Elena Keller , Andreas Ortmann , Georgina Mary Chambers
{"title":"Exploring the demand for elective egg freezing: A laboratory experiment","authors":"Elena Keller , Andreas Ortmann , Georgina Mary Chambers","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We conducted a proof-of-concept analysis to demonstrate that government funding decisions can be studied within a lab experiment: We explore the effects of government funding levels, information level, and various participant characteristics on the demand for elective egg freezing (EEF) and in vitro fertilization (IVF), two types of fertility treatment, and determine price and income elasticities of demand within an incentive-compatible experiment.</p><p>We recruited 217 female participants without children aged 20–29 years. Participants were assigned to one of three between-subjects experimental treatments that varied income endowment and information provided. Additionally, the experiment consisted of 3 within-subjects conditions corresponding to different levels of government funding for IVF and EEF with 2 decision periods (‘planning period’ and ‘family-formation period’) and participants had to indicate their treatment choice aiming to achieve a live birth.</p><p>The demand for EEF and IVF were shown to be price-inelastic. We found that the increase in the price for EEF and IVF through restrictions in government funding significantly reduced demand for such treatments. However, demand did not significantly change with income level, suggesting a high value associated with fertility treatment.</p><p>Overall, our study shows that government funding decisions for medical interventions can be explored within an experimental setting.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624/pdfft?md5=1d1a9ecddc67596e4a43148da0c4a20b&pid=1-s2.0-S2214804324000624-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000624","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We conducted a proof-of-concept analysis to demonstrate that government funding decisions can be studied within a lab experiment: We explore the effects of government funding levels, information level, and various participant characteristics on the demand for elective egg freezing (EEF) and in vitro fertilization (IVF), two types of fertility treatment, and determine price and income elasticities of demand within an incentive-compatible experiment.
We recruited 217 female participants without children aged 20–29 years. Participants were assigned to one of three between-subjects experimental treatments that varied income endowment and information provided. Additionally, the experiment consisted of 3 within-subjects conditions corresponding to different levels of government funding for IVF and EEF with 2 decision periods (‘planning period’ and ‘family-formation period’) and participants had to indicate their treatment choice aiming to achieve a live birth.
The demand for EEF and IVF were shown to be price-inelastic. We found that the increase in the price for EEF and IVF through restrictions in government funding significantly reduced demand for such treatments. However, demand did not significantly change with income level, suggesting a high value associated with fertility treatment.
Overall, our study shows that government funding decisions for medical interventions can be explored within an experimental setting.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
