Repeated Appeal to Tradition and Use of Pseudoscientific Jargon Decrease Instead of Increase Preference for Fictitious Herbal Products

Abstract

Non-evidence-based traditional, complementary, and alternative medicine (TCAM) practices can lead to harmful health outcomes, so media reporting about it should be responsible. Drawing from a media content analysis, we created three vignettes about a fictional herbal product: one repeatedly appealed to tradition, one used extensive pseudoscientific jargon, and one followed WHO reporting guidelines  (i.e., active control). In an online community sample (N = 366), we tested their effects on product preference, and if these were more pronounced in individuals receptive to pseudo-profound verbalisms, magical health beliefs, and positive attitudes toward TCAM. Unexpectedly, reading the vignettes decreased product preference; the decrease was smaller in those prone to magical health beliefs and receptive to pseudo-profound verbalisms. The effect might stem from the overuse of arguments, making the interventions resemble the so-called ‘paradoxical thinking interventions’. Future research should find a "tipping point" that reverses the effect by varying the number of supportive claims.