Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26818244›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2016

Feeling Is Believing: Evaluative Conditioning and the Ethics of Pharmaceutical Advertising.

Paul Biegler, Patrick Vargas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Health educationFrontiers in public health · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Paul BieglerCentre for Human Bioethics, School of Philosophical, Historical and International Studies, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia. paul.biegler@monash.edu.
Patrick VargasDepartment of Advertising, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central goal in regulating direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription pharmaceuticals (DTCA) is to ensure that explicit drug claims are truthful. Yet imagery can also alter viewer attitudes, and the degree to which this occurs in DTCA is uncertain. Addressing this data gap, we provide evidence that positive feelings produced by images can promote favourable beliefs about pharmaceuticals. We had participants view a fictitious anti-influenza drug paired with unrelated images that elicited either positive, neutral or negative feelings. Participants who viewed positive images rated the influenza drug as significantly more effective, safe, and beneficial than did participants who viewed negative images. This effect, known as evaluative conditioning, is well described in experimental social psychology but has not previously been shown with pharmaceuticals. We discuss how evaluative conditioning in DTCA may compromise viewer autonomy, and canvass possible regulatory responses.

Indexed as

Prescription DrugsAdultChoice BehaviorConditioning, PsychologicalDirect-to-Consumer AdvertisingDrug IndustryFemaleHumansMaleNew ZealandPersuasive CommunicationUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationPrescription DrugsAutonomyBehavioural researchDrugs and drug industryHealth promotionInformed consent

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.