IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v37y2014icp118-129.html

On the role of verifiability and commitment in credence goods markets

Author

Listed:
  • Fong, Yuk-fai
  • Liu, Ting
  • Wright, Donald J.

Abstract

A client has a problem, but does not know whether it is serious or minor. She consults an expert who can correctly diagnose and fix her problem. This paper characterizes the equilibrium pricing and recommendation strategies of an expert under the assumptions that i) the type of treatment is verifiable by the client, ii) the client has the option of rejecting any treatment recommendation, and iii) the expert is not liable for the outcome of the treatment. It is found, for any parameter configuration, that there exist equilibria in which the expert makes fraudulent recommendations resulting in inefficient treatment. The market outcome is compared with that under an alternative market environment in which the expert is liable for treatment outcome but the type of treatment performed is non-verifiable. It is shown that for some parameter configurations the equilibrium is more efficient when liability is in place than when the treatment is verifiable. These findings stand in sharp contrast to the received wisdom that the market outcome under verifiability of treatment is efficient while the market outcome under liability for outcome is not. Finally, this paper shows that the existence of some honest experts may induce more fraudulent behavior by opportunistic experts.

Suggested Citation

  • Fong, Yuk-fai & Liu, Ting & Wright, Donald J., 2014. "On the role of verifiability and commitment in credence goods markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 118-129.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:37:y:2014:i:c:p:118-129
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2014.08.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167718714000848
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2014.08.004?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Winand Emons, 1997. "Credence Goods and Fraudelent Experts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(1), pages 107-119, Spring.
    2. Yuk-fai Fong, 2005. "When Do Experts Cheat and Whom Do They Target?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
    3. Asher Wolinsky, 1993. "Competition in a Market for Informed Experts' Services," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(3), pages 380-398, Autumn.
    4. Dulleck, Uwe & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2009. "Experts vs. discounters: Consumer free-riding and experts withholding advice in markets for credence goods," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 15-23, January.
    5. Henry S. Schneider, 2012. "Agency Problems and Reputation in Expert Services: Evidence from Auto Repair," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 406-433, September.
    6. Ting Liu, 2011. "Credence Goods Markets With Conscientious And Selfish Experts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(1), pages 227-244, February.
    7. Emons, Winand, 2001. "Credence goods monopolists," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 375-389, March.
    8. Ingela Alger & François Salanié, 2006. "A Theory of Fraud and Overtreatment in Experts Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 853-881, December.
    9. Currie, Janet & Lin, Wanchuan & Zhang, Wei, 2011. "Patient knowledge and antibiotic abuse: Evidence from an audit study in China," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 933-949.
    10. McGuire, Thomas G., 2000. "Physician agency," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 461-536, Elsevier.
    11. Kai Sülzle & Achim Wambach, 2005. "Insurance in a Market for Credence Goods," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 72(1), pages 159-176, March.
    12. Pitchik, Carolyn & Schotter, Andrew, 1988. "Honesty in a Model of Strategic Information Transmission: Correction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1164-1164, December.
    13. Dranove, David, 1988. "Demand Inducement and the Physician/Patient Relationship," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(2), pages 281-298, April.
    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. Dominik Erharter, 2012. "Credence goods markets, distributional preferences and the role of institutions," Working Papers 2012-11, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    2. Uwe Dulleck & Rudolf Kerschbamer & Alexander Konovalov, 2024. "Too Much or Too Little? Price Discrimination in a Market for Credence Goods," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 180(1), pages 106-143.
    3. Helmut Bester & Matthias Dahm, 2018. "Credence Goods, Costly Diagnosis and Subjective Evaluation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(611), pages 1367-1394, June.
    4. Bester, Helmut & Ouyang, Yaofu, 2018. "Optimal procurement of a credence good under limited liability," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 96-129.
    5. Yiran Cao & Yongmin Chen & Yucheng Ding & Tianle Zhang, 2026. "Search and Competition in Expert Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 57(1), pages 158-175, March.
    6. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2022. "Seller Opportunism in Credence Good Markets – The Role of Market Conditions," Working Papers 2022-10, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    7. Liu, Ting & Ma, Ching-to Albert, 2024. "Equilibrium information in credence goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 84-101.
    8. David Bardey & Denis Gromb & David Martimort & Jérôme Pouyet, 2020. "Controlling Sellers Who Provide Advice: Regulation and Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 409-444, September.
    9. Yongmin Chen & Jianpei Li & Jin Zhang, 2022. "Efficient Liability In Expert Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1717-1744, November.
    10. Liu, Fang & Rasch, Alexander & Schwarz, Marco A. & Waibel, Christian, 2025. "The role of diagnostic ability in markets for expert services," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    11. Balafoutas, Loukas & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2020. "Credence goods in the literature: What the past fifteen years have taught us about fraud, incentives, and the role of institutions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    12. Dulleck, Uwe & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2009. "Experts vs. discounters: Consumer free-riding and experts withholding advice in markets for credence goods," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 15-23, January.
    13. Martin Obradovits & Philipp Plaickner, 2024. "Searching for Treatment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 180(1), pages 144-186.
    14. Li, Jianpei & Ouyang, Yaofu, 2016. "Expert Costs and the Role of Verifiability," MPRA Paper 74390, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Schneider, Tim & Meub, Lukas & Bizer, Kilian, 2021. "Consumer information in a market for expert services: Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    16. Colombo, Ferdinando & Ursino, Giovanni, 2025. "Beliefs, credence goods and information campaigns," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    17. Hyndman, Kyle & Ozerturk, Saltuk, 2011. "Consumer information in a market for expert services," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 628-640.
    18. Ouyang, Yaofu, 2016. "Credence Goods, Risk Averse, and Optimal Insurance," MPRA Paper 70392, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alexander Frankel & Michael Schwarz, 2009. "Experts and Their Records," NBER Working Papers 14921, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Vincze, János, 2010. "Miért és mitől védjük a fogyasztókat?. Aszimmetrikus információ és/vagy korlátozott racionalitás [Asymmetric information and/or bounded rationality: why are consumers protected and from what?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 725-752.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design

    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:eee:indorg:v:37:y:2014:i:c:p:118-129. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505551 .

    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.