Bridging the gap: Experimental evidence on information provision and health insurance choices

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Health economics Pub Date : 2024-03-07 DOI:10.1002/hec.4820
Ana Cecilia Quiroga Gutierrez, Stefan Boes
{"title":"Bridging the gap: Experimental evidence on information provision and health insurance choices","authors":"Ana Cecilia Quiroga Gutierrez,&nbsp;Stefan Boes","doi":"10.1002/hec.4820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Previous research has shown that individuals do not always make rational decisions when selecting their health insurance, for example, due to the existence of information frictions or mental gaps. We study the effect of specific types of information provision for decision support on health plan choices and test their potential to improve decision quality by implementing a randomized laboratory experiment. We provide personalized and generic aids, differentiate between numerical and visual decision support, and provide one or two optional formats of personalized information. We find that generic aids have no effect on health plan choices while personalized information leads to better choices as measured by several indicators of decision quality. The largest effects were observed for those who “opted in” to visualize personalized information, with immediate and lasting improvements in health insurance decisions. By reducing information frictions, our results suggest that accessible and easy-to-use tools can positively impact health insurance navigation, improve decision-making, and reduce switching costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":"33 6","pages":"1368-1386"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hec.4820","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4820","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous research has shown that individuals do not always make rational decisions when selecting their health insurance, for example, due to the existence of information frictions or mental gaps. We study the effect of specific types of information provision for decision support on health plan choices and test their potential to improve decision quality by implementing a randomized laboratory experiment. We provide personalized and generic aids, differentiate between numerical and visual decision support, and provide one or two optional formats of personalized information. We find that generic aids have no effect on health plan choices while personalized information leads to better choices as measured by several indicators of decision quality. The largest effects were observed for those who “opted in” to visualize personalized information, with immediate and lasting improvements in health insurance decisions. By reducing information frictions, our results suggest that accessible and easy-to-use tools can positively impact health insurance navigation, improve decision-making, and reduce switching costs.

Abstract Image

缩小差距:关于信息提供和医疗保险选择的实验证据。
以往的研究表明,由于存在信息摩擦或心理差距等原因,个人在选择医疗保险时并不总是能做出理性的决定。我们研究了为决策支持提供特定类型信息对医疗计划选择的影响,并通过实施随机实验室实验来检验其提高决策质量的潜力。我们提供了个性化辅助工具和通用辅助工具,区分了数字决策支持和视觉决策支持,并提供了一种或两种可选的个性化信息格式。我们发现,通用辅助工具对医疗计划的选择没有任何影响,而个性化信息则会带来更好的选择,这是由几个决策质量指标来衡量的。在 "选择加入 "可视化个性化信息的人群中,我们观察到了最大的效果,他们的医疗保险决策得到了立竿见影的持久改善。我们的研究结果表明,通过减少信息摩擦,方便易用的工具可以对健康保险导航产生积极影响,改善决策,降低转换成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health economics
Health economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems. Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses. Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信