{"title":"医生行为:从医生和患者角度看实验证据","authors":"Adolf Kwadzo Dzampe , Daisaku Goto","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Physician motives remain a hotly debated and sensitive topic. Given the sensitive nature of this issue, direct questions may elicit either dishonest responses or no response at all. To mitigate this risk, we carried out two list experiments between November 2022 and February 2023 to examine two important physician behaviors from both the physician and patient perspectives. In these experiments, participants in the control and treatment groups were shown a list of non-sensitive statements. Additionally, each treatment group received a sensitive statement related to either demand inducement or demand enablement behavior. Participants were then asked to report only the number of statements with which they agreed. The difference in the mean number of statements agreed upon between the control and treatment groups revealed the prevalence rates of sensitive behaviors. In the physician experiment, we observed a 25 % prevalence rate (standard error (SE) = 0.127, <em>p</em> = 0.046) for demand inducement behavior and a 65 % rate (SE = 0.125, <em>p</em> < 0.001) for demand enablement behavior. In the patient experiment, compared to the control group, 52 % of participants (SE = 0.074, <em>p</em> < 0.001) perceived that physicians exhibit demand inducement behavior, while 39 % (SE = 0.073, <em>p</em> < 0.001) demonstrated behavior consistent with demand enablement. These findings indicate that physicians are more prone to offer unnecessary medical services when patients actively participate, underscoring the significant influence of patients on physician behavior.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician behavior: Experimental evidence from physician and patient perspectives\",\"authors\":\"Adolf Kwadzo Dzampe , Daisaku Goto\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Physician motives remain a hotly debated and sensitive topic. Given the sensitive nature of this issue, direct questions may elicit either dishonest responses or no response at all. To mitigate this risk, we carried out two list experiments between November 2022 and February 2023 to examine two important physician behaviors from both the physician and patient perspectives. In these experiments, participants in the control and treatment groups were shown a list of non-sensitive statements. Additionally, each treatment group received a sensitive statement related to either demand inducement or demand enablement behavior. Participants were then asked to report only the number of statements with which they agreed. The difference in the mean number of statements agreed upon between the control and treatment groups revealed the prevalence rates of sensitive behaviors. In the physician experiment, we observed a 25 % prevalence rate (standard error (SE) = 0.127, <em>p</em> = 0.046) for demand inducement behavior and a 65 % rate (SE = 0.125, <em>p</em> < 0.001) for demand enablement behavior. In the patient experiment, compared to the control group, 52 % of participants (SE = 0.074, <em>p</em> < 0.001) perceived that physicians exhibit demand inducement behavior, while 39 % (SE = 0.073, <em>p</em> < 0.001) demonstrated behavior consistent with demand enablement. These findings indicate that physicians are more prone to offer unnecessary medical services when patients actively participate, underscoring the significant influence of patients on physician behavior.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"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/S2214804324000934\",\"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/S2214804324000934","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Physician behavior: Experimental evidence from physician and patient perspectives
Physician motives remain a hotly debated and sensitive topic. Given the sensitive nature of this issue, direct questions may elicit either dishonest responses or no response at all. To mitigate this risk, we carried out two list experiments between November 2022 and February 2023 to examine two important physician behaviors from both the physician and patient perspectives. In these experiments, participants in the control and treatment groups were shown a list of non-sensitive statements. Additionally, each treatment group received a sensitive statement related to either demand inducement or demand enablement behavior. Participants were then asked to report only the number of statements with which they agreed. The difference in the mean number of statements agreed upon between the control and treatment groups revealed the prevalence rates of sensitive behaviors. In the physician experiment, we observed a 25 % prevalence rate (standard error (SE) = 0.127, p = 0.046) for demand inducement behavior and a 65 % rate (SE = 0.125, p < 0.001) for demand enablement behavior. In the patient experiment, compared to the control group, 52 % of participants (SE = 0.074, p < 0.001) perceived that physicians exhibit demand inducement behavior, while 39 % (SE = 0.073, p < 0.001) demonstrated behavior consistent with demand enablement. These findings indicate that physicians are more prone to offer unnecessary medical services when patients actively participate, underscoring the significant influence of patients on physician behavior.
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.