TY - JOUR
T1 - Money-Back Guarantees and Service Quality
T2 - The Marketing of In Vitro Fertilization Services
AU - Yu, Shan
AU - Ghosh, Mrinal
AU - Viswanathan, Madhu
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research is supported by a grant from the Center for Management Innovation in Healthcare and from financial support provided by the Department of Marketing at the Eller College of Management, University of Arizona.
Publisher Copyright:
© American Marketing Association 2022.
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - Marketing practices like money-back guarantees (MBGs) are prevalent in many expert-service markets but are often decried as marketing gimmicks that take advantage of vulnerable and poorly informed consumers. In this research, conducted in the market for in vitro fertilization services, the authors empirically assess differences in quality of care between clinics that offer MBG programs and those that don't, to investigate whether MBG programs can serve a purpose consistent with signaling and insurance theories. The analysis is conducted on a unique longitudinal data set that includes information on clinic-level treatment, outcome statistics, clinic characteristics, and marketing practices for fertility clinics in the United States, state-level insurance mandates, competition environments, and demographic and geographic characteristics. Using an instrumental variable approach to account for the endogeneity of MBG decisions made by fertility clinics, the authors find that MBG clinics, on average, offer better treatment outcomes in terms of success rates while undertaking lower risks. The results are consistent with signaling theory predictions that market-based programs like MBGs can serve as signals of unobservable clinic quality despite the incentives for clinics to engage in opportunistic behaviors.
AB - Marketing practices like money-back guarantees (MBGs) are prevalent in many expert-service markets but are often decried as marketing gimmicks that take advantage of vulnerable and poorly informed consumers. In this research, conducted in the market for in vitro fertilization services, the authors empirically assess differences in quality of care between clinics that offer MBG programs and those that don't, to investigate whether MBG programs can serve a purpose consistent with signaling and insurance theories. The analysis is conducted on a unique longitudinal data set that includes information on clinic-level treatment, outcome statistics, clinic characteristics, and marketing practices for fertility clinics in the United States, state-level insurance mandates, competition environments, and demographic and geographic characteristics. Using an instrumental variable approach to account for the endogeneity of MBG decisions made by fertility clinics, the authors find that MBG clinics, on average, offer better treatment outcomes in terms of success rates while undertaking lower risks. The results are consistent with signaling theory predictions that market-based programs like MBGs can serve as signals of unobservable clinic quality despite the incentives for clinics to engage in opportunistic behaviors.
KW - expert services
KW - health care marketing
KW - in vitro fertilization
KW - information asymmetry
KW - insurance
KW - money-back guarantees
KW - quality of care
KW - signaling
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126519271&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85126519271&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/00222437211060733
DO - 10.1177/00222437211060733
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85126519271
SN - 0022-2437
VL - 59
SP - 659
EP - 673
JO - Journal of Marketing Research
JF - Journal of Marketing Research
IS - 3
ER -