IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v166y2021icp68-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When weak sanctioning systems work: Evidence from auto insurance industry fraud investigations

Author

Listed:
  • Warren, Danielle E.
  • Schweitzer, Maurice E.

Abstract

To deter auto insurance fraud, insurance companies and law enforcement agencies investigate and prosecute suspicious claims. We describe this sanctioning system and perceptions of this system by integrating unique datasets: insurance company records, interviews with insurance fraud investigators, state law enforcement data (CA, NY), and surveys of automotive insurance customers. We identify organizational constraints, such as public relations concerns, that limit the effectiveness of the formal sanctioning system (fewer than 1% of claims that are flagged as suspicious are ever prosecuted for fraud). We also identify psychological factors that deter consumers from committing fraud; consumers over-estimate the probability of detection, over-estimate the consequences of prosecution, are sensitive to social sanctions (e.g., negative publicity), and anticipate high emotional costs, such as shame and embarrassment, that make the prospect of committing fraud highly aversive. That is, psychological factors substantially deter fraud even though the economic sanctions are weak. Our findings integrate scholarship on sanctioning systems (Tenbrunsel & Messick, 1991) and highlight the role of organizational constraints and psychological factors in deterring fraud.

Suggested Citation

  • Warren, Danielle E. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2021. "When weak sanctioning systems work: Evidence from auto insurance industry fraud investigations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 68-83.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:166:y:2021:i:c:p:68-83
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.04.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597818303947
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.04.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gneezy, Uri & Rustichini, Aldo, 2000. "A Fine is a Price," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Steven Shavell & A. Mitchell Polinsky, 2000. "The Economic Theory of Public Enforcement of Law," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 45-76, March.
    3. Lance Lochner, 2007. "Individual Perceptions of the Criminal Justice System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 444-460, March.
    4. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Danielle E. Warren & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2018. "When Lying Does Not Pay: How Experts Detect Insurance Fraud," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 711-726, July.
    6. McCusker, Christopher & Carnevale, Peter J., 1995. "Framing in Resource Dilemmas: Loss Aversion and the Moderating Effects of Sanctions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 190-201, February.
    7. Yip, Jeremy A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2016. "Mad and misleading: Incidental anger promotes deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 207-217.
    8. Warren, Danielle E., 2019. "The Persistence of Organizational Deviance: When Informal Sanctioning Systems Undermine Formal Sanctioning Systems," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 55-84, January.
    9. Kristin Smith-Crowe & Danielle E. Warren, 2014. "The Emotion-Evoked Collective Corruption Model: The Role of Emotion in the Spread of Corruption Within Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1154-1171, August.
    10. De Cremer, David & Dijk, Eric van, 2009. "Paying for sanctions in social dilemmas: The effects of endowment asymmetry and accountability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 45-55, May.
    11. Verboon, Peter & van Dijke, Marius, 2011. "When do severe sanctions enhance compliance? The role of procedural fairness," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 120-130, February.
    12. William Lesch & Johannes Brinkmann, 2011. "Consumer Insurance Fraud/Abuse as Co-creation and Co-responsibility: A New Paradigm," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 17-32, April.
    13. Stijn Viaene & Guido Dedene, 2004. "Insurance Fraud: Issues and Challenges," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 29(2), pages 313-333, April.
    14. Aaron Chalfin & Justin McCrary, 2017. "Criminal Deterrence: A Review of the Literature," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 5-48, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yankol-Schalck, Meryem, 2022. "The value of cross-data set analysis for automobile insurance fraud detection," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Buechel, Berno & Feess, Eberhard & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2020. "Optimal law enforcement with sophisticated and naïve offenders," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 836-857.
    2. Matthias Kasper & James Alm, 2022. "Does the Bomb-crater Effect Really Exist? Evidence from the Laboratory," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 87-111.
    3. Blesse, Sebastian & Diegmann, André, 2022. "The place-based effects of police stations on crime: Evidence from station closures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    4. Casilda Lasso de la Vega & Oscar Volij & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2021. "Can more police induce more crime?," Working Papers 2107, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    5. Suurmond, Guido, 2007. "The effects of the enforcement strategy," MPRA Paper 21142, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Philip A. Curry & Anindya Sen & George Orlov, 2016. "Crime, apprehension and clearance rates: Panel data evidence from Canadian provinces," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 481-514, May.
    7. Lisa R. Anderson & Gregory DeAngelo & Winand Emons & Beth Freeborn & Hannes Lang, 2017. "Penalty Structures And Deterrence In A Two-Stage Model: Experimental Evidence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1833-1867, October.
    8. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson & Dietrich Earnhart, 2022. "The role of experience in deterring crime: A theory of specific versus general deterrence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(4), pages 1833-1853, October.
    9. Stefan Buehler & Daniel Halbheer & Michael Lechner, 2017. "Payment Evasion," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 804-832, December.
    10. Roee Sarel, 2022. "Crime and punishment in times of pandemics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 155-186, October.
    11. Joseph P. Gaspar & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2021. "Confident and Cunning: Negotiator Self-Efficacy Promotes Deception in Negotiations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 139-155, June.
    12. Lana Friesen & Dietrich Earnhart, 2012. "Environmental Management Responses to Punishment: Specific Deterrence and Certainty versus Severity of Punishment," Discussion Papers Series 463, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    13. Casilda Lasso de la Vega & Oscar Volij & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2023. "When do more police induce more crime?," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(3), pages 759-778, October.
    14. Feess, Eberhard & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Schramm, Markus & Wohlschlegel, Ansgar, 2018. "The impact of fine size and uncertainty on punishment and deterrence: Theory and evidence from the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 58-73.
    15. Renee Flasher & Melvin A. Lamboy-Ruiz, 2019. "Impact of Enforcement on Healthcare Billing Fraud: Evidence from the USA," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 217-229, June.
    16. Rizzolli, Matteo & Tremewan, James, 2018. "Hard labor in the lab: Deterrence, non-monetary sanctions, and severe procedures," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 107-121.
    17. Stefano Castriota & Mirco Tonin, 2019. "Stay or Flee? Probability Versus Severity of Punishment in Hit-And-Run Accidents," CESifo Working Paper Series 7907, CESifo.
    18. Hannah Schildberg-Hörisch & Christina Strassmair, 2012. "An Experimental Test of the Deterrence Hypothesis," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 447-459, August.
    19. Xiao, Erte & Houser, Daniel, 2009. "Avoiding the sharp tongue: Anticipated written messages promote fair economic exchange," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 393-404, June.
    20. Kasper, Matthias & Alm, James, 2022. "Audits, audit effectiveness, and post-audit tax compliance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 87-102.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:166:y:2021:i:c:p:68-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.