title: Cognitive and affective determinants of generic drug acceptance and use: cross-sectional and experimental findings.
abstract: An increase in generic substitution could be a viable approach to reduce global healthcare expenditures. In many countries, however, generic drug use is rather low. This study examines cognitive predictors (knowledge and beliefs) and affective predictors (general affect and sacred values) to explain generic drug acceptance and use. Data for the study come from a random postal survey conducted in Switzerland (N= 668). A detailed knowledge scale about generic drugs was developed. In addition, an experimental choice task was constructed in which respondents chose between branded and generic drugs. Generic drug acceptance as well as drug choices were influenced by knowledge, beliefs, and affect. It was also found that generic substitution is chosen less frequently for a more severe illness. Key insights could be used for developing information material or interventions aimed at increasing the substitution of generic drugs in order to make health care more affordable.
authors: Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Consumer Behavior , ETH Zurich, Zurich , Switzerland.
authors: Simone
authors: S
authors: Dohle
authors: Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Consumer Behavior , ETH Zurich, Zurich , Switzerland.
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Siegrist
keywords: affect; beliefs; generics; health care; knowledge
references: Health Psychol. 2006 Jan;25(1):82-90
references: 16448301
references: Transfusion. 2000 Aug;40(8):1017-22
references: 10960532
references: Risk Anal. 2012 Mar;32(3):464-77
references: 21977961
references: Risk Anal. 2012 Mar;32(3):481-2
references: 22409338
references: Pharm Pract (Granada). 2008 Apr;6(2):93-7
references: 25157287
references: Soc Sci Med. 2009 Dec;69(11):1643-50
references: 19815322
references: Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Mar-Apr;28(2):546-56
references: 19276015
references: Prev Med. 2006 Jun;42(6):401-8
references: 16626796
references: J Behav Med. 2009 Aug;32(4):317-27
references: 19224356
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Jul;7(7):320-324
references: 12860191
references: Pharm World Sci. 2008 Oct;30(5):590-4
references: 18704749
references: BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Jan 26;11:17
references: 21269426
references: Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Oct;43(10):472-9
references: 16240704
references: Health Psychol. 2009 Mar;28(2):258-63
references: 19290718
references: Int J Pharm Pract. 2009 Apr;17(2):79-88
references: 20214255
references: Health Psychol. 2005 Jul;24(4S):S35-40
references: 16045417
references: J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2001 Jul-Aug;41(4):567-77
references: 11486983
references: Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2005 Fall;12(3):e229-39
references: 16278495
references: J Health Psychol. 2010 Apr;15(3):446-55
references: 20348365
references: Risk Anal. 2005 Dec;25(6):1433-42
references: 16506973
references: Health Psychol. 1996 Nov;15(6):430-3
references: 8973922
references: J Adolesc Health. 1995 Sep;17(3):143-52
references: 8519782
references: Health Psychol. 2005 Jul;24(4S):S78-84
references: 16045423
references: Psychol Health Med. 2009 May;14(3):311-21
references: 19444709
references: Risk Anal. 1994 Dec;14(6):1085-96
references: 7846317
references: Med Care. 2009 Mar;47(3):319-25
references: 19194329
references: BMJ. 2006 Jul 8;333(7558):60
references: 16825211
references: Psychol Health. 2010 Nov;25(9):1121-8
references: 20309776
references: Health Psychol. 1999 Sep;18(5):532-6
references: 10519469