IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/20886.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Insurance Decision-Making For Rare Events: The Role Of Emotions

Author

Listed:
  • Howard Kunreuther
  • Mark Pauly

Abstract

This paper describes the results of a web-based multi-period insurance purchasing experiment focusing on how individuals make insurance choices for low-probability, high-consequence events. Participants were told the probability and resulting losses of a hurricane occurring and were informed that these were stable from period to period. We contrast the model of informed expected utility [E(U)] maximization with alternative behavioral models of choice as explanations for what we observe. The majority of individuals (63 percent) behaved in ways that were consistent with expected utility theory, although we do not know whether these individuals were utilizing other decision rules. A sizeable number of uninsured individuals decided to purchase insurance after learning that they had suffered a loss and revealing that they were unhappy about having been uninsured. In this sense, the study shows that a loss coupled with emotions is likely to play an important role in convincing an uninsured person to buy coverage. In contrast, insured individuals who did not suffer a loss rarely dropped coverage. The paper concludes by raising questions regarding the welfare implications of this behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Howard Kunreuther & Mark Pauly, 2015. "Insurance Decision-Making For Rare Events: The Role Of Emotions," NBER Working Papers 20886, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:20886
    Note: TWP
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20886.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    2. Kunreuther,Howard C. & Pauly,Mark V. & McMorrow,Stacey, 2013. "Insurance and Behavioral Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521845724.
    3. Brigitte C. Madrian & Dennis F. Shea, 2001. "The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1149-1187.
    4. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2007. "Welfare without Happiness," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 471-476, May.
    5. William P. Bottom & Kevin Gibson & Steven E. Daniels & J. Keith Murnighan, 2002. "When Talk Is Not Cheap: Substantive Penance and Expressions of Intent in Rebuilding Cooperation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 497-513, October.
    6. Liran Einav & Amy Finkelstein & Iuliana Pascu & Mark R. Cullen, 2012. "How General Are Risk Preferences? Choices under Uncertainty in Different Domains," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2606-2638, October.
    7. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "Behavioral Welfare Economics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 267-319, 04-05.
    8. Kunreuther,Howard C. & Pauly,Mark V. & McMorrow,Stacey, 2013. "Insurance and Behavioral Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521608268.
    9. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2009. "Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 51-104.
    10. Michael Braun & Alexander Muermann, 2004. "The Impact of Regret on the Demand for Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 71(4), pages 737-767, December.
    11. Matthew Rabin & Botond Kőszegi, 2007. "Mistakes in Choice-Based Welfare Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 477-481, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Hudson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jennifer Poussin & Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts, 2019. "Impacts of Flooding and Flood Preparedness on Subjective Well-Being: A Monetisation of the Tangible and Intangible Impacts," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 665-682, February.
    2. Carolyn Kousky, 2017. "Disasters as Learning Experiences or Disasters as Policy Opportunities? Examining Flood Insurance Purchases after Hurricanes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 517-530, March.
    3. V. Shunmugasundaram & Aashna Sinha, 2022. "Behavioral Biases Influencing Investment Decisions of Life Insurance Investors," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 12(6), pages 107-112, November.

    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. Howard Kunreuther & Mark V. Pauly, 2018. "Dynamic Insurance Decision-Making for Rare Events: The Role of Emotions," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 335-355, April.
    2. Zheng, Jiakun, 2020. "Optimal insurance design under narrow framing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 596-607.
    3. Jean Philippe Platteau & Darwin Ugarte Ontiveros, 2013. "Understanding and Information Failures in Insurance: Evidence from India," Development Research Working Paper Series 07/2013, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    4. Platteau, Jean-Philippe & Ugarte Ontiveros, Darwin, 2017. "Cognitive Bias in Insurance: Evidence from India," CEPR Discussion Papers 12242, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Hiroki Nishimura, 2014. "The Transitive Core: Inference of Welfare from Nontransitive Preference Relations," Working Papers 201419, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics.
    6. Nishimura, Hiroki, 2018. "The transitive core: inference of welfare from nontransitive preference relations," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    7. Luca Congiu & Ivan Moscati, 2022. "A review of nudges: Definitions, justifications, effectiveness," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 188-213, February.
    8. Platteau, Jean-Philippe & Ugarte Ontiveros, Darwin, 2021. "Cognitive bias in insurance: Evidence from a health scheme in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    9. Breitmoser, Yves, 2016. "The axiomatic foundation of logit and its relation to behavioral welfare," MPRA Paper 71632, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Asen Ivanov, 2021. "Optimal pension plan default policies when employees are biased," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(3), pages 583-596, June.
    11. Goda, Gopi Shah & Manchester, Colleen Flaherty & Sojourner, Aaron J., 2014. "What will my account really be worth? Experimental evidence on how retirement income projections affect saving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 80-92.
    12. Markus Haavio & Kaisa Kotakorpi, 2012. "Sin Licenses Revisited," CESifo Working Paper Series 4010, CESifo.
    13. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    14. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester, 2015. "A Measure of Rationality and Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(6), pages 1278-1310.
    15. Franz Dietrich & Antonios Staras & Robert Sugden, 2021. "Savage’s response to Allais as Broomean reasoning," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 143-164, April.
    16. Heutel, Garth, 2019. "Prospect theory and energy efficiency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-254.
    17. Johannes Spinnewijn, 2017. "Heterogeneity, Demand for Insurance, and Adverse Selection," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 308-343, February.
    18. Löfgren, Åsa & Nordblom, Katarina, 2020. "A theoretical framework of decision making explaining the mechanisms of nudging," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 1-12.
    19. Ben McQuillin & Robert Sugden, 2012. "Reconciling normative and behavioural economics: the problems to be solved," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(4), pages 553-567, April.
    20. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:20886. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.