2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2013.12.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of presentation modality in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug television advertisements

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The presence of incongruent audiovisual content during the major statement is a type of distraction that hampers a consumer’s ability to process risk information. Wogalter, Shaver, and Kalsher (2014) found that risk recognition decreased when an ad presented non-risk-related information (e.g., the company’s website) concurrently with risk information compared with when an ad presented only risk information. In a recent eye-tracking experiment of pharmaceutical ads created specifically to have either low or high distraction, Sullivan et al (2017) found that the presence of distracting information during the presentation of a drug’s side effects drew attention away from risk text, which in turn reduced retention of risk information about the drug.…”
Section: Research On Distraction In Dtcamentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The presence of incongruent audiovisual content during the major statement is a type of distraction that hampers a consumer’s ability to process risk information. Wogalter, Shaver, and Kalsher (2014) found that risk recognition decreased when an ad presented non-risk-related information (e.g., the company’s website) concurrently with risk information compared with when an ad presented only risk information. In a recent eye-tracking experiment of pharmaceutical ads created specifically to have either low or high distraction, Sullivan et al (2017) found that the presence of distracting information during the presentation of a drug’s side effects drew attention away from risk text, which in turn reduced retention of risk information about the drug.…”
Section: Research On Distraction In Dtcamentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The presence of warnings in both modalities is usually better than either modality alone (Barlow & Wogalter, 1993;Wogalter, Shaver, & Kalsher, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…As noted previously, speech warnings have several advantages over visual warnings and may be more appropriate for certain applications than visual print warnings (Conzola & Wogalter, 1999). The presence of warnings in both modalities is usually better than either modality alone (Barlow & Wogalter, 1993;Wogalter, Shaver, & Kalsher, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, many ads used the superimposed text during the major statement to convey non-risk information. The effects of presenting non-risk information during the major statement is unclear, with one study showing a decrease in risk retention (Wogalter et al, 2014) and another study not finding a significant effect on risk retention (Aikin, O'Donoghue, Squire, Sullivan, & Betts, 2016). Given that the presence of non-risk information is unlikely to increase consumers' understanding of the risk information, it would be prudent to avoid it during the major statement.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, music with a fast tempo can decrease consumers' recall of ad information (Fraser & Bradford, 2013;Oakes & North, 2006). On the other hand, using both audio and visual channels (dual-modality) has been found to increase consumer understanding of drug risk information (e.g., Glinert & Schommer, 2005;Wogalter, Shaver, & Kalsher, 2014), although there is some suggestion that audio only may be better for individuals with limited literacy (Kaphingst, DeJong, Rudd, & Daltroy, 2005). Unfortunately, previous content analyses of DTC television ads found that few ads used a dual-modality approach to convey all risk information (Kaphingst et al, 2004;Macias et al, 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%