Risk preferences, preventive behaviour, and the probability of a loss: Empirical evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic

被引:5
作者
Kalwij, Adriaan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Sch Econ, Dept Econ, Kriekenpitpl 21-22, NL-3584 EC Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
COVID-19; Loss prevention; Optimal choice under risk; Risk preferences; Survey data; SELF-INSURANCE; HEALTH; PRUDENCE; AVERSION; CHOICE; FACE;
D O I
10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116169
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Rationale: A theoretical model of optimal choice under risk, in which an individual chooses the level of prevention to avoid a loss, has the ambiguous prediction that a higher risk-taking preference increases the probability of a loss. Objective: To empirically investigate the prediction in the case of COVID-19 with individual-level survey data. Data: Survey data from the Understanding America Study (UAS). The UAS Coronavirus Tracking Survey followed 8628 respondents from March 2020 until July 2021 (29 survey waves) and data was gathered on having contracted COVID-19, vaccination, and preventive behaviour. Separate UAS modules gathered data on individuals' risk preferences; twice before and once during the COVID-19 pandemic. UAS also gathered data on pre-pandemic health and socio-economic status. Combining these data, and dropping missing observations, provided longitudinal data for 4335 respondents (96,370 observations) of whom 530 contracted COVID-19. Results: In support of the theoretical prediction, the empirical findings show that a one-standard deviation higher risk-taking preference is associated with about a one-third higher probability of contracting COVID-19 within two weeks. Furthermore, the findings show that individuals' risk-taking preference is negatively associated with the preventive behaviour of social distancing and not associated with getting vaccinated. There is, however, no support for preventive behaviour being associated with the probability of contracting COVID-19. The exception is for being vaccinated, which is negatively associated with the probability of contracting COVID-19. The findings, therefore, do not support that the positive association of the risk-taking preference with the probability of contracting COVID-19 is mediated through observed preventive behaviour. Conclusions: The findings support the importance of individuals' risk-taking behaviour for contracting COVID-19 and, more generally, the importance of loss prevention as a risk management tool for individuals.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 55 条
[1]  
Alattar L., 2018, Soc. Sec. Bull, V78, P13
[2]   Vaccination, politics and COVID-19 impacts [J].
Albrecht, Don .
BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 22 (01)
[3]  
Angrisani M., 2020, FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
[4]  
Angrist JD, 2009, MOSTLY HARMLESS ECONOMETRICS: AN EMPIRICISTS COMPANION, P1
[5]   How people know their risk preference [J].
Arslan, Ruben C. ;
Bruemmer, Martin ;
Dohmen, Thomas ;
Drewelies, Johanna ;
Hertwig, Ralph ;
Wagner, Gert G. .
SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2020, 10 (01)
[6]   Estimating excess 1-year mortality associated with the COVID-19 pandemic according to underlying conditions and age: a population-based cohort study [J].
Banerjee, Amitava ;
Pasea, Laura ;
Harris, Steve ;
Gonzalez-Izquierdo, Arturo ;
Torralbo, Ana ;
Shallcross, Laura ;
Noursadeghi, Mahdad ;
Pillay, Deenan ;
Sebire, Neil ;
Holmes, Chris ;
Pagel, Christina ;
Wong, Wai Keong ;
Langenberg, Claudia ;
Williams, Bryan ;
Denaxas, Spiros ;
Hemingway, Harry .
LANCET, 2020, 395 (10238) :1715-1725
[7]   Effectiveness of a third dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for preventing severe outcomes in Israel: an observational study [J].
Barda, Noam ;
Dagan, Noa ;
Cohen, Cyrille ;
Hernan, Miguel A. ;
Lipsitch, Marc ;
Kohane, Isaac S. ;
Reis, Ben Y. ;
Balicer, Ran D. .
LANCET, 2021, 398 (10316) :2093-2100
[8]   Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study [J].
Barsky, RB ;
Juster, FT ;
Kimball, MS ;
Shapiro, MD .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1997, 112 (02) :537-579
[9]   The psychometric and empirical properties of measures of risk preferences [J].
Beauchamp, Jonathan P. ;
Cesarini, David ;
Johannesson, Magnus .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2017, 54 (03) :203-237
[10]   Redefine statistical significance [J].
Benjamin, Daniel J. ;
Berger, James O. ;
Johannesson, Magnus ;
Nosek, Brian A. ;
Wagenmakers, E. -J. ;
Berk, Richard ;
Bollen, Kenneth A. ;
Brembs, Bjoern ;
Brown, Lawrence ;
Camerer, Colin ;
Cesarini, David ;
Chambers, Christopher D. ;
Clyde, Merlise ;
Cook, Thomas D. ;
De Boeck, Paul ;
Dienes, Zoltan ;
Dreber, Anna ;
Easwaran, Kenny ;
Efferson, Charles ;
Fehr, Ernst ;
Fidler, Fiona ;
Field, Andy P. ;
Forster, Malcolm ;
George, Edward I. ;
Gonzalez, Richard ;
Goodman, Steven ;
Green, Edwin ;
Green, Donald P. ;
Greenwald, Anthony ;
Hadfield, Jarrod D. ;
Hedges, Larry V. ;
Held, Leonhard ;
Ho, Teck Hua ;
Hoijtink, Herbert ;
Hruschka, Daniel J. ;
Imai, Kosuke ;
Imbens, Guido ;
Ioannidis, John P. A. ;
Jeon, Minjeong ;
Jones, James Holland ;
Kirchler, Michael ;
Laibson, David ;
List, John ;
Little, Roderick ;
Lupia, Arthur ;
Machery, Edouard ;
Maxwell, Scott E. ;
McCarthy, Michael ;
Moore, Don ;
Morgan, Stephen L. .
NATURE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR, 2018, 2 (01) :6-10