Is more patient empowerment always better? Examining the moderating role of perceived physician’s argument quality

Abstract Patient empowerment is an important concept in the study of physician–patient communication and is becoming increasingly popular in medical practices. However, previous studies have yielded inconsistent results regarding its effects. To reconcile these findings and establish a robust connection between empowerment and patient adherence, our study blends dyadic power theory with patient empowerment research. Using mixed methods, including both empirical modeling and controlled experiments, we found that patients who are equally empowered, as compared to those who are under- or over-empowered, exhibit a stronger dominance intention, which subsequently positively affects their adherence and satisfaction. Underlying this nonlinear influence of empowerment on adherence are two independent pathways: one channeling the effect through dominance intention and the other through perceived physician incompetence. Perceived physician’s argument quality represents a boundary condition. This research offers meaningful theoretical and practical implications to the literatures on patient empowerment and adherence by revealing the curvilinear relationship.