探索选择性冷冻卵子的需求:实验室实验

IF 1.6 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Elena Keller , Andreas Ortmann , Georgina Mary Chambers
{"title":"探索选择性冷冻卵子的需求:实验室实验","authors":"Elena Keller ,&nbsp;Andreas Ortmann ,&nbsp;Georgina Mary Chambers","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We conducted a proof-of-concept analysis to demonstrate that government funding decisions can be studied within a lab experiment: We explore the effects of government funding levels, information level, and various participant characteristics on the demand for elective egg freezing (EEF) and in vitro fertilization (IVF), two types of fertility treatment, and determine price and income elasticities of demand within an incentive-compatible experiment.</p><p>We recruited 217 female participants without children aged 20–29 years. Participants were assigned to one of three between-subjects experimental treatments that varied income endowment and information provided. Additionally, the experiment consisted of 3 within-subjects conditions corresponding to different levels of government funding for IVF and EEF with 2 decision periods (‘planning period’ and ‘family-formation period’) and participants had to indicate their treatment choice aiming to achieve a live birth.</p><p>The demand for EEF and IVF were shown to be price-inelastic. We found that the increase in the price for EEF and IVF through restrictions in government funding significantly reduced demand for such treatments. However, demand did not significantly change with income level, suggesting a high value associated with fertility treatment.</p><p>Overall, our study shows that government funding decisions for medical interventions can be explored within an experimental setting.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624/pdfft?md5=1d1a9ecddc67596e4a43148da0c4a20b&pid=1-s2.0-S2214804324000624-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the demand for elective egg freezing: A laboratory experiment\",\"authors\":\"Elena Keller ,&nbsp;Andreas Ortmann ,&nbsp;Georgina Mary Chambers\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102224\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We conducted a proof-of-concept analysis to demonstrate that government funding decisions can be studied within a lab experiment: We explore the effects of government funding levels, information level, and various participant characteristics on the demand for elective egg freezing (EEF) and in vitro fertilization (IVF), two types of fertility treatment, and determine price and income elasticities of demand within an incentive-compatible experiment.</p><p>We recruited 217 female participants without children aged 20–29 years. Participants were assigned to one of three between-subjects experimental treatments that varied income endowment and information provided. Additionally, the experiment consisted of 3 within-subjects conditions corresponding to different levels of government funding for IVF and EEF with 2 decision periods (‘planning period’ and ‘family-formation period’) and participants had to indicate their treatment choice aiming to achieve a live birth.</p><p>The demand for EEF and IVF were shown to be price-inelastic. We found that the increase in the price for EEF and IVF through restrictions in government funding significantly reduced demand for such treatments. However, demand did not significantly change with income level, suggesting a high value associated with fertility treatment.</p><p>Overall, our study shows that government funding decisions for medical interventions can be explored within an experimental setting.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624/pdfft?md5=1d1a9ecddc67596e4a43148da0c4a20b&pid=1-s2.0-S2214804324000624-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们进行了概念验证分析,证明政府资助决策可以在实验室实验中进行研究:我们探讨了政府资助水平、信息水平和参与者的各种特征对选择性冷冻卵子(EEF)和体外受精(IVF)这两种生育治疗需求的影响,并在一个激励兼容的实验中确定了需求的价格和收入弹性。我们招募了 217 名年龄在 20-29 岁之间、没有孩子的女性参与者。参与者被分配到三个主体间实验处理中的一个,这些实验处理的收入禀赋和提供的信息各不相同。此外,实验还包括 3 个主体内条件,分别对应于政府对试管婴儿和紧急助孕的不同资助水平,以及 2 个决策期("计划期 "和 "家庭组建期"),参与者必须表明自己的治疗选择,以实现活产。我们发现,通过限制政府资助来提高 EEF 和 IVF 的价格,大大降低了对此类治疗的需求。总之,我们的研究表明,政府对医疗干预措施的资助决策可以在实验环境中进行探索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the demand for elective egg freezing: A laboratory experiment

We conducted a proof-of-concept analysis to demonstrate that government funding decisions can be studied within a lab experiment: We explore the effects of government funding levels, information level, and various participant characteristics on the demand for elective egg freezing (EEF) and in vitro fertilization (IVF), two types of fertility treatment, and determine price and income elasticities of demand within an incentive-compatible experiment.

We recruited 217 female participants without children aged 20–29 years. Participants were assigned to one of three between-subjects experimental treatments that varied income endowment and information provided. Additionally, the experiment consisted of 3 within-subjects conditions corresponding to different levels of government funding for IVF and EEF with 2 decision periods (‘planning period’ and ‘family-formation period’) and participants had to indicate their treatment choice aiming to achieve a live birth.

The demand for EEF and IVF were shown to be price-inelastic. We found that the increase in the price for EEF and IVF through restrictions in government funding significantly reduced demand for such treatments. However, demand did not significantly change with income level, suggesting a high value associated with fertility treatment.

Overall, our study shows that government funding decisions for medical interventions can be explored within an experimental setting.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
83 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.
×
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