Dynamic Insurance Decision-Making for Rare Events: The Role of Emotions

Howard Kunreuther1, Mark V. Pauly2
1Department of Operations, Information and Decisions, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA
2Department of Health Care Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA

Tóm tắt

This paper describes the results of a web-based experiment that uses respondents’ stated preferences for purchasing insurance for low-probability, high-consequence events where the probability of a loss and its consequences are stable over time. We contrast the predictions of a model of insurance choice based on expected utility [E(U)] maximisation with those of an alternative behavioural model. The majority of subjects reported insurance purchasing behaviour consistent with expected utility theory; however, a sizeable number of uninsured individuals decided to purchase insurance after learning that they had suffered a loss whereby they responded that their prior choice to be uninsured made them unhappy. In this sense, the study shows that a loss coupled with self-reported emotions linked to the loss is likely to play an important role in convincing some uninsured persons to buy coverage. In contrast, insured individuals who did not suffer a loss rarely dropped coverage.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Bell, D. (1982) ‘Regret in decision making under uncertainty’, Operations Research 30(5): 961–981. Bernheim, B.D. and Rangel, A. (2009) ‘Beyond revealed preference: Choice-theoretic foundations for behavioral welfare economics’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 124(1): 51–104. Bottom, W., Gibson, K., Daniels, S. and Murnighan, J.K. (2002) ‘When talk is not cheap: Substantive penance and expressions of intent in rebuilding cooperation’, Organizational Science 13(5): 497–513. Braun, M. and Muermann, A. (2004) ‘The impact of regret on the demand for insurance’, The Journal of Risk and Insurance 71(4): 737–767. Einav, L., Finkelstein, A., Pascu, I. and Cullen, M. (2012) ‘How general are risk preferences? Choices under uncertainty in different domains’, American Economic Review 102(6): 2606–2638. Fehr-Duda, H., Gennaro M. and Schubert R. (2006) ‘Gender, financial risk, and probability weights,’ Theory and Decision 60(2): 283–313. Finucane, M.L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P. and Johnson, S.M. (2000) ‘The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits’, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 13(1): 1–17. Gilovich, T. and Medvec, H. (1995) ‘The experience of regret: What, when and why’, Psychological Review 102(2): 379–395. Gul, F. and Pesendorfer, W. (2007) ‘Welfare without happiness’, The American Economic Review 97(2): 471–476. Hershey, J.C. and Schoemaker P.J.H. (1980) ‘Risk taking and problem context in the domain of losses: An expected utility analysis,’ The Journal of Risk and Insurance 47(1): 111–132. Hsee, C.K. and. Kunreuther H.C. (2000) ‘The affection effect in insurance decisions,’ Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 20(2): 141–159. Jaspersen, J.G. (2016). ‘Hypothetical surveys and experimental studies of insurance demand: A review.’ The Journal of Risk and Insurance 83(1): 217–255. Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Kőszegi, B. and Rabin, M. (2007) ‘Mistakes in choice-based welfare analysis’, The American Economic Review 97(2): 477–481 Kunreuther, H., Ginsberg, R., Miller, L., Sagi, P., Slovic, P., Borkan, B. and Katz, N. (1978) Disaster Insurance Protection: Public Policy Lessons. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Kunreuther, H., Pauly, M.V. and McMorrow, S. (2013) Insurance and Behavioral Economics: Improving Decisions in the Most Misunderstood Industry. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kusev, P., van Schaik P., Ayton P., Dent J. and Chater N. (2009) ‘Exaggerated risk: Prospect theory and probability weighting in risky choice,’ Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35(6): 1487–1505. Loewenstein, G.F., Weber, E.U., Hsee, C.K. and Welch, N. (2001) ‘Risk as feelings’, Psychological Bulletin 127(2): 267–286. Loomes, G. and Sugden, R. (1982) ‘Regret theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty’, Economic Journal 92(368): 805–824. Lount, R., Zhong, C., Sivanathan, N. and Murnighan, J.K. (2008) ‘Getting off on the wrong foot: The timing of a breach and the restoration of trust’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(12): 1601–1612. Lypny, G.J. (1993) ‘An experimental study of managerial pay and firm hedging decisions,’ The Journal of Risk and Insurance 60(2): 208–229. Madrian, B.C. and Shea, D.F. (2001) ‘The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation and saving behavior,’ The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(4): 1149–1187. Meyer, R. and Kunreuther, H. (2017) The Ostrich Paradox: Why We Underprepare for Disasters. Wharton Digital Press. Michel-Kerjan, E., Lemoyne de Forges, S. and Kunreuther, H. (2012) ‘Policy tenure under the U.S. National Flood Insurance Program’, Risk Analysis 32(4): 644–658. Neipp, J. and Zeckhauser, R. (1985) ‘Persistence in the choice of health plans’, Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research 6: 47–72. Oppenheimer, D., Meyvis, T. and Davidenko, N. (2009) ‘Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45(4): 867–872. Shiller, R. (2003) The New Financial Order: Risk in the 21st Century, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Thaler, R. and Sunstein, C. (2008) Nudge: The Gentle Power of Choice Architecture, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Wagenaar, W. and Keren, G. (1988) ‘Chance and luck are not the same’, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 1(2): 65–75.