The Role of Optimism and Pessimism in the Substitution Between Primary and Secondary Health Prevention Efforts
Abstract We study how apparently healthy individuals arbitrate between primary and secondary health prevention under ambiguity. In our model, each individual simultaneously chooses the level of effort for the two types of prevention. Ambiguity relates to either the probability of disease occurrence or the effectiveness of secondary prevention. We find that pessimistic individuals invest more in primary prevention and less in secondary prevention when the effectiveness of secondary prevention is ambiguous. Conversely, pessimistic individuals invest more in secondary prevention and less in primary prevention when the probability of disease occurrence is ambiguous. When the effectiveness of secondary prevention is ambiguous, optimistic individuals invest more in secondary than primary prevention. We find also a substitution effect between the two types of prevention. The latter generates indirect effects of pessimism and optimism on each type of prevention which may reverse our results when they outweigh the direct effects.