Helen W Sullivan1, Amie C O'Donoghue2, Molly Lynch3, Mihaela Johnson3, Christine Davis3, Jacqueline B Amoozegar4, Douglas J Rupert3. 1. Office of Prescription Drug Promotion, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA. Electronic address: helen.sullivan@fda.hhs.gov. 2. Office of Prescription Drug Promotion, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA. 3. Center for Communication Science, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 4. Center for Health Informatics Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Images demonstrating a prescription drug's efficacy are often included in direct-to-consumer television advertisements. The current research assessed whether exaggerated efficacy images can mislead individuals, and whether providing accurate quantitative information can reduce these misperceptions. METHODS: We conducted two experimental studies with internet panelists 60 years and older testing drug efficacy images in television ads for wet age-related macular degeneration (N = 901) and plaque psoriasis (N = 902). In each study, participants viewed one of six ads that varied in the efficacy images included (no image, accurate image, exaggerated image) and the presentation of quantitative information (absent, present). Measures included recall, perceptions, and numeracy. RESULTS: In both studies, participants who saw exaggerated images were more likely than those who saw no image or accurate images to overestimate efficacy. Presenting quantitative information increased participants' gist and verbatim recall of drug efficacy, and in some cases, led participants to have more accurate perceptions of the drug's efficacy even in the presence of exaggerated images. Higher numeracy was associated with better gist and verbatim recall. CONCLUSIONS: These results support visual persuasion theory. Moreover, they show that exaggerating benefits visually can mislead viewers. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Stakeholders should ensure that images in direct-to-consumer promotion are accurate and non-misleading. Published by Elsevier B.V.
OBJECTIVE: Images demonstrating a prescription drug's efficacy are often included in direct-to-consumer television advertisements. The current research assessed whether exaggerated efficacy images can mislead individuals, and whether providing accurate quantitative information can reduce these misperceptions. METHODS: We conducted two experimental studies with internet panelists 60 years and older testing drug efficacy images in television ads for wet age-related macular degeneration (N = 901) and plaque psoriasis (N = 902). In each study, participants viewed one of six ads that varied in the efficacy images included (no image, accurate image, exaggerated image) and the presentation of quantitative information (absent, present). Measures included recall, perceptions, and numeracy. RESULTS: In both studies, participants who saw exaggerated images were more likely than those who saw no image or accurate images to overestimate efficacy. Presenting quantitative information increased participants' gist and verbatim recall of drug efficacy, and in some cases, led participants to have more accurate perceptions of the drug's efficacy even in the presence of exaggerated images. Higher numeracy was associated with better gist and verbatim recall. CONCLUSIONS: These results support visual persuasion theory. Moreover, they show that exaggerating benefits visually can mislead viewers. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Stakeholders should ensure that images in direct-to-consumer promotion are accurate and non-misleading. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advertising; DTCA; Prescription drug; Quantitative; Television
Authors: Matthew Daubresse; Susan Hutfless; Yoonsang Kim; Rachel Kornfield; Dima M Qato; Jidong Huang; Kay Miller; Sherry L Emery; G Caleb Alexander Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Dominick L Frosch; Patrick M Krueger; Robert C Hornik; Peter F Cronholm; Frances K Barg Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2007 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Angela Fagerlin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Peter A Ubel; Aleksandra Jankovic; Holly A Derry; Dylan M Smith Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2007-07-19 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Helen W Sullivan; Amie C O'Donoghue; Molly Lynch; Mihaela Johnson; Christine Davis; Douglas J Rupert Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Peter Knapp; David K Raynor; Elizabeth Woolf; Peter H Gardner; Neil Carrigan; Brian McMillan Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2009 Impact factor: 5.606