Misperception, self-reported probabilities and long-term care insurance take-up in the United States

Thomas Blavet (), Bertrand Chopard, Thomas Rapp () and Jonathan Sicsic ()
Additional contact information
Thomas Blavet: CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, LIRAES (URP_ 4470) - Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherche Appliquée en Economie de la Santé - UPCité - Université Paris Cité, UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne
Bertrand Chopard: LIRAES (URP_ 4470) - Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherche Appliquée en Economie de la Santé - UPCité - Université Paris Cité
Thomas Rapp: LIRAES (URP_ 4470) - Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherche Appliquée en Economie de la Santé - UPCité - Université Paris Cité, LIEPP - Laboratoire interdisciplinaire d'évaluation des politiques publiques (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po
Jonathan Sicsic: LIRAES (URP_ 4470) - Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherche Appliquée en Economie de la Santé - UPCité - Université Paris Cité, LIEPP - Laboratoire interdisciplinaire d'évaluation des politiques publiques (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: In the United States as in other developed countries, the take-up of Long-Term Care (LTC) insurance remains very low, suggesting that many individuals underestimate their future needs for professional LTC services. This paper examines the relationship between subjective expectations and LTC insurance demand, with a particular focus on miscalibration of survival beliefs. Using 12 waves of the Health and Retirement Study (1996–2018), we estimate various random effects linear probability models of LTC insurance take-up among individuals aged 50–75 years. We rely on two self-reported expectation measures: the probability of survival and the probability of nursing home entry. We then classify individuals into three groups – consistent, positive deviation, and negative deviation – based on the difference between subjective survival beliefs and life-table benchmarks. Robustness analyses are carried using alternative miscalibration measures, age groups and control variables. Our findings reveal strong heterogeneity. Individuals whose beliefs are consistent with life-table probabilities purchase more LTC insurance when they expect to live longer, in line with higher anticipated old-age expenditures. By contrast, individuals who substantially overestimate survival ("positive deviation" group) display no systematic response to either type of expectation, which could be related to cognitive difficulties in projecting future needs. Those who underestimate survival ("negative deviation" group) are responsive to nursing home expectations but less so to survival, indicating that they may anticipate short-term care needs but not long-term expenditures. Taken together, these results suggest that miscalibration of survival beliefs is an important determinant of insurance demand. They highlight that underestimation and overestimation reflect different mechanisms – potential private health information in the former case and cognitive limitations in the latter – ultimately contributing to the persistently low take-up of LTC insurance in the U.S.

Keywords: Ageing; Long-term care; Insurance (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026-02-11
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in International Journal of Health Economics and Management, 2026, 26 (1), pp.3. ⟨10.1007/s10754-025-09408-4⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05506437

DOI: 10.1007/s10754-025-09408-4

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().