IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v11y2023i12p216-d1298799.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Preferences for Health Services Offered by Health Insurance Companies in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Raphael Schilling

    (Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Deloitte Consulting GmbH, 40476 Düsseldorf, Germany)

  • Milena Pavlova

    (Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 Maastricht, The Netherlands)

  • Andrea Karaman

    (Deloitte Consulting GmbH, 40476 Düsseldorf, Germany)

Abstract

German health insurance companies increasingly strive to position themselves as health partners to their customers to improve customers’ health and contain costs. However, there is uncertainty about customers’ preferences for health services offered by health insurance companies. Therefore, this paper studies consumer preferences for health services that are or could be provided by health insurance companies in Germany. An online survey was conducted using two stated preference techniques to collect and analyze the data (namely, rating and ranking of health services considered by insurance companies). A sample of 880 German health insurance customers between 18 and 65 years old filled out the online questionnaire, of which 860 submitted complete responses. Ordinal logistic regression analysis was used for the rating and ranking. Preliminary examinations, care management, and health programs were the three health services most important to the respondents. The results suggest that people want their health insurance to support them with preventive health services that offer direct therapeutic value and not just informational, economic, access-related, or convenience-related benefits. These preferences for health services are homogeneous for most subgroups of the population, implying that health insurance companies could consider an overall strategy to address these preferences for all clients by focusing on the important health services.

Suggested Citation

  • Raphael Schilling & Milena Pavlova & Andrea Karaman, 2023. "Consumer Preferences for Health Services Offered by Health Insurance Companies in Germany," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-27, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2023:i:12:p:216-:d:1298799
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/12/216/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/12/216/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Toni Meier & Karolin Senftleben & Peter Deumelandt & Olaf Christen & Katja Riedel & Martin Langer, 2015. "Healthcare Costs Associated with an Adequate Intake of Sugars, Salt and Saturated Fat in Germany: A Health Econometrical Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Abel, Thomas, 1991. "Measuring health lifestyles in a comparative analysis: Theoretical issues and empirical findings," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 899-908, January.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. D. Wade Hands, 2010. "Economics, psychology and the history of consumer choice theory," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(4), pages 633-648.
    5. Stephanie Stock & Björn Stollenwerk & Gabriele Klever-Deichert & Marcus Redaelli & Guido Büscher & Christian Graf & Klaus Möhlendick & Jan Mai & Andreas Gerber & Markus Lüngen & Karl Lauterbach, 2008. "Preliminary analysis of short term financial implications of a prevention bonus program: First results from the German statutory health insurance," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 53(2), pages 78-86, April.
    6. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    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. M. Vittoria Levati & Aaron Nicholas & Birendra Rai, 2011. "Testing the Analytical Framework of Other-Regarding Preferences," Monash Economics Working Papers 26-11, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    2. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    3. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    4. Ary José A. de Souza-Jr. & Flávio Terto, 2021. "The propensity to adaptation under the new era of climate changes," Working Papers REM 2021/0167, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    5. Julia M. Puaschunder, 2023. "Behavioral Economics for All: From Nudging to Leadership," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2022-2023 0293, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    6. Yan, Xiaoming & Zhao, Wenhan & Yu, Yugang, 2022. "Optimal product line design with reference price effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(3), pages 1045-1062.
    7. Julia Koch & Britta Frommeyer & Gerhard Schewe, 2020. "Online Shopping Motives during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Lessons from the Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Pessali, Huascar & Berger, Bruno, 2010. "A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano [Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect]," MPRA Paper 26104, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Paul Dolan & Daniel Kahneman, 2008. "Interpretations Of Utility And Their Implications For The Valuation Of Health," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 215-234, January.
    10. Robin Maialeh, 2019. "Generalization of results and neoclassical rationality: unresolved controversies of behavioural economics methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1743-1761, July.
    11. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    12. Stavros, Drakopoulos, 2021. "The Relation of Neoclassical Economics to other Disciplines: The case of Physics and Psychology," MPRA Paper 106597, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. M. Vittoria Levati & Aaron Nicholas & Birendra Rai, 2011. "Testing the Framework of Other-Regarding Preferences," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-041, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    14. Múñoz, Féliz-Fernando & Encinar, María-Isabel & Cañibano, Carolina, 2016. "Agents, interaction, and economic laws: An analytical framework for understanding different economic theories," Working Papers in Economic Theory 2016/05, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain), Department of Economic Analysis (Economic Theory and Economic History).
    15. Christopher Kops, 2018. "(F)Lexicographic shortlist method," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(1), pages 79-97, January.
    16. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    17. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "A Psychological Perspective on Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 162-168, May.
    18. Wang, Jian & Iversen, Tor & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Godager, Geir, 2020. "Are patient-regarding preferences stable? Evidence from a laboratory experiment with physicians and medical students from different countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    19. Norbert Hirschauer & Mira Lehberger & Oliver Musshoff, 2015. "Happiness and Utility in Economic Thought—Or: What Can We Learn from Happiness Research for Public Policy Analysis and Public Policy Making?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 647-674, April.
    20. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 593-616, June.

    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:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2023:i:12:p:216-:d:1298799. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.