CUSTOMER BEHAVIOUR AND DECISION-MAKING IN THE INSURANCE SERVICES MARKET: DEDUCTIBLE CHOICE, RENEWAL INERTIA AND THE PRICE OF ADVICE

Maftunakhon Ibragimova

doi:10.68549/1y9rgx68

Authors

Maftunakhon Ibragimova Researcher, Tashkent State University of Economics (TSUE). Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.68549/1y9rgx68

Keywords:

insurance services market, insurance demand, deductible choice, consumer behaviour, financial literacy, insurance intermediaries, decision-making, insurance contract renewal, consumer inertia, motor insurance.

Abstract

This article examines customer behaviour and decision-making characteristics based on a survey of 640 motor insurance customers across five regional groups in Uzbekistan. The study evaluates deductible selection, insurance premiums, financial literacy, the influence of insurance intermediaries, and renewal inertia. The findings reveal that 195 out of 206 customers selecting a low deductible paid more than the expected economic benefit. Purchasing insurance through agents is associated with a 13.1-percentage-point higher probability of choosing a low deductible, while comparing offers is associated with a 16.9-percentage-point lower probability. Furthermore, half of the respondents renewed their insurance contracts without considering alternative offers. The findings highlight the importance of improving information transparency, expanding opportunities for comparing insurance products, and encouraging active customer decision-making in the insurance services market.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Sydnor J. (Over)insuring modest risks // American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. – 2010. – Vol. 2, No. 4. – P. 177–199. – DOI: 10.1257/app.2.4.177.

2. Barseghyan L., Molinari F., O’Donoghue T., Teitelbaum J. C. The nature of risk preferences: Evidence from insurance choices // American Economic Review. – 2013. – Vol. 103, No. 6. – P. 2499–2529. – DOI: 10.1257/aer.103.6.2499.

3. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk // Econometrica. – 1979. – Vol. 47, No. 2. – P. 263–292. – DOI: 10.2307/1914185.

4. Johnson E. J., Hershey J., Meszaros J., Kunreuther H. Framing, probability distortions, and insurance decisions // Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. – 1993. – Vol. 7, No. 1. – P. 35–51. – DOI: 10.1007/BF01065313.

5. Kunreuther H., Pauly M. Neglecting disaster: Why don’t people insure against large losses? // Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. – 2004. – Vol. 28, No. 1. – P. 5–21. – DOI: 10.1023/B:RISK.0000009433.25126.87.

6. Madrian B. C., Shea D. F. The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. – 2001. – Vol. 116, No. 4. – P. 1149–1187. – DOI: 10.1162/003355301753265543.

7. Handel B. R. Adverse selection and inertia in health insurance markets: When nudging hurts // American Economic Review. – 2013. – Vol. 103, No. 7. – P. 2643–2682. – DOI: 10.1257/aer.103.7.2643.

8. Hortaçsu A., Madanizadeh S. A., Puller S. L. Power to choose? An analysis of consumer inertia in the residential electricity market // American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. – 2017. – Vol. 9, No. 4. – P. 192–226. – DOI: 10.1257/pol.20150235.

9. Cummins J. D., Doherty N. A. The economics of insurance intermediaries // Journal of Risk and Insurance. – 2006. – Vol. 73, No. 3. – P. 359–396. – DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6975.2006.00180.x.

10. Anagol S., Cole S., Sarkar S. Understanding the advice of commissions-motivated agents: Evidence from the Indian life insurance market // The Review of Economics and Statistics. – 2017. – Vol. 99, No. 1. – P. 1–15.

11. Lusardi A., Mitchell O. S. The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence // Journal of Economic Literature. – 2014. – Vol. 52, No. 1. – P. 5–44. – DOI: 10.1257/jel.52.1.5.

12. Thaler R. H., Sunstein C. R. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. – New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008. – X, 293 p. – ISBN 978-0-300-12223-7.