IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v87y2020i2p822-869..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Salience, Myopia, and Complex Dynamic Incentives: Evidence from Medicare Part D

Author

Listed:
  • Christina M Dalton
  • Gautam Gowrisankaran
  • Robert J Town

Abstract

The standard Medicare Part D drug insurance contract is non-linear—with reduced subsidies in a coverage gap—resulting in a dynamic purchase problem. We consider enrolees who arrived near the gap early in the year and show that they should expect to enter the gap with high probability, implying that, under a benchmark model with neoclassical preferences, the gap should impact them very little. We find that these enrolees have flat spending in a period before the doughnut hole and a large spending drop in the gap, providing evidence against the benchmark model. We structurally estimate behavioural dynamic drug purchase models and find that a price salience model where enrolees do not incorporate future prices into their decision-making at all fits the data best. For a nationally representative sample, full price salience would decrease enrolee spending by 31%. Entirely eliminating the gap would increase insurer spending 27%, compared to 7% for generic-drug-only gap coverage.

Suggested Citation

  • Christina M Dalton & Gautam Gowrisankaran & Robert J Town, 2020. "Salience, Myopia, and Complex Dynamic Incentives: Evidence from Medicare Part D," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(2), pages 822-869.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:87:y:2020:i:2:p:822-869.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdz023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Balbus, Łukasz & Reffett, Kevin & Woźny, Łukasz, 2022. "Time-consistent equilibria in dynamic models with recursive payoffs and behavioral discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    2. Klein, Tobias & Salm, Martin & Upadhyay, Suraj, 2020. "The Response to Dynamic Incentives in Insurance Contracts with a Deductible: Evidence from a Differences-in-Regression-Disconti," CEPR Discussion Papers 14552, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Andrew T. Ching & Matthew Osborne, 2020. "Identification and Estimation of Forward-Looking Behavior: The Case of Consumer Stockpiling," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 707-726, July.
    4. Li, Li & Jeuland, Marc, 2023. "Household water savings and response to dynamic incentives under nonlinear pricing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Hayen, Arthur P. & Klein, Tobias J. & Salm, Martin, 2021. "Does the framing of patient cost-sharing incentives matter? the effects of deductibles vs. no-claim refunds," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    6. Qianhong Lu & Xiaoqing Gan & Zhensheng Chen, 2023. "The Impact of Medical Insurance Payment Policy Reform on Medical Cost and Medical Burden in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    7. Sá, Luís & Straume, Odd Rune, 2021. "Quality provision in hospital markets with demand inertia: The role of patient expectations," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    8. Johansson, Naimi & de New, Sonja C. & Kunz, Johannes S. & Petrie, Dennis & Svensson, Mikael, 2023. "Reductions in out-of-pocket prices and forward-looking moral hazard in health care demand," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    9. Chernew, Michael & Cooper, Zack & Hallock, Eugene Larsen & Scott Morton, Fiona, 2021. "Physician agency, consumerism, and the consumption of lower-limb MRI scans," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    10. Klein, Tobias J. & Salm, Martin & Upadhyay, Suraj, 2022. "The response to dynamic incentives in insurance contracts with a deductible: Evidence from a differences-in-regression-discontinuities design," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    11. Chao Ma, 2021. "Be Cautious In The Last Month: The Sunk Cost Fallacy Held By Car Insurance Policyholders," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1199-1236, August.
    12. Johannes Abeler & David Huffman & Collin Raymond & David B. Huffman, 2023. "Incentive Complexity, Bounded Rationality and Effort Provision," CESifo Working Paper Series 10541, CESifo.
    13. Peter Spittal, 2022. "Benefit Salience and Labour Supply," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 22/764, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    14. Abeler, Johannes & Huffman, David B. & Raymond, Collin, 2023. "Incentive Complexity, Bounded Rationality and Effort Provision," IZA Discussion Papers 16284, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Klein, Tobias J. & Salm, Martin & Upadhyay, Suraj, 2024. "Patient Cost-Sharing and Redistribution in Health Insurance," IZA Discussion Papers 16778, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-linear prices; Cost sharing; Doughnut hole; Discontinuity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • L88 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Government Policy

    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:oup:restud:v:87:y:2020:i:2:p:822-869.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/restud .

    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.