on detailing, house organs, other direct mail and the medical journal as advertising media; attitudes of physicians toward Council Acceptance; JAMA as an advertising medium; the Pfizer Spectrum insert; physician ratings of the nine AMA special journals; and attitudes of physicians toward some JAMA editorial and advertising policies. Designed as it was, it was necessarily more broad than deep. Deciding on Another Study Throughout 1954, discussions were held on the advisability of designing another study to serve as the basis for a second series of mailingpieces by the AMA to the pharmaceutical industry. The most promising topic for intensive and thorough exploration was the pay-off question of "How Physicians Learn About New Products." This question is a vital one, since the pharmaceutical industry annually spends around $130,000,000 a year with almost no factual knowledge on which to base the allocation of this huge expenditure. The Proposal on the Fond du Lac Study In September 1954 we submitted a "Preliminary Proposal" for an The Objectives As We Started Out The objectives of the study, as far as the pharmaceutical advertisers was concerned, were given as follows: "To uncover, in as much detail as possible, all relant "Among the specific influences upon the doctor, the pharmacist, and the hospital, we will attempt to study the part played by the commercial communications channels; detailing, direct mail, and medical journal advertising; and the relative influence of the professional channels; journal articles, medical society papers, hospital news, word of mouth, etc. pps. 1 and 2 by Ben Gaffin & Associates, Inc., Chicago, Illinois "As in any sound research project, we will attempt to uncover The proposal then went into the reasons for the selection of this particular area of knowledge to study: "To our knowledge, no previous study of this type and scope "If this study reveals a tenth of what we have reasonable hopes P. 2 by Ben Gaffin & Associates, Inc., Chicago, Illinois EXHIBIT 9 A STUDY OF MEDICAL ADVERTISING AND THE AMERICAN PHYSICIAN PART II. THE PHYSICIANS' VIEWPOINT An Opinion Survey Made for the American Medical Association CHAPTER VII. ATTITUDES OF PHYSICIANS TOWARD COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE From the survey of advertisers, we learned that the majority of medical advertisers believe that physicians attach little or no importance to the Council Seal of Acceptance in the case of a product which is not dangerous, especially if the manufacturer is well-known and of good reputation. Medical advertisers generally believe that the Council's Seal has considerable value in the case of a new, potentially dangerous drug; or any drug put out by an unknown firm. To learn the facts about the attitudes of physicians toward Council "When learning about a new product which is not particularly "In the case of a drug which is not particularly dangerous, "Which do you think is usually of greater importance to you - or the fact that the drug has the Council Seal?" On the first question (see Table 48), the answers of physicians as a whole broke down as follows: 71% have special interest, 27% makes no difference, There are some interesting variations on the part of special groups from this national average. The physicians who write over 100 prescriptions per week were considerably more inclined to be interested in Council Acceptance (85%) than those who write fewer prescriptions. The full-time G.P. is more interested (77%) than the full-time specialist (68%). The physicians of 40 and over were more interested (73%) than those under 40 (65%). Geographically, physicians living in the East were the least interested (67%), while those in the South expressed a considerably higher interest (average, 79%). Physicians living in cities under 100,000 were considerably more interested (76%), than those living in cities of a million and over (62%). p. 117, by Ben Gaffin & Associates, Chicago 4, Illinois, August 31, 1953 A STUDY OF MEDICAL ADVERTISING AND THE AMERICAN PHYSICIAN ART II. - There seem to be no pronounced or consistent differences on the basis of variations in exposure to commercial advertising channels. On the second question (see Table 49), the breakdown was as follows: 79% would feel safer, The same relative differences between various groups holds true on the answers to this question as on the preceding. The third question (see Table 50), produced the following overall breakdown: 55% Council Seal is more important than the name of manufacturer, 33% name of manufacturer is more important than Council Seal, 5% they are both equally important, 3% other factors are more important than either, and There are some differences between the national average and the averages for special groups which one would not expect from the answers to the two previous questions. Twice as many physicians who wrote the largest number of prescriptions consider the Council's Seal as of greater importance than the manufacturer (60% vs. 30%); among those who wrote the fewest prescriptions, this difference dropped to 48% vs. 39%. Full-time G.P.'s were highest by type of practice (57% for the Council Seal vs. 34% for the manufacturer), and Internists attached most importance to the Council Seal (66% vs. 28% manufacturer) of any of the specialities. Most surprising, the physicians under 40 attached relatively more As in the preceding questions, the small town physician living in towns under 10,000 population was relatively more impressed by the Council's Seal (62%) than by the name of the manufacturer (31%). pps. 117-118, by Ben Gaffin & Associates, Chicago 4, Illinois, August 31, 195: 68.943 88,493 93,865 103,882 |