Roles
Student Authors
Eric S. Osorio '16, Gettysburg College
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2019
Department 1
Psychology
Abstract
Research reveals a biased preference for natural versus synthetic drugs; however, this research is based upon self-report and has not examined ways to reduce the bias. We examined these issues in five studies involving 1,125 participants. In a Pilot Study (N = 110), participants rated the term natural to be more positive than the term synthetic, which reveals a default natural-is-better belief. In Studies 1 (N = 109) and 2 (N = 100), after a supposed personality study, participants were offered a thank you “gift” of a natural or synthetic pain reliever. Approximately 86% (Study 1) and 93% (Study 2) of participants chose the natural versus synthetic pain reliever, which provide a behavioral choice confirmation of the natural drug bias. In Studies 3 (N = 350) and 4 (N = 356), participants were randomly assigned to a control or experimental condition and were asked to consider a scenario in which they had a medical issue requiring a natural versus synthetic drug. The experimental condition included a stronger (Study 3) or weaker (Study 4) rational appeal about the natural drug bias and a statement suggesting that natural and synthetic drugs can be good or bad depending upon the context. In both studies, the natural bias was reduced in the experimental condition, and perceived safety and effectiveness mediated this effect. Overall, these data indicate a bias for natural over synthetic drugs in preferences and behavioral choices, which might be reduced with a rational appeal.
Copyright Note
This is the author's version of the work. This publication appears in Gettysburg College's institutional repository by permission of the copyright owner for personal use, not for redistribution.
Version
Post-Print
Recommended Citation
Meier, Brian P., Amanda J. Dillard, Eric Osorio, and Courtney M. Lappas. "A Behavioral Confirmation and Reduction of the Natural versus Synthetic Drug Bias." Medical Decision Making (2019).
Required Publisher's Statement
This article is in press at Medical Decision Making.