IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/oslohe/2021_001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does gender affect medical decisions? Results from a behavioral experiment with physicians and medical students

Author

Listed:
  • Godager, Geir

    (Department of Health Management and Health Economics)

  • Hennig-Schmidt, Heike

    (BonnEconLab, University of Bonn, Germany)

  • Li, Jing Jing

    (Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong, China)

  • Wang, Jian

    (Dong Fureng Institute of Economic and Social Development, Wuhan University, China)

  • Yang, Fan

    (Department of Health Management and Health Economics)

Abstract

It is rarely the case that differences in behaviors of females and males are described under a ceteris paribus condition, and behaviors can potentially be influenced by the environment in which decisions are made. In the case of medical decisions, physicians are expected to account for patient characteristics as well as observed and unobserved contextual factors, such as whether the patient has a healthy lifestyle. Since one usually do not randomize physicians to context, reported gender differences in medical practice can have several alternative interpretations. A key question is whether the medical treatment of a given patient is expected to depend on the gender of the physician. To address this question, we quantify gender effects using data from an incentivized laboratory experiment, where Chinese medical doctors and Chinese medical students choose medical treatment under different payment schemes. We estimate preference parameters of females and males assuming decision-makers have patient-regarding preferences. We cannot reject the hypothesis that gender differences in treatment choices are absent. Preference parameters of females and males are not statistically different in a log-likelihood ratio test, and there is no evidence that the degree of randomness in choices differs between genders. The absence of gender effects in the laboratory, where choice context is fixed, provides nuance to previous findings on gender differences, and highlights the general difficulty of separating individuals’ behavior from the context they are in.

Suggested Citation

  • Godager, Geir & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Li, Jing Jing & Wang, Jian & Yang, Fan, 2021. "Does gender affect medical decisions? Results from a behavioral experiment with physicians and medical students," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2021:1, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:oslohe:2021_001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.med.uio.no/helsam/forskning/nettverk/hero/publikasjoner/skriftserie/2021/hero_publisering_1_2021.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Godager, Geir & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Iversen, Tor, 2016. "Does performance disclosure influence physicians’ medical decisions? An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 36-46.
    2. Jeannette Brosig‐Koch & Heike Hennig‐Schmidt & Nadja Kairies‐Schwarz & Daniel Wiesen, 2017. "The Effects of Introducing Mixed Payment Systems for Physicians: Experimental Evidence," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 243-262, February.
    3. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2010. "Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of Competition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 129-144, Spring.
    4. Falk, Armin & Hermle, Johannes, 2018. "Relationship of Gender Differences in Preferences to Economic Development and Gender Equality," IZA Discussion Papers 12059, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Cadsby, C. Bram & Servátka, Maroš & Song, Fei, 2013. "How competitive are female professionals? A tale of identity conflict," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 284-303.
    6. Godager, Geir & Wiesen, Daniel, 2013. "Profit or patients’ health benefit? Exploring the heterogeneity in physician altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1105-1116.
    7. Geir Godager & Tor Iversen & Ching-To Ma, 2009. "Service motives and profit incentives among physicians," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 39-57, March.
    8. James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312.
    9. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "Differences in the Economic Decisions of Men and Women: Experimental Evidence," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 57, pages 509-519, Elsevier.
    10. David Klinowski, 2018. "Gender differences in giving in the Dictator Game: the role of reluctant altruism," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 4(2), pages 110-122, December.
    11. Ma, Ching-to Albert, 1994. "Health Care Payment Systems: Cost and Quality Incentives," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 93-112, Spring.
    12. Wang, Jian & Iversen , Tor & Hennig-Schmidt , Heike & Godager , Geir, 2019. "Are patient-regarding preferences stable?," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2020:2, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme, revised 02 Mar 2020.
    13. Arne Hole & Julie Kolstad, 2012. "Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 445-469, April.
    14. Scarpa, R. & Thiene, M. & Train, K., 2008. "Appendix to Utility in WTP space: a tool to address confounding random scale effects in destination choice to the Alps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1-9, January.
    15. Godager, Geir & Iversen, Tor & Ma, Ching-to Albert, 2015. "Competition, gatekeeping, and health care access," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 159-170.
    16. Michael Visser & Matthew Roelofs, 2011. "Heterogeneous preferences for altruism: gender and personality, social status, giving and taking," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(4), pages 490-506, November.
    17. John K. Dagsvik, 2016. "What independent random utility representations are equivalent to the IIA assumption?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(3), pages 495-499, March.
    18. Arne Risa Hole, 2006. "Small-sample properties of tests for heteroscedasticity in the conditional logit model," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(18), pages 1-14.
    19. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521766555 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Riska, Elianne, 2001. "Towards gender balance: but will women physicians have an impact on medicine?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 179-187, January.
    21. Dagsvik, John K., 2018. "Invariance axioms and functional form restrictions in structural models," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 85-95.
    22. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    23. 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).
    24. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    25. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521747387 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Iversen, Tor & Lurås, Hilde, 2011. "Patient switching in general practice," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 894-903.
    27. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2012. "Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1225-1239, November.
    28. Scott, Anthony, 2000. "Economics of general practice," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 22, pages 1175-1200, Elsevier.
    29. Mickael Bech & Trine Kjaer & Jørgen Lauridsen, 2011. "Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 273-286, March.
    30. Yuanyuan Gu & Arne Risa Hole & Stephanie Knox, 2013. "Fitting the generalized multinomial logit model in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(2), pages 382-397, June.
    31. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Kokot, Johanna & Wiesen, Daniel, 2020. "Physician performance pay: Experimental evidence," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2020:3, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
    32. Dagsvik, John K., 2008. "Axiomatization of stochastic models for choice under uncertainty," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 341-370, May.
    33. Ellis, Randall P. & McGuire, Thomas G., 1986. "Provider behavior under prospective reimbursement : Cost sharing and supply," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 129-151, June.
    34. Gong, Binglin & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2012. "Gender differences in risk attitudes: Field experiments on the matrilineal Mosuo and the patriarchal Yi," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 59-65.
    35. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Kenneth Train, 2008. "Utility in Willingness to Pay Space: A Tool to Address Confounding Random Scale Effects in Destination Choice to the Alps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 994-1010.
    36. A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), 2000. "Handbook of Health Economics," Handbook of Health Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    37. Geir Godager & Hilde Lurås, 2009. "Dual job holding general practitioners: the effect of patient shortage," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(10), pages 1133-1145, October.
    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. Oxholm, Anne Sophie & Di Guida, Sibilla & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2021. "Allocation of health care under pay for performance: Winners and losers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).

    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. 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).
    2. Waibel, Christian & Wiesen, Daniel, 2021. "An experiment on referrals in health care," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    3. Ge, Ge & Godager, Geir, 2021. "Predicting strategic medical choices: An application of a quantal response equilibrium choice model," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    4. Attema, Arthur E. & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Groß, Mona & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Karay, Yassin & L’Haridon, Olivier & Wiesen, Daniel, 2023. "The formation of physician altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. Riise, Julie & Hole, Arne Risa & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte & Skåtun, Diane, 2016. "GPs' implicit prioritization through clinical choices – evidence from three national health services," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 169-183.
    6. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Groß, Mona & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Wiesen, Daniel, 2021. "Physicians' incentives, patients' characteristics, and quality of care: A systematic experimental comparison of fee-for-service, capitation, and pay for performance," Ruhr Economic Papers 923, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    7. Oxholm, Anne Sophie & Di Guida, Sibilla & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2021. "Allocation of health care under pay for performance: Winners and losers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    8. Jeannette Brosig‐Koch & Burkhard Hehenkamp & Johanna Kokot, 2017. "The effects of competition on medical service provision," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 6-20, December.
    9. Anthony Scott & Peter Sivey, 2022. "Motivation and competition in health care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(8), pages 1695-1712, August.
    10. Godager, Geir & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Iversen, Tor, 2016. "Does performance disclosure influence physicians’ medical decisions? An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 36-46.
    11. Godager , Geir & Scott, Anthony, 2023. "Physician Behavior and Health Outcomes," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2023:3, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
    12. Simon Reif & Lucas Hafner & Michael Seebauer, 2020. "Physician Behavior under Prospective Payment Schemes—Evidence from Artefactual Field and Lab Experiments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-37, July.
    13. Ge Ge & Geir Godager & Jian Wang, 2022. "Exploring physician agency under demand‐side cost sharing—An experimental approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(6), pages 1202-1227, June.
    14. Li, JingJing & Godager, Geir & Wang, Jian, 2016. "Does physician gender influence the provision of medical care? An experimental study," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2016:6, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
    15. Jeannette Brosig‐Koch & Burkhard Hehenkamp & Johanna Kokot, 2023. "Who benefits from quality competition in health care? A theory and a laboratory experiment on the relevance of patient characteristics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(8), pages 1785-1817, August.
    16. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Kokot, Johanna & Wiesen, Daniel, 2024. "A new look at physicians’ responses to financial incentives: Quality of care, practice characteristics, and motivations," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Giacomo Pallante & Adam Drucker, 2014. "Niche Markets for Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Preference and Scale Heterogeneity Effects on Nepalese Consumers’ WTP for Finger Millet Products," SEEDS Working Papers 1414, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.
    18. Kohei Imamura & Kohei Takenaka Takano & Nobuhito Mori & Tohru Nakashizuka & Shunsuke Managi, 2016. "Attitudes toward disaster-prevention risk in Japanese coastal areas: analysis of civil preference," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 82(1), pages 209-226, May.
    19. Crea, Giovanni & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Linnosmaa, Ismo & Miraldo, Marisa, 2019. "Physician altruism and moral hazard: (no) Evidence from Finnish national prescriptions data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 153-169.
    20. Rebecca Owusu Coffie & Michael P. Burton & Fiona L. Gibson & Atakelty Hailu, 2016. "Choice of Rice Production Practices in Ghana: A Comparison of Willingness to Pay and Preference Space Estimates," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 799-819, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Gender; Laboratory experiment; Bounded rationality; Physician behavior;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • H40 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - General
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods

    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:hhs:oslohe:2021_001. 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: Kristi Brinkmann Lenander (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/heuiono.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.