The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program: Reply
Open accessAbstract
We explore the in- and out-of-sample robustness of tests for choice inconsistencies based on parameter restrictions in parametric models, focusing on tests proposed by Ketcham, Kuminoff, and Powers (2016). We argue that their nonparametric alternatives are inherently conservative with respect to detecting mistakes. We then show that our parametric model is robust to KKP’s suggested specification checks, and that comprehensive goodness of fit measures perform better with our model than the expected utility model. Finally, we explore the robustness of our 2011 results to alternative normative assumptions highlighting the role of brand fixed effects and unobservable characteristics. (JEL D12, H51, I13, I18, J14)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing?
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995 · Cited by 2,878
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Abaluck Jason, 2011, American Economic Review. http://www. aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer., 101, 1180, 10.1257/aer.101.4.1180 · DOI
- 10.1257/aer.101.3.377 · doi:10.1257/aer.101.3.377
- 10.1257/aer.20130778 · DOI
- 10.1353/eca.0.0067 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.03.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1468-2354.2007.00465.x · DOI
- 10.1257/aer.20131048 · DOI
- 10.1093/qje/qjr055 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements
Mas, A., & Pallais, A. (2017) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20161500 · Cited by 827
Adverse Selection and Inertia in Health Insurance Markets: When Nudging Hurts
Handel, B. R. (2013) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.103.7.2643 · Cited by 707
Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox
Allcott, H., & Wozny, N. (2014) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00419 · Cited by 504
Health Insurance for “Humans”: Information Frictions, Plan Choice, and Consumer Welfare
Handel, B. R., & Kolstad, J. T. (2015) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20131126 · Cited by 427
The Industrial Organization of Health-Care Markets
Gaynor, M., Ho, K., & Town, R. J. (2015) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.53.2.235 · Cited by 349
Metadata
- Authors
- Abaluck, J., & Gruber, J.
- Venue
- American Economic Review
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 2016-12-01
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 3962-3987
- ISSN
- 0002-8282 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4248964662
- Cited by
- 539
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 98.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program: Reply. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1257/aer.20151318
- The paper
- Abaluck, J., & Gruber, J. (2016). Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program: Reply. American Economic Review. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151318
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
