Opinion leaders are experts in their domain of interest that share their experience
with others. Opinion seekers, on the other hand, value the opinion leader’s knowledge
and use them as a source of information to form an opinion about a service or a product.
Marketers in the healthcare industry have recognized this information flow and have
begun to use leading experts as a valuable third party who can take over the role of brand
advocates or endorsers of a particular product. This research examines the marketing
concept of opinion leaders advocating a product and persuading medical professionals.
In two experimental studies, the influence of opinion leaders on medical students and
practicing physicians and their perceived credibility of the message, as well as their
attitude towards the company, is examined. The second focus of this research is how
medical professionals cope with this form of persuasion attempt and whether their
persuasion knowledge is activated. The influence on medical students and physicians
through a peer expert - a skilled expert without any public recognition – represents the point of
comparison in both studies. The results demonstrate that there are no significant
differences in terms of perceived credibility between peer experts and opinion leaders,
and that there are no differences regarding their influence on message credibility or
attitude toward the company either. Moreover, disclosing company affiliations lead to the
correction of attitudes toward the company. However, disclosing conflicts of interest can
also be beneficial as it boosts the credibility of the source and helps to increase the
perceived credibility of the corporation
