Quality Disclosure and Regulation: Scoring Design in Medicare Advantage

Policymakers and market intermediaries often use quality scores to alleviate asymmetric information about product quality. Scores affect the demand for quality and, in equilibrium, its supply. Equilibrium effects break the rule whereby more information is always better, and the optimal design of scores must account for them. In the context of Medicare Advantage, I find that consumers' information is limited, and quality is inefficiently low. A simple design alleviates these issues and increases total welfare by 3.7 monthly premiums. More than half of the gains stem from scores' effect on quality rather than information. Scores can outperform full‐information outcomes by regulating inefficient oligopolistic quality provision, and a binary certification of quality attains 98% of this welfare. Scores are informative even when coarse; firms' incentives are to produce quality at the scoring threshold, which consumers know. The primary design challenge of scores is to dictate thresholds and thus regulate quality.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Econometrica
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3982/ecta21182
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.36
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quality Disclosure and Regulation: Scoring Design in Medicare Advantage

Benjamin Vatter
5 citations
Econometrica
Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
10.36
article

Quality Disclosure and Regulation: Scoring Design in Medicare Advantage

Benjamin Vatter
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Policymakers and market intermediaries often use quality scores to alleviate asymmetric information about product quality. Scores affect the demand for quality and, in equilibrium, its supply. Equilibrium effects break the rule whereby more information is always better, and the optimal design of scores must account for them. In the context of Medicare Advantage, I find that consumers' information is limited, and quality is inefficiently low. A simple design alleviates these issues and increases total welfare by 3.7 monthly premiums. More than half of the gains stem from scores' effect on quality rather than information. Scores can outperform full‐information outcomes by regulating inefficient oligopolistic quality provision, and a binary certification of quality attains 98% of this welfare. Scores are informative even when coarse; firms' incentives are to produce quality at the scoring threshold, which consumers know. The primary design challenge of scores is to dictate thresholds and thus regulate quality.

EconometricaVol. 93(3)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
10.36
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.

Quality Disclosure and Regulation: Scoring Design in Medicare Advantage — Benjamin Vatter · Econometrica (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS