IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v111y2024ics2214804324000624.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the demand for elective egg freezing: A laboratory experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Keller, Elena
  • Ortmann, Andreas
  • Chambers, Georgina Mary

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Keller, Elena & Ortmann, Andreas & Chambers, Georgina Mary, 2024. "Exploring the demand for elective egg freezing: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:111:y:2024:i:c:s2214804324000624
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2024.102224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2024.102224?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. Izabela Jelovac & Philippe Polomé, 2017. "Incentives to patients versus incentives to health care providers: The users' perspective," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 319-331, December.
    2. Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1993. "Monetary Rewards and Decision Cost in Experimental Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(2), pages 245-261, April.
    3. Michael L. DeKay & David A. Asch, 1998. "Is the Defensive Use of Diagnostic Tests Good for Patients, or Bad?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 18(1), pages 19-28, January.
    4. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    5. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin, 2016. "A theoretical and experimental appraisal of four risk elicitation methods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(3), pages 613-641, September.
    6. Honora Smith & Christine Currie & Pornpimol Chaiwuttisak & Andreas Kyprianou, 2018. "Patient choice modelling: how do patients choose their hospitals?," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 259-268, June.
    7. Gershoni, Naomi & Low, Corinne, 2021. "The power of time: The impact of free IVF on Women’s human capital investments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    8. John List & Sally Sadoff & Mathis Wagner, 2011. "So you want to run an experiment, now what? Some simple rules of thumb for optimal experimental design," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(4), pages 439-457, November.
    9. Drichoutis, Andreas & Nayga, Rodolfo, 2013. "A reconciliation of time preference elicitation methods," MPRA Paper 46916, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 12 May 2013.
    10. repec:ces:ifodic:v:15:y:2017:i:2:p:19337561 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Baetschmann, Gregori & Staub, Kevin E. & Studer, Raphael, 2016. "Does the stork deliver happiness? Parenthood and life satisfaction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 242-260.
    12. Schram, Arthur & Sonnemans, Joep, 2011. "How individuals choose health insurance: An experimental analysis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 799-819, August.
    13. Buckley, Neil J. & Cuff, Katherine & Hurley, Jeremiah & McLeod, Logan & Mestelman, Stuart & Cameron, David, 2012. "An experimental investigation of mixed systems of public and private health care finance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 713-729.
    14. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    15. Jonathan Cohen & Keith Marzilli Ericson & David Laibson & John Myles White, 2020. "Measuring Time Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(2), pages 299-347, June.
    16. Marianne Bitler & Lucie Schmidt, 2012. "Utilization of Infertility Treatments: The Effects of Insurance Mandates," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 49(1), pages 125-149, February.
    17. Jens Rommel & Daniel Hermann & Malte Müller & Oliver Mußhoff, 2017. "Comprehension in risk elicitation experiments," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(9), pages 627-634, May.
    18. Ali Darvishi & Reza Goudarzi & Viktoria Habib Zadeh & Mohsen Barouni, 2020. "Cost-benefit Analysis of IUI and IVF based on willingness to pay approach; case study: Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-13, July.
    19. Man Yee Mallory Leung & Fane Groes & Raul Santaeulalia-Llopis, 2016. "The Relationship between Age at First Birth and Mother's Lifetime Earnings: Evidence from Danish Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, January.
    20. Bateman, Hazel & Dobrescu, Loretti I. & Newell, Ben R. & Ortmann, Andreas & Thorp, Susan, 2016. "As easy as pie: How retirement savers use prescribed investment disclosures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 60-76.
    21. Keith M. Ericson & John Myles White & David Laibson & Jonathan D. Cohen, 2015. "Money Earlier or Later? Simple Heuristics Explain Intertemporal Choices Better than Delay Discounting," NBER Working Papers 20948, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Arthur Schram, 2005. "Artificiality: The tension between internal and external validity in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 225-237.
    23. Massimiliano Bratti & Elena Claudia Meroni & Chiara Pronzato, 2017. "Motherhood Postponement and Wages in Europe," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 15(02), pages 31-37, August.
    24. Barton H. Hamilton & Emily Jungheim & Brian McManus & Juan Pantano, 2018. "Health Care Access, Costs, and Treatment Dynamics: Evidence from In Vitro Fertilization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3725-3777, December.
    25. Elena Keller & Willings Botha & Georgina M. Chambers, 2023. "What Features of Fertility Treatment do Patients Value? Price Elasticity and Willingness-to-Pay Values from a Discrete Choice Experiment," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 91-107, January.
    26. repec:ces:ifodic:v:15:y:2017:i:2:p:31-37 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Ben Greiner & Le Zhang & Chengxiang Tang, 2017. "Separation of prescription and treatment in health care markets: A laboratory experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 21-35, December.
    28. Palan, Stefan & Schitter, Christian, 2018. "Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 22-27.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gruner, Sven & Lehberger, Mira & Hirschauer, Norbert & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2022. "How (un)informative are experiments with students for other social groups? A study of agricultural students and farmers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(03), January.
    2. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García‐Prado & Paula González & José Luis Pinto‐Prades, 2017. "Risk attitudes in medical decisions for others: An experimental approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 97-113, December.
    3. Fiore, Annamaria, 2009. "Experimental Economics: Some Methodological Notes," MPRA Paper 12498, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Grüner, S. & Hirschauer, N. & Mußhoff, O., 2015. "Potenzial verschiedener experimenteller Designs für die Politikfolgenabschätzung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.
    5. Pablo Brañas-Garza & Diego Jorrat & Antonio M. Espín & Angel Sánchez, 2023. "Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: lab, field and online evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 412-434, April.
    6. Marie‐Louise Leroux & Pierre Pestieau & Gregory Ponthiere, 2024. "The optimal design of assisted reproductive technologies policies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(7), pages 1454-1479, July.
    7. Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Kokot, Johanna & Vomhof, Markus & Weßling, Jens, 2017. "Health insurance choice and risk preferences under cumulative prospect theory – an experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 374-397.
    8. Ulrich Schmidt & Christian Seidl, 2014. "Reconsidering the common ratio effect: the roles of compound independence, reduction, and coalescing," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 323-339, October.
    9. Andreas Ortmann, 2009. ""The Way in which an Experiment is Conducted is Unbelievably Important": On the Experimentation Practices of Economists and Psychologists," CESifo Working Paper Series 2887, CESifo.
    10. Jonathan Chapman & Mark Dean & Pietro Ortoleva & Erik Snowberg & Colin Camerer, 2023. "Econographics," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 115-161.
    11. David Burner & Michael McKee & Rudy Santore, 2008. "Hand in the Cookie Jar: An Experimental Investigation of Equity‐Based Compensation and Managerial Fraud," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(1), pages 261-278, July.
    12. Jan Hanousek & Evžen Kočenda, 2011. "Learning by investing," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 19(1), pages 125-149, January.
    13. Peilu Zhang & Marco A. Palma, 2021. "Compulsory Versus Voluntary Insurance: An Online Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 106-125, January.
    14. Matteo M. Marini, 2022. "20 years of emotions and risky choices in the lab: A meta-analysis," Working Papers 2022/03, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    15. Horn, Dániel & Kiss, Hubert Janos & Lénárd, Tünde, 2020. "Economic preferences in the classroom - research documentation," MPRA Paper 100815, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Thomas, Ranjeeta & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Moorhouse, Louisa & Nyamukapa, Constance & Hallett, Timothy B., 2024. "Do risk, time and prosocial preferences predict risky sexual behaviour of youths in a low-income, high-risk setting?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    17. Fairley, Kim & Parelman, Jacob M. & Jones, Matt & Carter, R. McKell, 2019. "Risky health choices and the Balloon Economic Risk Protocol," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 15-33.
    18. Jinkwon Lee, 2007. "Repetition And Financial Incentives In Economics Experiments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 628-681, July.
    19. Michele Garagnani, 2023. "The predictive power of risk elicitation tasks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 165-192, October.
    20. Beşliu, Corina, 2022. "Complexity in insurance selection: Cross-classified multilevel analysis of experimental data," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experiment; Fertility treatment; Elective egg freezing; IVF treatment; Government funding;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • H42 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Private Goods
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:soceco:v:111:y:2024:i:c:s2214804324000624. 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/inca/620175 .

    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.