Educating consumers on the importance of income protection is a job for government and industry-led campaigns, advisers have said.
According to a Cirencester adviser survey, only a quarter said it was part of their job to educate consumers.
The research shows adviser clients are having difficulty distinguishing income protection (IP) from payment protection insurance (PPI), with more than three quarters of respondents reporting client confusion and 63% saying clients were not clear on what income protection actually was.
Paul Hudson, chief executive of the mutual, said: "Raising awareness and educating consumers cannot be achieved overnight and will need significant effort from everyone involved.
"While the benefits of income protection is a common topic amongst the financial and trade media the message rarely makes it into the wider public domain."
He said changes to the State Benefits System and the way eligibility was being assessed meant income protection needed to be brought into sharp focus for consumers.
"Unsurprisingly, negative press around the PPI product has made consumers wary of protection products and more needs to be done to educate consumers on the differences between PPI and other protection products in the market," Hudson said.
He added provider advertising on television to raise awareness of the need for income protection was "great" but workers without workplace benefits needed to be made more aware of individual options.
The majority (62%) of advisers said they would be encouraged to sell more income protection if they had better educated consumers.
Income protection was a must-have in the eyes of 85% of advisers surveyed yet sales of new critical illness policies were almost five times that of income protection contracts in 2011, according to Swiss Re Term & Health Watch 2012.
Mr Hudson said: "The danger is that a person with critical illness cover may assume that they do not need income protection."
He added it was not a case of choosing between the products as they were complimentary and "a little of both" was the best option.
The barriers to advisers recommending IP were; cost (55%); and clients not thinking they needed the cover (60%).
