More options, more problems? Lost in the health insurance maze
研究发现，即使健康保险选择相对简单，仍有至少36%的人选错保险计划，且提供信息和限制选择等干预措施无法显著改善决策质量，非最优选择导致总年成本增加约9.4%。
Abstract While the opportunity to choose from a diverse range of options can be advantageous, consumers often struggle to make optimal decisions in the domain of health insurance. In this study, we examine the effects of decision aids on improving choice optimality in a health insurance setting that allows for variations in coverage but is standardized otherwise. While this relatively simplistic setting theoretically implies optimal conditions for observing large fractions of optimal choices, we observe widespread adoption of non‐welfare‐maximizing plans, with at least 36% of the population winding up with suboptimal insurance plans. In a hypothetical‐choice survey experimental setting, we estimate the treatment effects of increasing transparency through information provision and restricting choice on choice optimality. We find that decision quality cannot be improved meaningfully by our interventions and that nonoptimal choice is economically relevant, as it accounts for an increase of approximately 9.4% in total annual cost.