Do Ordeals Work for Selection Markets? Evidence from Health Insurance Auto-Enrollment

Are application hassles, or “ordeals,” an effective way to limit public program enrollment? We provide new evidence by studying (removal of) an auto-enrollment policy for health insurance, adding an extra step to enroll. This minor ordeal has a major impact, reducing enrollment by 33 percent and differentially excluding young, healthy, and economically disadvantaged people. Using a simple model, we show adverse selection—a classic feature of insurance markets—undermines ordeals’ standard rationale of excluding low-value individuals since they are also low-cost and may not be inefficient. Our analysis illustrates why ordeals targeting is unlikely to work well in selection markets. (JEL D82, G22, H75, I13, I18)

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Economic Review
Published
2025-02-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20231133
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Healthcare Policy and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.39

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Ordeals Work for Selection Markets? Evidence from Health Insurance Auto-Enrollment

Mark Shepard, Myles Wagner
3 citations
American Economic Review
Healthcare Policy and Management
9.39
article

Do Ordeals Work for Selection Markets? Evidence from Health Insurance Auto-Enrollment

Mark Shepard, Myles Wagner
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Are application hassles, or “ordeals,” an effective way to limit public program enrollment? We provide new evidence by studying (removal of) an auto-enrollment policy for health insurance, adding an extra step to enroll. This minor ordeal has a major impact, reducing enrollment by 33 percent and differentially excluding young, healthy, and economically disadvantaged people. Using a simple model, we show adverse selection—a classic feature of insurance markets—undermines ordeals’ standard rationale of excluding low-value individuals since they are also low-cost and may not be inefficient. Our analysis illustrates why ordeals targeting is unlikely to work well in selection markets. (JEL D82, G22, H75, I13, I18)

American Economic ReviewVol. 115(3)
Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (US), The Ohio State University (US)
Harvard University, Harvard Kennedy School
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Healthcare Policy and Management
9.39
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Do Ordeals Work for Selection Markets? Evidence from Health Insurance Auto-Enrollment — Mark Shepard, Myles Wagner · American Economic Review (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS