This article explores the second-person effect in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising. The authors examine the conceptual and operational definitions of the second-person effect, empirically testing Neuwirth and Frederick's operational definition of the second-person effect (the additive term); determine predictors of the second-person effect; and extend the findings of the Neuwirth and Frederick study regarding the relationship between the second-person effect and behavioral outcomes to the advertising context. The findings suggest that the additive term may not reflect the conceptual definition of the second-person effect but instead may measure combined perceived effect or total perceived effect, which is free from the constraint of focusing on the self—other effect gap. Applying the conceptual definition of the second-person effect, this study proposes an alternative operationalization method (the difference term) that measures perceived effect similarity based on the difference score. This study also presents findings regarding the behavioral aspects of the second-person effect.
Auton, F. (2004). The advertising of pharmaceuticals direct to consumers: A critical review of the literature and debate. International Journal of Advertising, 23(1), 5-52.
2.
Brosius, H.-B., & Engel, D. (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence?International Journal of Public Opinion Research , 8(2), 142-162.
3.
Calfee, J.E. (2002). Public policy issues in direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing , 21(2), 174-193.
4.
Chapin, J.R. (1999). Third-person perception and sexual risk taking among minority "at-risk" youth. Mass Communication & Society , 2(3/4), 163-173.
5.
Cohen, J., Mutz, D., Price, V., & Gunther, A.C. (1988). Perceived impact of defamation: An experiment on third-person effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161-173.
6.
Davison, W.P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15.
7.
Duck, J.M., & Mullin, B.- A. (1995). The perceived impact of the mass media: Reconsidering the third person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology , 25, 77-93.
8.
Duck, J.M., Terry, D.J., & Hogg, M.A. (1995). The perceived influence of AIDS advertising: The third-person effect in the context of positive media content. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 117-140.
9.
Findlay, S.D. (2001). Direct-to-consumer promotion of prescription drugs: Economic implications for patients, payers and providers. Pharmacoeconomics, 19(2), 109-119.
10.
Foley, L.A. (2001). The medication information gap: Older consumers in the void between direct-to-consumer advertising and professional care. Generations, 24(4), 49-54.
11.
Gunther, A.C. (1991). What we think others think. Communication Research, 18(3), 355-372.
12.
Gunther, A.C. (1995). Overrating the x-rating: The third-person perception and support for censorship of pornography. Journal of Communication , 45(1), 27-38.
13.
Gunther, A.C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70(1), 58-67.
14.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15.
Haridakis, P.M., & Rubin, A.M. (2005). Third-person effects in the aftermath of terrorism . Mass Communication & Society, 8(1), 39-59.
16.
Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (1999). Support for censorship of television violence . Communication Research, 26(6), 726-742.
17.
Huh, J., & Becker, L.B. (2005). Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising: Understanding its consequences. International Journal of Advertising , 24(4), 441-466.
18.
Huh, J., DeLorme, D.E., & Reid, L.N. (2004). The third-person effect and its influence on behavioral outcomes in a product advertising context: The case of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising. Communication Research, 31(5), 568-589.
19.
Lambe, J.L., & McLeod, D.M. (2005). Understanding third-person perception processes: Predicting perceived impact on self and others for multiple expressive contexts. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 277-291.
20.
Lexchin, J., & Mintzes, B. (2002). Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs: The evidence says no. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21(2), 194-201.
21.
MacKenzie, S.B., & Lutz, R.J. (1989). An empirical examination of the antecedents of attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context. Journal of Marketing, 53, 48-65.
22.
Mehta, A., & Purvis, S.C. (2003). Consumer response to print prescription drug advertising . Journal of Advertising Research, 43(2), 194-206.
23.
Menon, A.M., Deshpande, A.D., Zinkhan, G.M., & Perri, M., III. (2004). A model assessing the effectiveness of direct-to-consumer advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 23(1), 91-117.
24.
Muehling, D.D. (1987). An investigation of factors underlying attitude-toward-advertising-in-general . Journal of Advertising, 16(1), 32-40.
25.
Neuwirth, K., & Frederick, E. (1999, November). Third, first, and second-person effects: A selective review and data. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research , Chicago.
26.
Neuwirth, K., & Frederick, E. (2002). Extending the framework of third-, first-, and second-person effects. Mass Communication & Society, 5(2), 113-140.
27.
Neuwirth, K., Frederick, E., & Mayo, C. (2002). Person-effects and heuristic-systematic processing . Communication Research, 29(3), 320-359.
28.
Park, H.S., & Salmon, C.T. (2005). A test of the third-person effect in public relations: Applications of social comparison theory. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(1), 25-43.
29.
Perloff, R.M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16(2), 236-262.
30.
Pollay, R.W., & Mittal, B. (1993). Here's the beef: Factors, determinants, and segments in consumer criticism of advertising. Journal of Marketing , 57(3), 99-114.
31.
Ramaprasad, J. (2001). South Asian students' beliefs about and attitude toward advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 23(1), 55-70.
32.
Rosenthal, M.B., Berndt, E.R., Donohue, J.M., Frank, R.G., & Epstein, A.M. (2002). Promotion of prescription drugs to consumers. The New England Journal of Medicine, 346(7), 498-505.
33.
Salwen, M.B., & Dupagne, M. (1999). The third-person effect. Communication Research, 26(5), 523-549.
34.
Tewksbury, D., Moy, P., & Weis, D.S. (2004). Preparations for Y2K: Revisiting the behavioral component of the third person effect. Journal of Communication , 54(1), 138-155.
35.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1999). Attitudes and behaviors associated with direct-to-consumer promotion of prescription drugs (conducted by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Spring 1999) . Available at www.fda.gov/cder/ddmac/research.htm
36.
White, H.J., Draves, L.P., Soong, R., & Moore, C. (2004). Measuring the effect of direct-to-consumer communications in the world's largest healthcare market. International Journal of Advertising, 23(1), 53-68.
37.
Wilkes, M.S., Bell, R.A., & Kravitz, R.L. (2000). Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising: Trends, impact and implications. Health Affairs, 19(2), 110-128.
38.
Williams, J.R., & Hensel, P.J. (1995). Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. Journal of Health Care Marketing, 15(1), 35-41.
39.
Yang, K.C.C. (2005). Consumers' attitudes toward regulation of internet auction sites: A third-person effect perspective. Internet Research, 15(4), 359-377.
40.
Youn, S., Faber, R.J., & Shah, D.V. (2000). Restricting gambling advertising and the third-person effect. Psychology & Marketing, 17(7), 633-649.
