A Behavioral Confirmation and Reduction of the Natural versus Synthetic Drug Bias

Abstract

Research reveals a biased preference for natural v. synthetic drugs; however, this research is based on self-report and has not examined ways to reduce the bias. We examined these issues in 5 studies involving 1125 participants. In a pilot study ( N = 110), participants rated the term natural to be more positive than the term synthetic, which reveals a default natural-is-better belief. In studies 1 ( N = 109) and 2 ( N = 100), after a supposed personality study, participants were offered a thank you “gift” of a natural or synthetic pain reliever. Approximately 86% (study 1) and 93% (study 2) of participants chose the natural v. synthetic pain reliever, which provides a behavioral choice confirmation of the natural drug bias. In studies 3 ( N = 350) and 4 ( N = 356), participants were randomly assigned to a control or experimental condition and were asked to consider a scenario in which they had a medical issue requiring a natural v. synthetic drug. The experimental condition included a stronger (study 3) or weaker (study 4) rational appeal about the natural drug bias and a statement suggesting that natural and synthetic drugs can be good or bad depending on the context. In both studies, the natural bias was reduced in the experimental condition, and perceived safety and effectiveness mediated this effect. Overall, these data indicate a bias for natural over synthetic drugs in preferences and behavioral choices, which might be reduced with a rational appeal.

Naturally better? A review of the natural‐is‐better bias

“…In other words, when making judgements or evaluating items such as food, drugs, or beauty items, people may rely on a fundamental cognitive shortcut in which a natural item is preferred to anything that is non‐natural, synthetic, or human made. In direct support of this idea, research has shown that participants rate the term natural as more positive than the term synthetic (Meier, Osorio, Dillard, & Lappas, ). In this study, 105 participants rated the valence (1 = very negative to 5 = neutral to 9 = very positive) of 17 words including natural and synthetic as well as filler words unrelated to these domains (e.g., region, horror, or fireworks).…”

“…Other work has provided evidence for perceived safety as a mechanism for the naturalness bias. In two studies, Meier et al () asked participants if they would prefer a similarly effective and safe natural or synthetic drug for a hypothetical medical condition. In the control condition, participants were simply given this question and were asked for a choice.…”

“…As far as we can tell, only three studies have examined the naturalness bias with behavior, or at the least, with a dependent variable that is close to behavior. Meier et al () conducted two studies that involved a research assistant approaching people walking on a small college campus in the Northeast U.S. (Study 1) or a large public university in the Midwest U.S. (Study 2). The research assistant asked people walking alone if they would participate in a 5‐minute psychology study that involved completing a personality questionnaire in exchange for a candy bar.…”

“…These studies (DiBonaventura & Chapman, ; Meier et al, ) present two ways to measure behavior or at least self‐reported behavior. These studies also illustrate the potential negative consequences that could occur from a naturalness preference—possibly taking a drug without knowledge of its ingredients, and a reduced likelihood of getting a vaccination against influenza, which kills thousands of people every year.…”

“…We are aware of only two studies that have examined a method for reducing a bias for naturalness. Meier et al () examined the impact of a rational appeal in reducing the naturalness bias. Participants were asked if they would prefer a similarly effective and safe natural drug or synthetic drug for a hypothetical medical condition.…”