IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v259y2020ics0277953620300095.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protecting consumers from fraudulent health claims: A taxonomy of psychological drivers, interventions, barriers, and treatments

Author

Listed:
  • MacFarlane, Douglas
  • Hurlstone, Mark J.
  • Ecker, Ullrich K.H.

Abstract

Fraudulent health claims—false or misleading claims used to promote health remedies that are untested, ineffective, and often harmful—cause extensive and persistent harm to consumers. To address this problem, novel interventions are needed that address the underlying cognitive mechanisms that render consumers susceptible to fraudulent health claims. However, there is currently no single framework of relevant psychological insights to design interventions for this purpose. The current review aims to address this gap.

Suggested Citation

  • MacFarlane, Douglas & Hurlstone, Mark J. & Ecker, Ullrich K.H., 2020. "Protecting consumers from fraudulent health claims: A taxonomy of psychological drivers, interventions, barriers, and treatments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:259:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620300095
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112790
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620300095
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112790?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    2. Hall, Marissa G. & Mendel, Jennifer R. & Noar, Seth M. & Brewer, Noel T., 2018. "Why smokers avoid cigarette pack risk messages: Two randomized clinical trials in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 165-172.
    3. Axelrod, Robert, 1986. "An Evolutionary Approach to Norms," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1095-1111, December.
    4. Dan M. Kahan & Ellen Peters & Maggie Wittlin & Paul Slovic & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette & Donald Braman & Gregory Mandel, 2012. "The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 732-735, October.
    5. Centola, Damon & Eguíluz, Víctor M. & Macy, Michael W., 2007. "Cascade dynamics of complex propagation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 374(1), pages 449-456.
    6. Lisa E. Bolton & Joel B. Cohen & Paul N. Bloom, 2006. "Does Marketing Products as Remedies Create "Get Out of Jail Free Cards"?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 33(1), pages 71-81, June.
    7. Tobias Regner, 2018. "Reciprocity under moral wiggle room: Is it a preference or a constraint?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(4), pages 779-792, December.
    8. de Barra, Mícheál, 2017. "Reporting bias inflates the reputation of medical treatments: A comparison of outcomes in clinical trials and online product reviews," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 248-255.
    9. Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 247-257, September.
    10. Julie Leask, 2011. "Target the fence-sitters," Nature, Nature, vol. 473(7348), pages 443-445, May.
    11. Friehe, Tim & Utikal, Verena, 2018. "Intentions under cover – Hiding intentions is considered unfair," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 11-21.
    12. Attwell, Katie & Ward, Paul R. & Meyer, Samantha B. & Rokkas, Philippa J. & Leask, Julie, 2018. "“Do-it-yourself”: Vaccine rejection and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 106-114.
    13. Berinsky, Adam J., 2017. "Rumors and Health Care Reform: Experiments in Political Misinformation," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 241-262, April.
    14. Seymour, B. & Getman, R. & Saraf, A. & Zhang, L.H. & Kalenderian, E., 2015. "Erratum: When advocacy obscures accuracy online: Digital pandemics of public health misinformation through an antifluoride case study (American Journal of Public Health (2015) 105:3 (517-523))," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(5), pages 1-7.
    15. Julie Y. Huang & Joshua M. Ackerman & George E. Newman, 2017. "Catching (Up with) Magical Contagion: A Review of Contagion Effects in Consumer Contexts," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(4), pages 430-443.
    16. Casey A. Klofstad & Joseph E. Uscinski & Jennifer M. Connolly & Jonathan P. West, 2019. "What drives people to believe in Zika conspiracy theories?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    17. Loewenstein, George, 1996. "Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 272-292, March.
    18. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    19. Seymour, B. & Getman, R. & Saraf, A. & Zhang, L.H. & Kalenderian, E., 2015. "When advocacy obscures accuracy online: Digital pandemics of public health misinformation through an antifluoride case study," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(3), pages 517-523.
    20. Randy J. Seeley & Darleen A. Sandoval, 2011. "Weight loss through smoking," Nature, Nature, vol. 475(7355), pages 176-177, July.
    21. Jonah Berger & Lindsay Rand, 2008. "Shifting Signals to Help Health: Using Identity Signaling to Reduce Risky Health Behaviors," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 509-518, March.
    22. Reynolds, J.P. & Archer, S. & Pilling, M. & Kenny, M. & Hollands, G.J. & Marteau, T.M., 2019. "Public acceptability of nudging and taxing to reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and food: A population-based survey experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    23. Duncan Graham-Rowe, 2011. "Biodiversity: Endangered and in demand," Nature, Nature, vol. 480(7378), pages 101-103, December.
    24. Callaghan, Timothy & Motta, Matthew & Sylvester, Steven & Lunz Trujillo, Kristin & Blackburn, Christine Crudo, 2019. "Parent psychology and the decision to delay childhood vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    25. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    26. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:5:p:429-441 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Ali Siddiq Alhakami & Paul Slovic, 1994. "A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1085-1096, December.
    28. Motta, Matthew & Callaghan, Timothy & Sylvester, Steven, 2018. "Knowing less but presuming more: Dunning-Kruger effects and the endorsement of anti-vaccine policy attitudes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 274-281.
    29. Philip M. Fernbach & Nicholas Light & Sydney E. Scott & Yoel Inbar & Paul Rozin, 2019. "Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 251-256, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lyons, Benjamin A. & Merola, Vittorio & Reifler, Jason, 2020. "Shifting medical guidelines: Compliance and spillover effects for revised antibiotic recommendations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    2. Theiss Bendixen, 2020. "How cultural evolution can inform the science of science communication—and vice versa," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Blanco, Fernando & Matute, Helena, 2020. "Diseases that resolve spontaneously can increase the belief that ineffective treatments work," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    4. Bernadette Hyland-Wood & John Gardner & Julie Leask & Ullrich K. H. Ecker, 2021. "Toward effective government communication strategies in the era of COVID-19," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Milošević Đorđević, J. & Mari, S. & Vdović, M. & Milošević, A., 2021. "Links between conspiracy beliefs, vaccine knowledge, and trust: Anti-vaccine behavior of Serbian adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    2. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2002. "Rational actors or rational fools: implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 329-342.
    3. Karen Richardsen Moberg & Benjamin K. Sovacool & Alexandra Goritz & Gaëtan M. Hinojosa & Carlo Aall & Maria Nilsson, 2021. "Barriers, emotions, and motivational levers for lifestyle transformation in Norwegian household decarbonization pathways," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Stefano Carattini & Simon Levin & Alessandro Tavoni, 2019. "Cooperation in the Climate Commons," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 227-247.
    5. Piras, Simone & Pancotto, Francesca & Righi, Simone & Vittuari, Matteo & Setti, Marco, 2021. "Community social capital and status: The social dilemma of food waste," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    6. Welsch, Heinz, 2021. "How climate-friendly behavior relates to moral identity and identity-protective cognition: Evidence from the European social surveys," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    7. Steven M. Sylvester, 2021. "COVID‐19 and Motivated Reasoning: The Influence of Knowledge on COVID‐Related Policy and Health Behavior," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2341-2359, September.
    8. Casey A. Klofstad & Joseph E. Uscinski & Jennifer M. Connolly & Jonathan P. West, 2019. "What drives people to believe in Zika conspiracy theories?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    9. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    11. Ming, Yaxin & Deng, Huixin & Wu, Xiaoyue, 2022. "The negative effect of air pollution on people's pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 72-87.
    12. Falk, Armin & Boneva, Teodora & Chopra, Felix, 2021. "Fighting Climate Change: the Role of Norms, Preferences, and Moral Values," CEPR Discussion Papers 16343, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    14. Wardley, Marcus & Alberhasky, Max, 2021. "Framing zero: Why losing nothing is better than gaining nothing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Castro-Santa, Juana & Drews, Stefan & Bergh, Jeroen van den, 2023. "Nudging low-carbon consumption through advertising and social norms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    16. Jana Eßer & Manuel Frondel & Stephan Sommer, 2023. "Soziale Normen und der Emissionsausgleich bei Flügen: Evidenz für deutsche Haushalte [Social Norms and Flight Emission Offsets: Evidence for German Households]," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 17(1), pages 71-99, March.
    17. Alper Ozpinar, 2023. "A Hyper-Integrated Mobility as a Service (MaaS) to Gamification and Carbon Market Enterprise Architecture Framework for Sustainable Environment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-22, March.
    18. Mao, Wen, 2016. "Sometimes “Fee” Is Better Than “Free”: Token Promotional Pricing and Consumer Reactions to Price Promotion Offering Product Upgrades," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 173-184.
    19. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    20. Leonhard K. Lades & Kate Laffan & Till O. Weber, 2020. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Working Papers 202003, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:259:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620300095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.