Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chu/wpaper/16-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Payment Scheme Self-Selection in the Credence Goods Market: An Experimental Study

Author

Listed:
  • Hernan Bejarano

    (CIDE and Economic Science Institute, Chapman University)

  • Ellen P. Green

    (School for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Arizona State University)

  • Stephen Rassenti

    (Economic Science Institute, Chapman University)

Abstract
Given heterogeneity in expert behavior across payment schemes in credence goods markets, it becomes important to understand the consequences of payment scheme selection. To study the effect on customer well being of expert self-selection, we recruited subjects to participate in a real-effort credence good laboratory market. Experts were either randomly assigned or faced with the choice of three payment schemes: fee-for-service, salary, and capitation. We found that experts who selected fee-for-service payment resulted in customers with significantly worse outcomes in comparison with experts who had been randomly assigned to fee-for-service. In contrast, experts who selected salary payment did not change customer outcomes relative to those who were randomly assigned.

Suggested Citation

  • Hernan Bejarano & Ellen P. Green & Stephen Rassenti, 2016. "Payment Scheme Self-Selection in the Credence Goods Market: An Experimental Study," Working Papers 16-04, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:chu:wpaper:16-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.chapman.edu/research-and-institutions/economic-science-institute/_files/WorkingPapers/Payment-Scheme-Self-Selection-in-the-Credence-Goods-Market1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:zbw:rwirep:0413 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Winand Emons, 1997. "Credence Goods and Fraudelent Experts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(1), pages 107-119, Spring.
    3. Mimra, Wanda & Rasch, Alexander & Waibel, Christian, 2016. "Price competition and reputation in credence goods markets: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 337-352.
    4. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk, 2011. "Performance Pay and Multidimensional Sorting: Productivity, Preferences, and Gender," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 556-590, April.
    5. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies, Nadja & Wiesen, Daniel, 2013. "How Effective are Pay-for-Performance Incentives for Physicians? – A Laboratory Experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 413, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    6. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Performance Pay and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1346-1361, December.
    7. Sorensen, Rune J. & Grytten, Jostein, 2003. "Service production and contract choice in primary physician services," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 73-93, October.
    8. Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Selten, Reinhard & Wiesen, Daniel, 2011. "How payment systems affect physicians' provision behaviour--An experimental investigation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 637-646, July.
    9. Devlin, Rose Anne & Sarma, Sisira, 2008. "Do physician remuneration schemes matter? The case of Canadian family physicians," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1168-1181, September.
    10. Martin Gaynor & Paul Gertler, 1995. "Moral Hazard and Risk Spreading in Partnerships," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(4), pages 591-613, Winter.
    11. Macpherson, David A. & Prasad, Kislaya & Salmon, Timothy C., 2014. "Deferred compensation vs. efficiency wages: An experimental test of effort provision and self-selection," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 90-107.
    12. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Wiesen, Daniel, 2016. "Using artefactual field and lab experiments to investigate how fee-for-service and capitation affect medical service provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 17-23.
    13. Matsaganis, Manos & Glennerster, Howard, 1994. "The threat of 'cream skimming' in the post-reform NHS," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 31-60, March.
    14. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González & Eric Schniter, 2015. "Why real leisure really matters: incentive effects on real effort in the laboratory," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 284-301, June.
    15. Green, Ellen P., 2014. "Payment systems in the healthcare industry: An experimental study of physician incentives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 367-378.
    16. Croxson, B. & Propper, C. & Perkins, A., 2001. "Do doctors respond to financial incentives? UK family doctors and the GP fundholder scheme," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 375-398, February.
    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. Bardey, David & Kembou, Samuel & Ventelou, Bruno, 2021. "Physicians’ incentives to adopt personalised medicine: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 686-713.
    2. Atehortua, S & Rodríguez-Valencia, A, 2021. "Physician s Allocation Preferences under Scarcity and Uncertainty," Documentos de Trabajo 19665, Universidad del Rosario.
    3. Manela Karunadasa & Katri K. Sieberg & Toni Tapani Kristian Jantunen, 2023. "Payment Systems, Supplier-Induced Demand, and Service Quality in Credence Goods: Results from a Laboratory Experiment," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-31, May.
    4. Jeannette Brosig‐Koch & Nadja Kairies‐Schwarz & Johanna Kokot, 2017. "Sorting into payment schemes and medical treatment: A laboratory experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 52-65, December.
    5. Agrawal, Anjali & Green, Ellen P. & Lavergne, Lisa, 2019. "Gender effects in the credence goods market: An experimental study," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 195-199.
    6. Green, Ellen P. & Kloosterman, Andrew, 2022. "Agent sorting by incentive systems in mission firms: Implications for healthcare and other credence goods markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 408-429.

    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. Castro, M.F.; & Ferrara, P.; & Guccio, C.; & Lisi, D.;, 2018. "Medical Malpractice Liability and Physicians’ Behavior:Experimental Evidence," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 18/11, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    2. Castro, Massimo Finocchiaro & Ferrara, Paolo Lorenzo & Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2019. "Medical malpractice liability and physicians’ behavior: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 646-666.
    3. Finocchiaro Castro, Massimo & Ferrara, Paolo Lorenzo & Guccio, Calogero & Lisi, Domenico, 2021. "Optimal mixed payment system and medical liability. A laboratory study," MPRA Paper 110276, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kurt R. Brekke & Tor Helge Holmäs & Karin Monstad & Odd Rune Straume, 2018. "How does the type of remuneration affect physician behaviour? Fixed salary versus fee-for-service," NIPE Working Papers 09/2018, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    5. Kurt R. Brekke & Tor Helge Holmås & Karin Monstad & Odd Rune Straume, 2020. "How Does The Type of Remuneration Affect Physician Behavior?," American Journal of Health Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(1), pages 104-138.
    6. Huck, Steffen & Lünser, Gabriele & Spitzer, Florian & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2016. "Medical insurance and free choice of physician shape patient overtreatment: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 78-105.
    7. Green, Ellen P., 2014. "Payment systems in the healthcare industry: An experimental study of physician incentives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 367-378.
    8. repec:zbw:rwirep:0529 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Jeannette Brosig-Koch & Nadja Kairies-Schwarz & Johanna Kokot, 2014. "Sorting into Physician Payment Schemes – A Laboratory Experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 0529, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    10. Jeannette Brosig‐Koch & Nadja Kairies‐Schwarz & Johanna Kokot, 2017. "Sorting into payment schemes and medical treatment: A laboratory experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 52-65, December.
    11. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Kokot, Johanna, 2014. "Sorting into Physician Payment Schemes – A Laboratory Experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 529, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    12. Cadena, Brian C. & Smith, Austin C., 2022. "Performance pay, productivity, and strategic opt-out: Evidence from a community health center," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    13. Cox, James C. & Sadiraj, Vjollca & Schnier, Kurt E. & Sweeney, John F., 2016. "Incentivizing cost-effective reductions in hospital readmission rates," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 24-35.
    14. Ben Greiner & Le Zhang & Chengxiang Tang, 2017. "Separation of prescription and treatment in health care markets: A laboratory experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 21-35, December.
    15. 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).
    16. Lagarde, Mylène & Blaauw, Duane, 2017. "Physicians’ responses to financial and social incentives: A medically framed real effort experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 147-159.
    17. 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.
    18. Agrawal, Anjali & Green, Ellen P. & Lavergne, Lisa, 2019. "Gender effects in the credence goods market: An experimental study," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 195-199.
    19. Green, Ellen P. & Kloosterman, Andrew, 2022. "Agent sorting by incentive systems in mission firms: Implications for healthcare and other credence goods markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 408-429.
    20. Bardey, David & Kembou, Samuel & Ventelou, Bruno, 2021. "Physicians’ incentives to adopt personalised medicine: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 686-713.
    21. Jostein Grytten & Dorthe Holst & Irene Skau, 2009. "Incentives and remuneration systems in dental services," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 259-278, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Credence Goods; Self-Selection; Fee-for-service; Capitation; Payment; Sorting;
    All these keywords.

    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:chu:wpaper:16-04. 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: Megan Luetje (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esichus.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.