Nakamura Ryota, Suhrcke Marc, Zizzo Daniel John
1Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University, 2-1 Naka, Kunitachi, Tokyo 186-8601 Japan.
2Centre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK.
Theory Decis. 2017;83(4):513-533. doi: 10.1007/s11238-017-9625-9. Epub 2017 Jul 18.
We propose a triple test to evaluate the usefulness of behavioral economics models for public health policy. Test 1 is whether the model provides reasonably new insights. Test 2 is on whether these have been properly applied to policy settings. Test 3 is whether they are corroborated by evidence. We exemplify by considering the cases of social interactions models, self-control models and, in relation to health message framing, prospect theory. Out of these sets of models, only a correctly applied prospect theory fully passes the tests at present. Specifically, in broad agreement with the evidence, a gain frame has positive implications for welfare encourages disease prevention activity, though this does not apply if the perceived probability of the bad health outcome is large enough. We see our tests as being useful to identify how much health policy weight policy makers should assign to specific behavioral economic models; they are also useful to verify what next steps would be most useful in further research.
我们提出了一项三重测试，以评估行为经济学模型对公共卫生政策的实用性。测试1是该模型是否能提供相当新颖的见解。测试2是这些见解是否已被正确应用于政策制定环境。测试3是它们是否得到证据的证实。我们通过考虑社会互动模型、自我控制模型以及与健康信息框架相关的前景理论的案例来举例说明。在这些模型组中，目前只有正确应用的前景理论完全通过了测试。具体而言，与证据大致一致的是，收益框架对福利有积极影响，鼓励疾病预防活动，不过如果感知到的不良健康结果的概率足够大，情况则并非如此。我们认为我们的测试有助于确定政策制定者应赋予特定行为经济模型多少卫生政策权重；它们也有助于验证在进一步研究中哪些后续步骤将最有用。
