Direct-to-consumer marketing initiatives may improve utilization of evidence-based therapy. An important decision in such marketing efforts is how to effectively present scientific evidence supporting these treatments to potential consumers (if at all). This OSF preregistered study experimentally tested whether the language used to describe research evidence supporting cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for anxiety disorders affected consumer treatment attitudes and intentions. Adult participants (N = 303) recruited via mTurk were first assessed for their understanding of the term "evidence-based." They were then randomized to read a description of CBT employing either: formal research language (e.g., "large-scale clinical trials have demonstrated…"), informal language about research support derived from prior qualitative work (e.g., "people have better results…"), or no information about research. Perceptions of CBT (including credibility and expectancy) and likelihood of pursuing CBT (pull demand) were assessed. Results indicated that only half the sample understood the meaning of the term "evidence-based." The conditions that discussed research support outperformed the control condition on CBT perceptions, credibility, general expectancies, and perceived effectiveness. Post-hoc comparisons provided some evidence that qualitatively-derived language was more effective than formal research language for promoting positive perceptions of CBT. Implications for marketing content are discussed.
Keywords: Direct-to-consumer; anxiety; barriers; cognitive-behavioral therapy.