JAR masthead
Current Issue Summary
December 2021 (Vol. 61, Issue 4)

Effects of Animation and Rotoscoping in Direct-to-Consumer Rx TV Advertising: How Animation vs. Rotoscoping vs. Live Action Drive Perceptions and Attitudes toward Drugs
Brands have used animated characters in ads for low-involvement products like food. But more recently, this format has appeared in direct-to-consumer TV commercials promoting prescription drugs. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is charged with ensuring that people understand the risks and benefits of these drugs. Its observation—about the increased use of the animation format—led to this study exploring whether the animation or rotoscoping tactic in ads “inflates efficacy perceptions, minimizes risk, or otherwise hinders comprehension of drug risks and benefits.” The research team—Amie C. O’Donoghue and Kevin R. Betts (both at the FDA), Sarah Parvanta (ALS Association; previously at RTI International), and Mihaela Johnson, Bridget Kelly and Nicole Mack (all three at RTI International)— offer insights into these ads’ effectiveness.

In experiments, the researchers tested fictitious ads for drugs that treat dry eye and psoriasis against a convenience sample of nearly 1,000 participants (divided by about half for each product category). They examined whether animation or rotoscoping could affect the processing of information differently than with ads featuring live human actors, and whether that impact varied by medical condition. They also tested for recall, comprehension, perceived benefit and risk, attitudes and behavioral intentions. Drawing from the uncanny valley theory, the researchers expected the eeriness of rotoscoped characters to “evoke discord in the viewer and a sense of revulsion.” Such aversive reactions “may inhibit recall and cause negative feelings.” But, bucking earlier research, the type of character did not affect memory at all. “Neither retention of risk nor retention of benefit information was affected by character manipulation.”

Among the findings:

  • Animation or rotoscoping had no effect on comprehension of drug risks or benefits, the perception of them or behavioral intentions surrounding them.
  • Animated ads resulted in “more negative attitudes toward the character, ad and product.”
  • On some occasions, rotoscoped ads also produced less-positive attitudes than the live-action ones. But future research should explore lagged effects of recall, given the possibility that ads “featuring animated characters are recalled over time better than those with live-action or rotoscoped characters because of the less positive attitudes they induce.”