IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v58y2012i7p1374-1387.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the Informative and Persuasive Roles of Detailing on Prescribing Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew T. Ching

    (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6, Canada)

  • Masakazu Ishihara

    (Stern School of Business, New York University, New York, New York 10012)

Abstract

In the pharmaceutical industry, measuring the importance of informative and persuasive roles of detailing is crucial for both drug manufacturers and policy makers. However, little progress has been made in disentangling these two roles of detailing in empirical research. In this paper, we provide a new identification strategy to address this problem. Our key identification assumptions are that the informative component of detailing is chemical specific and the persuasive component is brand specific. Our strategy is to focus on markets where some drug manufacturers engage in a comarketing agreement, under which two or more companies market the same chemical using their own brand names. With our identification assumptions, the variation in the relative market shares of these two brands, together with their brand specific detailing efforts, would allow us to measure the persuasive component of detailing. The variation in the market shares of chemicals, and the detailing efforts summed across brands made of the same chemical, would allow us to measure the informative component of detailing. Using the data for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor with diuretic in Canada, we find evidence that our identification strategy can help disentangle these two effects. Although both effects are statistically significant, we find that the persuasive function of detailing plays a very minor role in determining the demand at the chemical level--the informative role of detailing is mainly responsible for the diffusion patterns of chemicals. In contrast, the persuasive role of detailing plays a crucial role in determining the demand for brands that comarket the same chemical. This paper was accepted by Pradeep Chintagunta, marketing.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew T. Ching & Masakazu Ishihara, 2012. "Measuring the Informative and Persuasive Roles of Detailing on Prescribing Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(7), pages 1374-1387, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:58:y:2012:i:7:p:1374-1387
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1499
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1499
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1499?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keane, Michael P., 2010. "Structural vs. atheoretic approaches to econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 3-20, May.
    2. Sridhar Narayanan & Puneet Manchanda, 2009. "Heterogeneous Learning and the Targeting of Marketing Communication for New Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 424-441, 05-06.
    3. Hurwitz, Mark A & Caves, Richard E, 1988. "Persuasion or Information? Promotion and the Shares of Brand Name and Generic Pharmaceuticals," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(2), pages 299-320, October.
    4. Leffler, Keith B, 1981. "Persuasion or Information? The Economics of Prescription Drug Advertising," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 45-74, April.
    5. Ching, Andrew T., 2010. "Consumer learning and heterogeneity: Dynamics of demand for prescription drugs after patent expiration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 619-638, November.
    6. Andrew Ching & Masakazu Ishihara, 2010. "The effects of detailing on prescribing decisions under quality uncertainty," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 123-165, June.
    7. Andrew T. Ching, 2010. "A Dynamic Oligopoly Structural Model For The Prescription Drug Market After Patent Expiration," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1175-1207, November.
    8. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    9. Nora Lado & Omar Licandro & Francisco Pérez Bermejo, "undated". "How Brand Names Affect the Price Setting of Carmakers Producing Twin Cars?," Working Papers 2003-27, FEDEA.
    10. Dmitri Byzalov & Ron Shachar, 2004. "The Risk Reduction Role of Advertising," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 283-320, December.
    11. Ackerberg, Daniel A, 2001. "Empirically Distinguishing Informative and Prestige Effects of Advertising," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(2), pages 316-333, Summer.
    12. Nitin Mehta & Xinlei (Jack) Chen & Om Narasimhan, 2008. "Informing, Transforming, and Persuading: Disentangling the Multiple Effects of Advertising on Brand Choice Decisions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 334-355, 05-06.
    13. Rizzo, John A, 1999. "Advertising and Competition in the Ethical Pharmaceutical Industry: The Case of Antihypertensive Drugs," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 89-116, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges and New Developments," Economics Papers 2013-W07, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    2. Tat Chan & Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Ying Xie, 2013. "Treatment Effectiveness and Side Effects: A Model of Physician Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(6), pages 1309-1325, June.
    3. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2017. "Empirical Models of Learning Dynamics: A Survey of Recent Developments," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Berend Wierenga & Ralf van der Lans (ed.), Handbook of Marketing Decision Models, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 223-257, Springer.
    4. Song Lin & Juanjuan Zhang & John R. Hauser, 2015. "Learning from Experience, Simply," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 1-19, January.
    5. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Invited Paper ---Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges, and New Developments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 913-938, November.
    6. Sridhar Narayanan & Puneet Manchanda, 2009. "Heterogeneous Learning and the Targeting of Marketing Communication for New Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 424-441, 05-06.
    7. Ching, Andrew T. & Erdem, Tülin & Keane, Michael P., 2014. "A simple method to estimate the roles of learning, inventories and category consideration in consumer choice," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 60-72.
    8. Guofang Huang & Matthew Shum & Wei Tan, 2019. "Is pharmaceutical detailing informative? Evidence from contraindicated drug prescriptions," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 135-160, June.
    9. Xu, Yan, 2017. "Essays on preference formation and home production," Other publications TiSEM b028fd7e-53ba-4ff6-97eb-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2020. "How much do consumers know about the quality of products? Evidence from the diaper market," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 541-569, October.
    11. Suppliet, Moritz, 2020. "Umbrella branding in pharmaceutical markets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    12. Alicia Barroso & Gerard Llobet, 2011. "Advertising and Consumer Awareness of New, Differentiated Products," Working Papers wp2011_1104, CEMFI.
    13. Nuno Camacho & Bas Donkers & Stefan Stremersch, 2011. "Predictably Non-Bayesian: Quantifying Salience Effects in Physician Learning About Drug Quality," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 305-320, 03-04.
    14. Anderson, Simon P. & Ciliberto, Federico & Liaukonyte, Jura, 2013. "Information content of advertising: Empirical evidence from the OTC analgesic industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 355-367.
    15. Zhu, Z.;, 2023. "The Value of Patients: Heterogenous Physician Learning and Generic Drug Diffusion," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 23/12, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    16. Ajay Kalra & Shibo Li & Wei Zhang, 2011. "Understanding Responses to Contradictory Information About Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1098-1114, November.
    17. Haiyan Liu, 2016. "A Structural Model of Advertising Signaling and Social Learning: The Case of the Motion Picture Industry," Working Papers 0216, University of South Florida, Department of Economics.
    18. Andrew J. Epstein & Jonathan D. Ketcham, 2014. "Information technology and agency in physicians' prescribing decisions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 422-448, June.
    19. Ching, Andrew & Ishihara, Masakazu, 2007. "The Effects of Detailing on Prescribing Decisions under Two-Sided Learning," MPRA Paper 4935, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Arjen van Lin & Els Gijsbrechts, 2019. "“Hello Jumbo!” The Spatio-Temporal Rollout and Traffic to a New Grocery Chain After Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2388-2411, May.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:58:y:2012:i:7:p:1374-1387. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.