The advantages of early detection are great. Some diseases may be prevented entirely by early detection of potential causes (high cholesterol). Others are treated much more effectively and efficiently if detected and treated early. Thus, early detection can save lives, suffering, and money.
Despite such advantages, the use of early detection technology remains far below an optimal level. Some of this is due to economics of the medical system. Lower-income individuals often lack adequate health insurance and are reluctant to spend scarce financial resources on tests for problems they may not have. However, even well-insured and prosperous individuals often forgo important tests. For example, it is estimated that 20 percent of American adults have dangerously high cholesterol, and many are unaware of this fact.
Why are consumers reluctant to take steps, often quite simple and inexpensive, that could literally save their lives? Some consumers believe that they are not susceptible to a particular health problem because of their age, genetics, or general condition. Given this belief, they do not see any value in taking a test that they are sure will merely confirm what they already “know.” Marketers for Lipitor, a cholesterol-lowering drug, try to counter this by showing that apparently low-risk people, such as figure skater Peggy Fleming, have cholesterol levels that need treatment.
Other consumers are in the opposite camp. They are fearful that the test might reveal a problem. Even if such a problem is correctable if caught early, it is still bad news to have any type of disease or likelihood of a disease. Further, such a diagnosis generally involves at least short-term unpleasantness-a change in diet, physical or drug treatments, and anxiety. People are ambivalent at best about seeking out potentially bad news.
In view of the above, how does a firm or a nonprofit or public agency persuade consumers to use appropriate early-detection technologies?
A number of opposing advertising approaches have been suggested. Should the ad use statistics or anecdotal evidence? Should the consequences be framed in terms of losses from not being tested or gains from being tested? Examples of each of these approaches are:
• Statistical, gain. “Many women have no family history of breast cancer and have never felt any lump in their breast. But they follow the advice of the American Cancer Society and start having annual screening mammograms when they turn fifty. Because of this, doctors are able to detect their tumors at an early, treatable stage, and they are 30 percent less likely to die of breast cancer.”
• Statistical, loss. “Many women have no family history of breast cancer and have never felt any lump in their breast. So they don’t follow the advice of the American Cancer Society to start having annual screening mammograms when they turn fifty. Because of this, doctors are not able to detect tumors at an early, treatable stage, and they are 43 percent more likely to die of breast cancer.”
• Anecdotal, gain. “No one in Sara Johnson’s family had ever gotten breast cancer, and started having annual screening mammograms when she turned fifty. Because of this, doctors were able to detect her breast tumor at an early, treatable stage, and now Sara can look forward to a long life, watching her grandson, Jeffery, grow up.”
• Anecdotal, loss. “No one in Sara Johnson’s family had ever gotten breast cancer, and she had never felt any lump in her breast. So she didn’t follow the advice from the American Cancer Society to start having annual mammograms when she turned fifty. Because of this, doctors were not able to detect her breast tumor at an early, treatable stage, and now Sara may miss out on a long life, watching her grandson, Jeffery, grow up.”
Discussion questions
1. Which of the four ads described above will work best? What consumer behavior theory helps you come to this conclusion?
2. Evaluate the four ads in terms of their use of fear appeal. What emotional responses linked to fear do these various message promote? What consumer factors do you think will increase or decrease the level of fear that is experienced in response to any one of the ads (holding the ad itself constant)?
3. Create a survey to examine the effectiveness of each of the above ad formats in including changes in behavior intentions (the focal behavior is your choice, and could include such things as intensions to take vitamins, engage in daily exercise, and so on). Which format works best? Why?
4. Develop a strategy to encourage people to test for a disease or health risk factor of your choice.
