IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/now/fntmic/0700000069.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral Economics of Multiperiod Insurance Purchasing Behavior: The Role of Emotions

Author

Listed:
  • Kunreuther, Howard
  • Pauly, Mark

Abstract

Consumers face many risky situations that can severely impact their wealth or health from one year to the next. People sometimes behave in inconsistent ways in such settings; many individuals faced with these risks do not consider purchasing insurance until after suffering a loss, but then they may cancel their policy a few years later if they have not had a claim (Kunreuther, Pauly, and McMorrow 2013). Our interest is in why a consumer, having decided whether or not to purchase insurance for a particular year, might change that decision over time – even if the person’s risk and insurance premium remain exactly the same every year in the future. In some circumstances (fire insurance, life insurance), many people renew their policies year after year in ways consistent with relevant tradeoffs that consider the likelihood and consequences of a particular risk in relation to the cost of the insurance. If these individuals make decisions systematically, they should not change their insurance decision over time if the probability, the premiums, and the consequences from the risk remain the same from year to year. However, we find that a significant number of people are swayed by their emotions and past experiences when making their future insurance decisions. This behavior is particularly common for risks that are classified as low-probability, high-consequence (LP-HC) events. Because consumers’ knowledge is incomplete, ambiguous, and biased by recent experience, they may rely on their intuition to decide whether to buy, keep, drop, or change the extent of their insurance coverage. Potential buyers may not face an identical set of circumstances year after year. Loss probabilities may change over time (for example, due to global warming, build-up of earthquake stresses, or onset of a chronic health condition). Buyers may be confused about whether experiencing a major loss tells them something about future probabilities, even if they are explicitly informed as to the potential damage from a future low probability event. Having suffered a personal loss may affect how the person feels about next year’s coverage. The interplay between changing expectations about next period’s risk and willingness to buy insurance can, in theory and in practice, affect buyer behavior in many different ways.

Suggested Citation

  • Kunreuther, Howard & Pauly, Mark, 2018. "Behavioral Economics of Multiperiod Insurance Purchasing Behavior: The Role of Emotions," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 12(2), pages 109–199-1, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:now:fntmic:0700000069
    DOI: 10.1561/0700000069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/0700000069
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1561/0700000069?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman & Alan Schwartz, 1997. "The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 647-661.
    2. Pauly, Mark V. & Kunreuther, Howard, 2019. "Responses to losses in high-deductible health insurance: persistence, emotions, and rationality," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 72-86, May.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:3:p:237-245 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    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. Laura Hueber & Rene Schwaiger, 2021. "Debiasing Through Experience Sampling: The Case of Myopic Loss Aversion," Working Papers 2021-01, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    2. Heutel, Garth, 2019. "Prospect theory and energy efficiency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-254.
    3. Hopfensitz, Astrid, 2009. "Previous outcomes and reference dependence: A meta study of repeated investment tasks with and without restricted feedback," MPRA Paper 16096, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Miklós Antal & Ardjan Gazheli & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2012. "Behavioural Foundations of Sustainability Transitions. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 3," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 46424, April.
    5. Anbarci, Nejat & Arin, K. Peren & Kuhlenkasper, Torben & Zenker, Christina, 2018. "Revisiting loss aversion: Evidence from professional tennis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-18.
    6. Ido Erev & Sharon Gilat-Yihyie & Davide Marchiori & Doron Sonsino, 2015. "On loss aversion, level-1 reasoning, and betting," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(1), pages 113-133, February.
    7. Di Guida, Sibilla & Marchiori, Davide & Erev, Ido, 2012. "Decisions among defaults and the effect of the option to do nothing," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 790-793.
    8. Hueber, Laura & Schwaiger, Rene, 2022. "Debiasing through experience sampling: The case of myopic loss aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 87-138.
    9. Jérôme Boutang & Michel de Lara, 2016. "Risk Marketing," Working Papers hal-01353821, HAL.
    10. Ugo Panizza, 2015. "Billions on the Sidewalk: Improving Savings by Reducing Investment Mistakes," IHEID Working Papers 18-2015, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    11. Kevin Lee & Scott Miller & Nicole Velasquez & Christi Wann, 2013. "The Effect of Investor Bias and Gender on Portfolio Performance and Risk," The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:214-235 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Eyal Ert & Ido Erev, 2010. "On the Descriptive Value of Loss Aversion in Decisions under Risk," Harvard Business School Working Papers 10-056, Harvard Business School.
    14. David de Meza & David C. Webb, 2007. "Incentive Design under Loss Aversion," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 5(1), pages 66-92, March.
    15. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    16. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    17. Dupont, Dominique Y., 2001. "The Endowment Effect, Status Quo Bias and Loss Aversion: Rational Alternative Explanation," Economics Series 92, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    18. Hopfensitz, Astrid, 2009. "Previous Outcomes and Reference Dependence: A Meta Study of Repeated Investment Tasks with Restricted Feedback," TSE Working Papers 09-087, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    19. Lee, Boram & Veld-Merkoulova, Yulia, 2016. "Myopic loss aversion and stock investments: An empirical study of private investors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 235-246.
    20. Miroslav Ferenèak & Dušan Dobromirov & Mladen Radišiæ & Aleksandar Takaèi, 2018. "Aversion to a sure loss: turning investors into gamblers," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 36(2), pages 537-557.
    21. Eyal Ert & Ido Erev, 2013. "On the descriptive value of loss aversion in decisions under risk: Six clarifications," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 214-235, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Insurance; Health Economics; Behavioral economics; Biases; Heuristics; Individual Decision Making;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D10 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private

    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:now:fntmic:0700000069. 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: Lucy Wiseman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nowpublishers.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.