This study explored the third-person effect in the context of direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising. A survey of 264 adults examined perceptions of DTC ad effects and their relationship to support for DTC ad regulation. Results support the third-person-effect perceptual component. The study revealed that for DTC advertising, the third-person effect operates in a multidimensional fashion through four factors (Negative DTC Ad Effects, Learning and Involvement, Patient/Provider Interaction, and Distrust of DTC Ad Information) and that negative content-based third-person effects were greater than positive effects. However, the current study showed weak support for the third-person effect behavioral component. Only perceived self-effect for Distrust of DTC Ad Information and attitude toward DTC advertising were significant predictors of regulatory support. The findings are discussed in relation to existing theoretical work, and future research recommendations are provided.
Alperstein, N. M., & Peyrot, M. (1993). Consumer awareness of prescription drug advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 33(4), 50-56.
2.
Alwitt, L. F., & Prabhaker, P. R. (1992). Functional and belief dimensions of attitudes to television advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 32(5), 30-42.
3.
Alwitt, L. F., & Prabhaker, P. R. (1994). Identifying who likes television advertising: Not by demographics alone. Journal of Advertising Research, 34(6), 17-29.
4.
Andrews, J. C. (1989). The dimensionality of beliefs toward advertising in general. Journal of Advertising, 18(1), 26-35.
5.
Arnould, E. J., Price, L. L., & Zinkhan, G. M. (2002). Consumers. New York: McGraw-Hill.
6.
Atwood, L. E. (1994). Illusions of media power: The third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 71(2), 269-281.
7.
Blankenhorn, K., & Lipson, D. (2002, May). Business watch, 2001 in review: Despite economic challenges, pharmaceutical industry still maintains steady growth. Medical Marketing and Media, 37(5), 46-62.
8.
Brosius, H., & Engel, D. (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes toward media influence?International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(2), 142-162.
9.
Calabro, S. (2003, August 25). Poll says people base trust on media over advertising. PRWeek, 6(33), 5-5. Available at www.prweek.com/news
10.
Calfee, J. E. (2002). Public policy issues in direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(2), 174-193.
11.
Chapin, J. R. (1999). Third-person perception and sexual risk taking among minority “at risk” youth. Mass Communication and Society, 2(3/4), 163-173.
12.
Cohen, J., & Davis, R. G. (1991). Third-person effects and the differential impact in negative political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 68(4), 680-688.
13.
Coney, S. (2002). Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription pharmaceuticals: A consumer perspective from New Zealand. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(2), 213-223.
14.
Davis, J. J. (2000). Riskier than we think? The relationship between risk statement completeness and perceptions of direct consumer advertised prescription drugs. Journal of Health Communication, 5(4), 349-369.
15.
Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15.
16.
Deshpande, A., Menon, A., Perri, M., III, & Zinkham, G. C. (in press). Direct-to-consumer advertising and its utility in health care decision-making: A consumer perspective. Journal of Health Communication.
17.
Driscoll, P. D., & Salwen, M. B. (1997). Self-perceived knowledge of the O. J. Simpson trial: Third-person perception and perceptions of guilt. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 541-556.
18.
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.
19.
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.
20.
Everett, S. E. (1991). Lay audience response to prescription drug advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(2), 43-49.
21.
Findlay, S. D. (2001). Direct-to-consumer promotion of prescription drugs: Economic implications for patients, payers, and providers. Pharmacoeconomics, 19(2), 109-119.
22.
Foley, L. A. (2000). The medication information gap: Older consumers in the void between direct-to-consumer advertising and professional care. Generations, Journal on the American Society on Aging: Medication and Aging, 24 (4), 49-54.
23.
Griswold, W. F. (1994, August). Third-person effects and voting intentions in a presidential primary election. Paper presented at the Conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Atlanta, GA.
24.
Gunther, A. C. (1991). What we think others think. Communication Research, 18(3), 355-372.
25.
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.
26.
Gunther, A. C., & Hwa, A. P. (1996). Public perceptions of television influence and opinions about censorship in Singapore. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(3), 248-265.
27.
Gunther, A. C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70(1), 58-67.
28.
Gunther, A. C., & Storey, J. D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication, 53(2), 199-215.
29.
Gunther, A. C., & Thorson, E. (1992). Perceived persuasive effects of product commercials and public service announcements: Third-person effects in new domains. Communication Research, 19(5), 574-596.
30.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31.
Henriksen, L., & Flora, J. A. (1999). Third-person perception and children: Perceived impact of pro- and anti-smoking ads. Communication Research, 26(6), 643-665.
32.
Hense, R., & Wright, C. (1992). The development of the attitudes toward censorship questionnaire. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1666-1675.
33.
Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (1999). Support for censorship of television violence. Communication Research, 26(6), 726-742.
34.
Hoffner, C., Plotkin, R. S., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Kamigaki, S. K., Hubbs, L. A., et al. (2001). The third-person effect in perceptions of the influence of television violence. Journal of Communication, 51, 283-299.
35.
Hollon, M. F. (1999). Direct-to-consumer marketing of prescription drugs: Creating consumer demand. Journal of the American Medical Association, 281(4), 382-382.
36.
Holtz, W. E. (1998). Consumer-directed prescription drug advertising: Effects on public health. Journal of Law and Health, 13(2), 199-218.
37.
IMS Health Inc. (1998, September 15). Majority of physicians have negative view towards DTC advertising [Press release]. Fairfield, CT: Author.
38.
IMS Health Inc.(2000). IMS Health reports U.S. pharmaceutical promotional spending reached record $13.9 billion in 1999 [Press release]. Retrieved October, 26, 2001, from from www.imshealth.com/public/structure.../1,2779,1009-1009-75077,00.htm
39.
Jones, E. E. (1979). The rocky road from acts to dispositions. American Psychologist, 34, 104-117.
40.
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2001a). Prescription drug trends: A chartbook update. Menlo Park, CA: Author.
41.
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2001b). Understanding the effects of direct-toconsumer prescription drug advertising. Menlo Park, CA: Author.
42.
Kopp, S. W., & Bang, H. K. (2000). Benefit and risk information in prescription drug advertising: review of empirical studies and marketing implications. Health Marketing Quarterly, 17(3), 39-56.
43.
Krugman, D. M., Reid, L. N., Dunn, S. W., & Barban, A. M. (1994). Advertising: Its role in modern marketing (8th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.
44.
Leshner, G. R., Holbert, L., & Yoon, T. I. (2002, August). Motivating turnout: Counter-endorsement third-person effects, campaign negativity, and voting. Paper presented at the 2002 Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Conference, Miami, FL.
45.
Lexchin, J., & Mintzes, B. (2002). Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs: The evidence says no. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(2), 194-201.
46.
MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. J. (1989). An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context. Journal of Marketing, 53, 48-65.
47.
Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood, S. L. (1995). With malice towards some: How people make civil liberties judgments. New York: Cambridge University Press.
48.
Masson, A., & Rubin, P. H. (1986). Plugs for drugs. Regulation,10 (September/October), 37-53.
49.
McClosky, H., & Brill, A. (1983). Dimensions of tolerance: What Americans believe about civil liberties. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
50.
McInturff, B. (2001, March 26). Consumers see benefit in what they see, read. Advertising Age, 24-24.
51.
McLeod, D. M., Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Nathanson, A. I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent and misogynic rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 24(2), 153-174.
52.
Mehta, A., & Purvis, S. C. (2003). Consumer response to print prescription drug advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(2), 194-206.
53.
Mittal, B. (1994). Public assessment of TV advertising: Faint praise and harsh criticism. Journal of Advertising Research, 34(1), 35-53.
54.
Montagne, M. (1992). Drug advertising and promotion: An introduction. Journal of Drug Issues, 22(2), 195-203.
55.
Morris, L. A., Brinberg, D., Klimberg, R., Rivera, C., & Millstein, L. G. (1986). The attitudes of consumers toward direct advertising of prescription drugs. Public Health Reports, 101(1), 82-89.
56.
Muehling, D. D. (1987). An investigation of factors underlying attitude-toward-advertising-in-general. Journal of Advertising, 16(1), 32-40.
57.
Mutz, D. C. (1989). The influence of perceptions of media influence: Third person effects and the public expression of opinions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 1(1), 3-23.
58.
National Institute for Health Care Management. (2001). Prescription drugs and mass media advertising. Washington, DC: National Institute for Health Care Management Research and Educational Foundation.
59.
Neuwirth, K., & Frederick, E. (2002). Extending the framework of third-, first-, and second-person effects. Mass Communication and Society, 5(2), 113-140.
60.
Parker, B. J., & Delene, L. M. (1998). Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising: Content analysis and public policy implications. Journal of Pharmaceutical Marketing and Management, 12(4), 27-42.
61.
Paul, B., Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (2000). The third-person effect: A meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication and Society, 3(1) 57-85.
62.
Perloff, L. S., & Fetzer, B. K. (1986). Self-other judgments and perceived vulnerability to victimization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 502-510.
63.
Perloff, R. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16(2), 236-262.
64.
Perloff, R. M. (1993). Third-person effect research 1983-1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5(2), 167-184.
65.
Perri, M., III, & Dickson, W. M. (1987). Direct to consumer prescription drug advertising: Consumer attitudes and physician reaction. Journal of Pharmaceutical Marketing and Management, 2(1), 3-23.
66.
Perri, M., III, & Nelson, A. A., Jr. (1987). An exploratory analysis of consumer recognition of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medications. Journal of Health Care Marketing, 7(1), 9-17.
67.
Pfizer Inc. (2000, November). Patient empowerment study. New York: Author.
68.
Pfizer Inc. (2001, June). Direct-to-consumer advertising: How it benefits consumers. New York: Author.
69.
Pines, W. L. (1999). A history and perspective on direct-to-consumer promotion. Food and Drug Law Journal, 54(4), 489-518.
70.
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.
71.
Price, V., Tewksbury, D., & Huang, L. (1996, May). Denying the Holocaust: Third-person effects and decisions to publish a controversial advertisement. Paper presented at the American Association for Public Opinion Research Conference, Salt Lake City, UT.
72.
Price, V., Tewksbury, D., & Huang, L. (1998). Third-person effects on publication of a Holocaust-denial advertisement. Journal of Communication, 48(2), 3-27.
73.
Ramaprasad, J. (2001). South Asian students’ beliefs about and attitude toward advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 23(1), 55-70.
74.
Reid, L. N., & Soley, L. C. (1982). Generalized and personalized attitudes toward advertising’s social and economic effects. Journal of Advertising, 11(3), 3-7.
75.
Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(2), 163-185.
76.
Roth, M. S. (2003). Media and message effects on DTC prescription drug print advertising awareness. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(3), 180-193.
77.
Rucinski, D., & Salmon, C. T. (1990). The “other” as the vulnerable voter: A study of the third person effect in the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2(4), 345-368.
78.
Salwen, M. B. (1998). Perception of media influence and support for censorship. Communication Research, 25(3), 259-285.
79.
Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (1999). The third-person effect: Perceptions of the media’s influence and immoral consequences. Communication Research, 26(5), 523-525.
80.
Sandage, C. H., & Leckenby, J. D. (1980). Student attitudes toward advertising: Institution vs. instrument. Journal of Advertising, 9(2), 29-32.
81.
Savitt, S., Lowery, P., & Haefner, J. (1998). Public attitudes toward advertising: More favorable than you might think. Journal of Advertising Research, 38(4), 7-22.
82.
Scharrer, E. (2002). Third-person perception and television violence: The role of out-group stereotyping in perceptions of susceptibility to effects. Communication Research, 29(6), 681-704.
83.
Sengupta, S. (2002, August). Prescription drug advertising: The effectiveness of pitching directly to consumers. Paper presented at the Conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Miami, FL.
84.
Sheffet, M. J., & Kopp, S. W. (1990). Advertising prescription drugs to the public: Headache or relief?Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 9(2),42-61.
85.
Slaughter, E. (2001). Making direct to consumer advertising work in an era of self-care. DTC Perspectives, 1(1), 8-10.
86.
Smith, R. E., & Swinyard, W. R. (1982). Information response models: An integrated approach. Journal of Marketing, 46, 81-93.
87.
Sullivan, J. L., Piereson, J., & Marcus, G. E. (1982). Political tolerance and American democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
88.
Sweeney, H. (1999). Pharmaceuticals are not consumer products. Medical and Marketing Media, 34(5), 38-42.
89.
Tewksbury, D., Huang, L. N., & Price, V. (1996, November). Predictors of support for the expressive rights of the mass media. Paper presented at the Conference of the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research, Chicago.
90.
Thorson, E., & Friestad, M. (1989). The effects of emotions on episodic memory for TV commercials. In A. Tybout & P. Cafferata (Eds.), Cognitive and affective responses to advertising (pp. 305-326). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
91.
Tsfati, Y., & Cohen, J. (2003, December). On the effect of the “third-person effect”: Perceived influence of media coverage and residential mobility intentions. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 711-727.
92.
Umphrey, D. (2002, August). Attributions of advertising influence via third-person perceptions: A review and synthesis. Paper presented at the Conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Miami, FL
93.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1999). Attitudes and behaviors associated with direct-to-consumer promotion of prescription drugs. Available from www.fda.gov/cder/ddmac/research.htm.
94.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration,(2003). FDA releases preliminary results of physician survey on direct-to-consumer Rx drug advertisements. Available from www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/2003/ANS01189.html
95.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2003). Prescription drugs: FDA oversight of direct-to-consumer drug advertising has limitations. Washington, DC: Author.
96.
West, D. (1999). Mixing it up in the media. DTC Times, 2(2), 6-18.
97.
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.
98.
Wilkie, W. L. (1986) Consumer behavior. New York: John Wiley.
99.
Williams, J. R., & Hensel, P. J. (1995). Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. Journal of Health Care Marketing, 15(1), 35-41.
100.
Wu, W., & Koo, S. H. (2001). Perceived effects of sexually explicit Internet content: The third-person effect in Singapore. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(2), 260-274.
101.
Youn, S., Faber, R. J., & Shah, D. V. (2000). Restricting gambling advertising and the third-person effect. Psychology and Marketing, 17(7), 633-649.
102.
Zanot, E. (1981, March). Public attitudes toward advertising. Paper presented at the 1981 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Provo, Utah.
103.
Zanot, E. (1984). Public attitudes toward advertising: The American experience. International Journal of Advertising, 3(1), 3-15.
