How Affiliation Disclosure and Control Over User-Generated Comments Affects Consumer Health Knowledge and Behavior: A Randomized Controlled Experiment of Pharmaceutical Direct-to-Consumer Advertising on Social Media

BACKGROUND: More people are seeking health information online than ever before and pharmaceutical companies are increasingly marketing their drugs through social media. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine two major concerns related to online direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising: (1) how disclosing an affiliation with a pharmaceutical company affects how people respond to drug information produced by both health organizations and online commenters, and (2) how knowledge that health organizations control the display of user-generated comments affects consumer health knowledge and behavior. METHODS: We conducted a 2×2×2 between-subjects experiment (N=674). All participants viewed an infographic posted to Facebook by a health organization about a prescription allergy drug. Across conditions, the infographic varied in the degree to which the health organization and commenters appeared to be affiliated with a drug manufacturer, and the display of user-generated comments appeared to be controlled. RESULTS: Affiliation disclosure statements on a health organization’s Facebook post increased perceptions of an organization-drug manufacturer connection, which reduced trust in the organization (point estimate –0.45, 95% CI –0.69 to –0.24) and other users who posted comments about the drug (point estimate –0.44, 95% CI –0.68 to –0.22). Furthermore, increased perceptions of an organization-manufacturer connection reduced the likelihood that people would recommend the drug to important others (point estimate –0.35, 95% CI –0.59 to –0.15), and share the drug post with others on Facebook (point estimate –0.37, 95% CI –0.64 to –0.16). An affiliation cue next to the commenters' names increased perceptions that the commenters were affiliated with the drug manufacturer, which reduced trust in the comments (point estimate –0.81, 95% CI –1.04 to –0.59), the organization that made the post (point estimate –0.68, 95% CI –0.90 to –0.49), the likelihood of participants recommending the drug (point estimate –0.61, 95% CI –0.82 to –0.43), and sharing the post with others on Facebook (point estimate –0.63, 95% CI –0.87 to –0.43). Cues indicating that a health organization removed user-generated comments from a post increased perceptions that the drug manufacturer influenced the display of the comments, which negatively affected trust in the comments (point estimate –0.35, 95% CI –0.53 to –0.20), the organization (point estimate –0.31, 95% CI –0.47 to –0.17), the likelihood of recommending the drug (point estimate –0.26, 95% CI –0.41 to –0.14), and the likelihood of sharing the post with others on Facebook (point estimate –0.28, 95% CI –0.45 to –0.15). (All estimates are unstandardized indirect effects and 95% bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals.) CONCLUSIONS: Concern over pharmaceutical companies hiding their affiliations and strategically controlling user-generated comments is well founded; these practices can greatly affect not only how viewers evaluate drug information online, but also how likely they are to propagate the information throughout their online and offline social networks.