Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research

Date Submitted: Dec 2, 2020
Date Accepted: Jan 5, 2022

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Reversing the Antibiotic Resistance “Yelp Effect” Through the Use of Emotionally Framed Responses to Negative Reviews of Providers: Questionnaire Study

Turner MM, Choung H, Bui QHHM, Beck P, Ashraf H

Reversing the Antibiotic Resistance “Yelp Effect” Through the Use of Emotionally Framed Responses to Negative Reviews of Providers: Questionnaire Study

JMIR Form Res 2022;6(3):e26122

DOI: 10.2196/26122

PMID: 35315787

PMCID: 8984826

Can the "Yelp Effect" Be Reversed? An experimental test of the effects of emotionally framed responses to negative reviews of providers

  • Monique Mitchell Turner; 
  • Hyesun Choung; 
  • Quoc-Ha Hannah Mai Bui; 
  • Paige Beck; 
  • Hera Ashraf

ABSTRACT

Background:

The overuse of antibiotics has rapidly made antimicrobial resistance a global public health challenge. There is an emerging trend where providers who perceive that their patients expect antibiotics are more likely to prescribe antibiotics unprompted or upon request.1 Particularly, health care providers have expressed concern that dissatisfied patients will provide disparaging online reviews therefore threatening the reputation of the practice.2 To better deal with the negative reviews and inform patients, some health care staff directly respond to patients' online feedback.3 Engaging with patients’ online reviews gives providers an opportunity to prevent reputational damage and improve patients’ understanding of the antibiotic resistance problem.

Objective:

We aim to suggest and test the effectiveness of different response strategies to the negative patient online reviews on the readers’ perceptions of the health care provider and their perceptions related to antibiotics resistance.

Methods:

Two experimental surveys were conducted to examine the impact of message tactics (apologizing, inducing fear or guilt) that can be employed by healthcare providers when responding to patients’ negative online feedback related to not receiving an antibiotic.

Results:

Overall, our results demonstrated positive impacts of responding to patients’ online reviews. In Study 1, we found an apologetic messaging and using emotional appeals in the response were effective in making readers feel more favorable toward the message. Readers also expressed greater credibility perception toward the provider when emotional appeals were used. Findings from study 2 largely supported the effectiveness of fear-inducing response in improving the readers’ misconception and unrealistic expectation for antibiotics.

Conclusions:

This paper demonstrated that a strategic response to patient online complaints can prevent reputational damage and help to minimize the potential negative impacts of the review. The results also glean insight into the step toward developing a novel intervention--crafting a persuasive response to patients’ negative feedback that can help to improve the understanding of antibiotic resistance problems.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Turner MM, Choung H, Bui QHHM, Beck P, Ashraf H

Reversing the Antibiotic Resistance “Yelp Effect” Through the Use of Emotionally Framed Responses to Negative Reviews of Providers: Questionnaire Study

JMIR Form Res 2022;6(3):e26122

DOI: 10.2196/26122

PMID: 35315787

PMCID: 8984826

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.