Abstract
Little experimental evidence exists regarding corrective television advertising as a remedy for misleading direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads. We examined how exposure to an ad for a fictitious prescription drug that appeared to offer benefits and risks superior to normative standards for asthma medication (i.e., a simulated violative ad) and a corresponding corrective ad shaped viewer perceptions, understanding, and intended behavior. Through an experiment with 1,057 participants, we found that a corrective ad counteracted viewer belief of an overstatement of efficacy claim, but was less successful in counteracting omission of risk. Corrective ad exposure also affected general viewer perceptions of, and intended behaviors toward, the drug.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
