This study examines the use of high-expertise sources such as doctors to sell dietary supplements and the use of skeptical statements toward approved drugs in the act of selling dietary supplements.
The research questions are addressed by means of a scenario experiment that manipulated two independent variables: expertise (high- vs low-expertise) and skepticism toward prescription drugs (present vs absent).
Surprisingly, skeptical statements from a low-expertise source toward a prescription drug made while selling dietary supplements was found to have an insignificant effect on selling effectiveness (willingness to recommend and perceived product effectiveness). However, when a high-expertise source (doctor) did the same, selling effectiveness was reduced.
The paper identifies a boundary condition for competitive selling claims of dietary supplements. Doctors are likely to get away with claims regarding the efficacy of dietary supplements until they criticize a more credible prescription drug in favor of supplements.
Claims made by a low-expertise sources and high-expertise sources in the act of selling dietary supplements must be carefully considered. Conventional wisdom tactics may be ineffective.
This paper uniquely demonstrates the role of competitive skepticism at different levels of expertise. The findings of this study suggest that managers, in especially the multi-level marketing industry, should reconsider some of their selling tactics.
