IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/nbr/nberwo/22765.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Inattention and Switching Costs as Sources of Inertia in Medicare Part D

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Johannes Johnen, 2019. "Automatic‐renewal contracts with heterogeneous consumer inertia," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 765-786, November.
  2. Martin Gaynor & Kate Ho & Robert J. Town, 2015. "The Industrial Organization of Health-Care Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 235-284, June.
  3. Sébastien Houde & Erica Myers, 2019. "Heterogeneous (Mis-) Perceptions of Energy Costs: Implications for Measurement and Policy Design," NBER Working Papers 25722, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Jason Abaluck & Abi Adams, 2017. "What Do Consumers Consider Before They Choose? Identification from Asymmetric Demand Responses," NBER Working Papers 23566, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Victor H. Aguiar & Maria Jose Boccardi & Nail Kashaev & Jeongbin Kim, 2023. "Random utility and limited consideration," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(1), pages 71-116, January.
  6. Jason Abaluck & Mauricio Caceres Bravo & Peter Hull: & Amanda Starc, 2021. "Mortality Effects and Choice Across Private Health Insurance Plans," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(3), pages 1557-1610.
  7. Anell, Anders & Dietrichson, Jens & Ellegård, Lina Maria & Kjellsson, Gustav, 2021. "Information, switching costs, and consumer choice: Evidence from two randomised field experiments in Swedish primary health care," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
  8. Tamara Bischof & Christian P.R. Schmid, 2018. "Consumer price sensitivity and health plan choice in a regulated competition setting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(9), pages 1366-1379, September.
  9. Kaufmann, Cornel & Müller, Tobias & Hefti, Andreas & Boes, Stefan, 2018. "Does personalized information improve health plan choices when individuals are distracted?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 197-214.
  10. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Matthew Thirkettle, 2021. "Discrete Choice under Risk with Limited Consideration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(6), pages 1972-2006, June.
  11. Kashaev, Nail & Aguiar, Victor H., 2022. "A random attention and utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
  12. Altmann, Steffen & Grunewald, Andreas & Radbruch, Jonas, 2019. "Passive Choices and Cognitive Spillovers," IZA Discussion Papers 12337, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  13. Withagen-Koster, Anja A. & van Kleef, Richard C. & Eijkenaar, Frank, 2023. "Predictable profits and losses in a health insurance market with risk equalization: A multiple-contract period perspective," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
  14. Jason Abaluck & Abi Adams, 2017. "What do consumers consider before they choose? Identification from asymmetric demand responses," IFS Working Papers W17/09, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  15. Gibbard, Peter, 2021. "Disentangling preferences and limited attention: Random-utility models with consideration sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
  16. Sai Krishnan S. & Subramanian S. Iyer & Sai Balaji SMR, 2022. "Insights from behavioral economics for policymakers of choice‐based health insurance markets: A scoping review," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 115-143, June.
  17. Levon Barseghyan & Maura Coughlin & Francesca Molinari & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2021. "Heterogeneous Choice Sets and Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2015-2048, September.
  18. Steffen Altmann & Christian Traxler & Philipp Weinschenk, 2017. "Deadlines and Cognitive Limitations," CESifo Working Paper Series 6761, CESifo.
  19. Crawford, Gregory S. & Griffith, Rachel & Iaria, Alessandro, 2021. "A survey of preference estimation with unobserved choice set heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 4-43.
  20. Francesco Decarolis & Andrea Guglielmo & Clavin Luscombe, 2020. "Open enrollment periods and plan choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(7), pages 733-747, July.
  21. Deuflhard, Florian, 2018. "Quantifying inertia in retail deposit markets," SAFE Working Paper Series 223, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
  22. Goldin, Jacob & Reck, Daniel, 2018. "Rationalizations and mistakes: optimal policy with normative ambiguity," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 89237, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  23. Ito, Yuki & Hara, Konan & Kobayashi, Yasuki, 2020. "The effect of inertia on brand-name versus generic drug choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 364-379.
  24. Atherly Adam & Feldman Roger D. & Dowd Bryan & van den Broek-Altenburg Eline, 2020. "Switching Costs in Medicare Advantage," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(1), pages 1-14, June.
  25. M. Kate Bundorf & Maria Polyakova & Ming Tai-Seale, 2019. "How do Humans Interact with Algorithms? Experimental Evidence from Health Insurance," NBER Working Papers 25976, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Zarek Brot-Goldberg & Timothy Layton & Boris Vabson & Adelina Yanyue Wang, 2023. "The Behavioral Foundations of Default Effects: Theory and Evidence from Medicare Part D," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(10), pages 2718-2758, October.
  27. Martin, Simon, 2020. "Market transparency and consumer search - Evidence from the German retail gasoline market," DICE Discussion Papers 350, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.