Insurance demand experiments: Comparing crowdworking to the lab
Johannes G. Jaspersen,
Marc A. Ragin and
Justin R. Sydnor
Journal of Risk & Insurance, 2022, vol. 89, issue 4, 1077-1107
We analyze an insurance demand experiment conducted in two different settings: in‐person at a university laboratory and online using a crowdworking platform. Subject demographics differ across the samples, but average insurance demand is similar. However, choice patterns suggest online subjects are less cognitively engaged—they have more variation in their demand and react less to changes in exogenous factors of the insurance situation. Applying data quality filters does not lead to more comparable demand patterns between the samples. Additionally, while online subjects pass comprehension questions at the same rate as in‐person subjects, they show more random behavior in other questions. We find that online subjects are more likely to engage in “coarse thinking,” choosing from a reduced set of options. Our results justify caution in using crowdsourced subjects for insurance demand experiments. We outline some best practices which may help improve data quality from experiments conducted via crowdworking platforms.
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jrinsu:v:89:y:2022:i:4:p:1077-1107
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Risk & Insurance is currently edited by Joan T. Schmit
More articles in Journal of Risk & Insurance from The American Risk and Insurance Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().