Choose to Lose: Health Plan Choices from a Menu with Dominated Option. Issue 3 (27th April 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bhargava, Saurabh; Loewenstein, George; Sydnor, Justin
• Is Part Of: Quarterly journal of economics. Volume 132:Issue 3(2017:Aug.)
• Page Start: 1319
• Page End: 1372
• Publication Date: 2017-04-27
• Subjects: Economics -- Periodicals; 330.05
• DOI: 10.1093/qje/qjx011
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0033-5533

Abstract

Abstract: We examine the health plan choices that 23, 894 employees at a U.S. firm made from a large menu of options that differed only in financial cost-sharing and premium. These decisions provide a clear test of the predictions of the standard economic model of insurance choice in the absence of choice frictions because plans were priced so that nearly every plan with a lower deductible was financially dominated by an otherwise identical plan with a high deductible. We document that the majority of employees chose dominated plans, which resulted in excess spending equivalent to 24% of chosen plan premiums. Low-income employees were significantly more likely to choose dominated plans, and most employees did not switch into more financially efficient plans in the subsequent year. We show that the choice of dominated plans cannot be rationalized by standard risk preference or any expectations about health risk. Testing alternative explanations with a series of hypothetical-choice experiments, we find that the popularity of dominated plans was not primarily driven by the size and complexity of the plan menu, nor informed preferences for avoiding high deductibles, but by employees' lack of understanding of health insurance. Our findings challenge the standard practice of inferring risk preferences from insurance choices and raise doubts about the welfare benefits of health reforms that expand consumer choice.