparisons based on labeled attributes of the drug, such as dosing. Researchers have examined comparative advertising for packaged goods; however, scant research has examined comparative DTC advertising. We conducted two studies to determine if comparative claims in DTC ads influence consumers' perceptions and recall of drug information. In Experiment 1, participants with osteoarthritis (n = 1934) viewed a fictitious print or video DTC ad that had no comparative claim or made an efficacy comparison to a named or unnamed competitor. Participants who viewed print (but not video) ads with named competitors had greater efficacy and lower risk perceptions than participants who viewed unnamed competitor and noncomparative ads. In Experiment 2, participants with high cholesterol or high body mass index (n = 5317) viewed a fictitious print or video DTC ad that had no comparative claim or made a comparison to a named or unnamed competitor. We varied the type of comparison (of indication, dosing, or mechanism of action) and whether the comparison was accompanied by a visual depiction. Participants who viewed print and video ads with named competitors had greater efficacy perceptions than participants who viewed unnamed competitor and noncomparative ads. Unlike Experiment 1, named competitors in print ads resulted in higher risk perceptions than unnamed competitors. In video ads, participants who saw an indication comparison had greater benefit recall than participants who saw dosing or mechanism of action comparisons. In addition, visual depictions of the comparison decreased risk recall for video ads. Overall, the results suggest that comparative claims in DTC ads could mislead consumers about a drug's efficacy and risk; therefore, caution should be used when presenting comparative claims in DTC ads.

Suggested Citation

  • O'Donoghue, Amie C. & Williams, Pamela A. & Sullivan, Helen W. & Boudewyns, Vanessa & Squire, Claudia & Willoughby, Jessica Fitts, 2014. "Effects of comparative claims in prescription drug direct-to-consumer advertising on consumer perceptions and recall," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-11.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:120:y:2014:i:c:p:1-11
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.08.039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614005656
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.08.039?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burke, Raymond R, et al, 1988. "Deception by Implication: An Experimental Investigation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(4), pages 483-494, March.
    2. Miniard, Paul W. & Rose, Randall L. & Manning, Kenneth C. & Barone, Michael J., 1998. "Tracking the effects of comparative and noncomparative advertising with relative and nonrelative measures: A further examination of the framing correspondence hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 137-143, February.
    3. Pechmann, Cornelia & Stewart, David W, 1990. "The Effects of Comparative Advertising on Attention, Memory, and Purchase Intentions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(2), pages 180-191, September.
    4. Pechmann, Cornelia & Ratneshwar, S, 1991. "The Use of Comparative Advertising for Brand Positioning: Association versus Differentiation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(2), pages 145-160, September.
    5. Demirdjian, Z S, 1983. "Sales Effectiveness of Comparative Advertising: An Experimental Field Investigation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(3), pages 362-364, December.
    6. Scott, Linda M, 1994. "Images in Advertising: The Need for a Theory of Visual Rhetoric," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(2), pages 252-273, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Banerjee, Bibek & Chakrabarty Patrali, 2010. "An Eye for an Eye: Impact of Sequelization and Comparison in Advertisements on Consumer’s Perception of Brands," IIMA Working Papers WP2010-08-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    2. Jeon, Jung Ok & Beatty, Sharon E., 2002. "Comparative advertising effectiveness in different national cultures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 907-913, November.
    3. Easley, Richard W. & Bearden, William O. & Teel, Jesse E., 1995. "Testing predictions derived from inoculation theory and the effectiveness of self-disclosure communications strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 93-105, October.
    4. Bambauer-Sachse, Silke & Heinzle, Priska, 2018. "Comparative advertising: Effects of concreteness and claim substantiation through reactance and activation on purchase intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 233-242.
    5. Bambauer-Sachse, Silke & Heinzle, Priska, 2018. "Comparative advertising for goods versus services: Effects of different types of product attributes through consumer reactance and activation on consumer response," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 82-90.
    6. Dieter K. Tscheulin & Bernd Helmig, 1999. "Zur Effizienz verschiedener Ausgestaltungsformen vergleichender Werbung — Internationale Rechtslage, „State-of-the-art” und Ergebnisse einer empirischen Studie," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 550-578, June.
    7. Pillai, Kishore Gopalakrishna & Goldsmith, Ronald E., 2008. "How brand attribute typicality and consumer commitment moderate the influence of comparative advertising," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(9), pages 933-941, September.
    8. Pierro, Antonio & Giacomantonio, Mauro & Pica, Gennaro & Mannetti, Lucia & Kruglanski, Arie W. & Tory Higgins, E., 2013. "When comparative ads are more effective: Fit with audience’s regulatory mode," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 90-103.
    9. Ricardo Paredes M, 2004. "Fundamentos Para La Regulacion De La Publicidad Comparativa," Abante, Escuela de Administracion. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 7(1), pages 67-102.
    10. Siddharth Bhattacharya & Jing Gong & Sunil Wattal, 2022. "Competitive Poaching in Search Advertising: Two Randomized Field Experiments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 599-619, June.
    11. Daly, Bonita A. & Schuler, Drue K., 1998. "Redefining a certified public accounting firm," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 549-567.
    12. Jun Zhang & Joon Soo Lim, 2021. "Mitigating negative spillover effects in a product-harm crisis: strategies for market leaders versus market challengers," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(1), pages 77-98, January.
    13. Maria Alipranti & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2013. "Comparative versus Informative Advertising in Oligopolistic Markets," Working Papers 1301, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    14. Higgins, Colin & Walker, Robyn, 2012. "Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 194-208.
    15. Maria Antonietta Raimondo & Gaetano Nino Miceli & Stefania Farace, 2013. "Self o mass branding? La relazione tra personalizzazione e marca," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(4), pages 149-171.
    16. Bulmer, Sandy & Buchanan-Oliver, Margo, 2010. "Experiences of brands and national identity," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 199-205.
    17. Gaurav Sabnis & Rajdeep Grewal, 2015. "Cable News Wars on the Internet: Competition and User-Generated Content," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 301-319, June.
    18. Celhay, Franck & Cheng, Peiyao & Masson, Josselin & Li, Wenhua, 2020. "Package graphic design and communication across cultures: An investigation of Chinese consumers' interpretation of imported wine labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 108-128.
    19. Espigares-Jurado, Francisco & Muñoz-Leiva, Francisco & Correia, Marisol B. & Sousa, Carlos M.R. & Ramos, Célia M.Q. & Faísca, Luís, 2020. "Visual attention to the main image of a hotel website based on its position, type of navigation and belonging to Millennial generation: An eye tracking study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    20. Karpinska-Krakowiak, Malgorzata, 2021. "Women are more likely to buy unknown brands than men: The effects of gender and known versus unknown brands on purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:120:y:2014:i:c:p:1-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.