Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rut/rutres/201410.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Information Presentation and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Success Rates Reports

Author

Listed:
  • Bingxiao Wu

    (Rutgers University)

Abstract
Prior literature on quality disclosure focuses on whether information provision affects consumer choice. This paper extends this research and explores whether information presentation affects consumer responsiveness in the context of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) reports. I find that after CDC releases quality information on both “success rate” and “multiple-birth rate,” with the former highlighted, consumers only respond to “success rate;” after CDC changes the format by highlighting “multiple-birth rate,” consumers start to choose clinics with lower “multiple-birth rates.” It implies that proper design of information presentation is crucial in determining the effectiveness of public reporting.

Suggested Citation

  • Bingxiao Wu, 2014. "Information Presentation and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Success Rates Reports," Departmental Working Papers 201410, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:rut:rutres:201410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sas.rutgers.edu/virtual/snde/wp/2014-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bettman, James R & Kakkar, Pradeep, 1977. "Effects of Information Presentation Format on Consumer Information Acquisition Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 3(4), pages 233-240, March.
    2. Bundorf, M. Kate & Chun, Natalie & Goda, Gopi Shah & Kessler, Daniel P., 2009. "Do markets respond to quality information? The case of fertility clinics," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 718-727, May.
    3. Mandel, Naomi & Johnson, Eric J, 2002. "When Web Pages Influence Choice: Effects of Visual Primes on Experts and Novices," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(2), pages 235-245, September.
    4. Lussier, Denis A & Olshavsky, Richard W, 1979. "Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Brand Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 6(2), pages 154-165, Se.
    5. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2001. "The Internet and the Investor," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 41-54, Winter.
    6. Hong, Sung-Tai & Wyer, Robert S, Jr, 1989. "Effects of Country-of-Origin and Product-Attribute Information on Product Evaluation: An Information Processing Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 175-187, September.
    7. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    8. Rashi Glazer & Joel H. Steckel & Russell S. Winer, 1992. "Locally Rational Decision Making: The Distracting Effect of Information on Managerial Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 212-226, February.
    9. Zeithaml, Valarie A, 1982. "Consumer Response to In-Store Price Information Environments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(4), pages 357-369, March.
    10. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    11. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    12. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2002. "Online Investors: Do the Slow Die First?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(2), pages 455-488, March.
    13. Dilip Soman & Mengze Shi, 2003. "Virtual Progress: The Effect of Path Characteristics on Perceptions of Progress and Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1229-1250, September.
    14. David Dranove & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2010. "Quality Disclosure and Certification: Theory and Practice," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(4), pages 935-963, December.
    15. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    16. Leemore Dafny & David Dranove, 2008. "Do report cards tell consumers anything they don't already know? The case of Medicare HMOs," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 790-821, September.
    17. Michael R. Hagerty & David A. Aaker, 1984. "A Normative Model of Consumer Information Processing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 227-246.
    18. Smith, Gerald E. & Venkatraman, Meera P. & Dholakia, Ruby Roy, 1999. "Diagnosing the search cost effect: Waiting time and the moderating impact of prior category knowledge," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 285-314, June.
    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. Bingxiao Wu, 2019. "Information presentation and consumer choice: Evidence from Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Success Rate Reports," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(7), pages 868-883, July.
    2. Van Parys, Jessica & Brown, Zach Y., 2024. "Broadband Internet access and health outcomes: Patient and provider responses in Medicare," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    3. Mariétou H. Ouayogodé & Kurt E. Schnier, 2021. "Patient selection in the presence of regulatory oversight based on healthcare report cards of providers: the case of organ transplantation," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 160-184, March.
    4. Zhao, Xin, 2016. "Competition, information, and quality: Evidence from nursing homes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 136-152.
    5. Adalja, Aaron A., 2022. "Voluntary Quality Disclosure in Credence Good Markets," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322570, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Susan Feng Lu, 2012. "Multitasking, Information Disclosure, and Product Quality: Evidence from Nursing Homes," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 673-705, September.
    7. Chan, Tat Y. & Narasimhan, Chakravarthi & Yoon, Yeujun, 2017. "Advertising and price competition in a manufacturer-retailer channel," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 694-716.
    8. Fredriksen, Kaja & Runst, Petrik & Bizer, Kilian, 2017. "Masterful Meisters? Voluntary Certification and Quality in the German Crafts Sector," ifh Working Papers 3 (2017), Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh), revised 2017.
    9. Herr, A. & Saric, A., 2016. "The Welfare Effects of Single Rooms in German Nursing Homes: A Structural Approach," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 16/23, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    10. Lacaze, Maria Victoria & Gonzalez, Julia, 2012. "Implementation of a GAP Label in a Differentiated-Product Industry: A Welfare Evaluation with a Random Coefficients Model for Mar Del Plata, Argentina," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126397, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. DeSarbo, Wayne S. & Choi, Jungwhan, 1998. "A latent structure double hurdle regression model for exploring heterogeneity in consumer search patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 423-455, November.
    12. Lacaze, María Victoria & González, Julia, 2018. "New goods with new attributes: combining revealed and stated preferences to assess the effect of a novel quality label in the food industry," Nülan. Deposited Documents 2976, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    13. Kaja Fredriksen & Petrik Runst & Kilian Bizer, 2019. "Masterful Meisters? Voluntary Certification and Quality in the German Crafts Sector," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 20(1), pages 83-104, February.
    14. Manuel Frondel & Andreas Gerster & Colin Vance, 2020. "The Power of Mandatory Quality Disclosure: Evidence from the German Housing Market," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(1), pages 181-208.
    15. Stephen Gibbons & Eric Neumayer & Richard Perkins, 2013. "Student Satisfaction, League Tables and University Applications," SERC Discussion Papers 0142, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    16. Cuesta, José Ignacio & González, Felipe & Larroulet Philippi, Cristian, 2020. "Distorted quality signals in school markets," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    17. McCarthy, Ian M., 2018. "Quality disclosure and the timing of insurers’ adjustments: Evidence from medicare advantage," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 13-26.
    18. Werner, Rachel M. & Norton, Edward C. & Konetzka, R. Tamara & Polsky, Daniel, 2012. "Do consumers respond to publicly reported quality information? Evidence from nursing homes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 50-61.
    19. Gibbons, Stephen & Neumayer, Eric & Perkins, Richard, 2015. "Student satisfaction, league tables and university applications: Evidence from Britain," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 148-164.
    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

    Information Presentation; Quality Disclosure; Infertility;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:rut:rutres:201410. 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/derutus.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.