For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom
{"title":"For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom","authors":"Gabriella Conti, Pamela Giustinelli","doi":"10.1002/hec.4942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We study the determinants of voluntary compliance in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using rich data on subjective expectations we collected during the spring 2020 lockdown in the UK, we estimate a simple model of compliance choice with uncertain costs and benefits whose estimates quantify the utility trade-offs underlying compliance. Using these estimates, we decompose group differences in compliance into components due to preferences vis-à-vis expectations and compute the monetary compensation required for different groups to comply. We find citizens face intuitive trade-offs between costs and benefits of noncompliance, with the largest costs being the disutility of passing away from COVID-19 and the psychological cost of being caught transgressing, and the largest benefit being preserving own mental health. Significant heterogeneity exists across groups, with women's higher compliance being explained by gender differences in both preferences and expectations, while vulnerables' higher compliance being mainly driven by differences in preferences. The response of individual behavior to others' behavior, too, varies across personal characteristics and circumstances. Our findings underscore the importance for public health policies to take into account behavior-relevant heterogeneity in citizens' preferences, expectations, and responses to others.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":"34 5","pages":"992-1012"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hec.4942","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4942","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
We study the determinants of voluntary compliance in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using rich data on subjective expectations we collected during the spring 2020 lockdown in the UK, we estimate a simple model of compliance choice with uncertain costs and benefits whose estimates quantify the utility trade-offs underlying compliance. Using these estimates, we decompose group differences in compliance into components due to preferences vis-à-vis expectations and compute the monetary compensation required for different groups to comply. We find citizens face intuitive trade-offs between costs and benefits of noncompliance, with the largest costs being the disutility of passing away from COVID-19 and the psychological cost of being caught transgressing, and the largest benefit being preserving own mental health. Significant heterogeneity exists across groups, with women's higher compliance being explained by gender differences in both preferences and expectations, while vulnerables' higher compliance being mainly driven by differences in preferences. The response of individual behavior to others' behavior, too, varies across personal characteristics and circumstances. Our findings underscore the importance for public health policies to take into account behavior-relevant heterogeneity in citizens' preferences, expectations, and responses to others.
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.