IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v20y2022i6d10.1007_s40258-022-00751-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applications of Behavioral Economics to Pharmaceutical Policymaking: A Scoping Review with Implications for Best-Value Biological Medicines

Author

Listed:
  • Yannick Vandenplas

    (KU Leuven)

  • Steven Simoens

    (KU Leuven)

  • Florian Turk

    (University of Paderborn)

  • Arnold G. Vulto

    (KU Leuven
    Erasmus University Medical Center)

  • Isabelle Huys

    (KU Leuven)

Abstract

Background and Objective Pharmaceutical policies are generally based on the assumption that involved stakeholders make rational decisions. However, behavioral economics has taught us that this is not always the case as people deviate from rational behavior in rather predictable patterns. This scoping review examined to what extent behavioral concepts have already been applied in the pharmaceutical domain and what evidence exists about their effectiveness, with the aim of formulating future applications and research hypotheses on policymaking for best-value biologicals. Methods A scoping literature review was conducted on the evidence of behavioral applications to pharmaceuticals. Scientific databases (Embase, MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, and Scopus) were searched up to 20 October, 2021. Results Forty-four full-text scientific articles were identified and narratively described in this article. Pharmaceutical domains where behavioral concepts have been investigated relate to influencing prescribing behavior, improving medication adherence, and increasing vaccination uptake. Multiple behavioral concepts were examined in the identified studies, such as social norms, defaults, framing, loss aversion, availability, and present bias. The effectiveness of the applied interventions was generally positive, but depended on the context. Some of the examined interventions can easily be translated into effective policy interventions for best-value biological medicines. However, some applications require further investigation in a research context. Conclusions Applications of behavioral economics to pharmaceutical policymaking are promising. However, further research is required to investigate the effect of behavioral applications on policy interventions for a more sustainable market environment for best-value biological medicines.

Suggested Citation

  • Yannick Vandenplas & Steven Simoens & Florian Turk & Arnold G. Vulto & Isabelle Huys, 2022. "Applications of Behavioral Economics to Pharmaceutical Policymaking: A Scoping Review with Implications for Best-Value Biological Medicines," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 803-817, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00751-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00751-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-022-00751-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-022-00751-y?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. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    2. Levin, Irwin P. & Schneider, Sandra L. & Gaeth, Gary J., 1998. "All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 149-188, November.
    3. Jay Bhattacharya & Alan M. Garber & Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert, 2015. "Nudges in Exercise Commitment Contracts: A Randomized Trial," NBER Working Papers 21406, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Gillitzer, Christian & Sinning, Mathias, 2020. "Nudging businesses to pay their taxes: Does timing matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 284-300.
    2. Idris Adjerid & Sonam Samat & Alessandro Acquisti, 2016. "A Query-Theory Perspective of Privacy Decision Making," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(S2), pages 97-121.
    3. Laura Derksen & Jason T Kerwin & Natalia Ordaz Reynoso & Olivier Sterck, 2025. "Healthcare Appointments as Commitment Devices," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 135(665), pages 81-118.
    4. Zarko Kalamov & Marco Runkel, 2020. "Present-Focused Preferences and Sin Goods Consumption at the Extensive and Intensive Margins," CESifo Working Paper Series 8237, CESifo.
    5. Katharina Dowling & Daniel Guhl & Daniel Klapper & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich & Narine Yegoryan, 2020. "Behavioral biases in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 449-477, May.
    6. Muller, Paul & Habla, Wolfgang, 2018. "Experimental and non-experimental evidence on limited attention and present bias at the gym," Working Papers in Economics 743, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Samdruk Dharshing & Stefanie Lena Hille, 2017. "The Energy Paradox Revisited: Analyzing the Role of Individual Differences and Framing Effects in Information Perception," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 485-508, December.
    8. Tim Kaiser & Lukas Menkhoff & Luis Oberrauch, 2022. "Is Patience Malleable via Educational Intervention? Evidence from Field Experiments," CESifo Working Paper Series 10080, CESifo.
    9. Kemptner, Daniel & Tolan, Songül, 2018. "The role of time preferences in educational decision making," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 25-39.
    10. Lillemo, Shuling Chen, 2014. "Measuring the effect of procrastination and environmental awareness on households' energy-saving behaviours: An empirical approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 249-256.
    11. John Y. Campbell, 2016. "Restoring Rational Choice: The Challenge of Consumer Financial Regulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 1-30, May.
    12. Hinnosaar, Marit, 2016. "Time inconsistency and alcohol sales restrictions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 108-131.
    13. Humphreys, Brad & Ruseski, Jane & Zhou, Li, 2015. "Physical Activity, Present Bias, and Habit Formation: Theory and Evidence from Longitudinal Data," Working Papers 2015-6, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    14. Sorger, Gerhard, 2004. "Consistent planning under quasi-geometric discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 118-129, September.
    15. Luca De Gennaro Aquino & Sascha Desmettre & Yevhen Havrylenko & Mogens Steffensen, 2024. "Equilibrium control theory for Kihlstrom-Mirman preferences in continuous time," Papers 2407.16525, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    16. Feigenbaum, James, 2008. "Can mortality risk explain the consumption hump?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 844-872, September.
    17. Christopher D. Carroll, 2000. "Requiem for the Representative Consumer? Aggregate Implications of Microeconomic Consumption Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 110-115, May.
    18. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    19. Stephen L. Cheung & Agnieszka Tymula & Xueting Wang, 2022. "Present bias for monetary and dietary rewards," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1202-1233, September.
    20. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.

    More about this item

    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:spr:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00751-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.