Gopi Shah Goda is a senior fellow and deputy director at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) at Stanford University. She completed her PhD in economics at Stanford University in 2007. She is also a Faculty Research Fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a Fellow of the Society of Actuaries. Prior to joining SIEPR, she was a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in Health Policy Research at Harvard University. Gopi conducts research on issues primarily related to the economics of aging in the United States that inform economic policymaking. Her recent research studies include an examination of perceptual and behavioral biases and their relationship with retirement saving decisions and the effects of long-term care insurance on family members’ work and location decisions. Her work has appeared in a variety of leading economics journals, and has been supported by the Social Security Administration, the National Institutes on Aging, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the TIAA Institute.
Senior Fellow, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR)
Deputy Director, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (2016 - Present)
- Who is a passive saver under opt-in and auto-enrollment? JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION 2020; 173: 301–21
- PREDICTING RETIREMENT SAVINGS USING SURVEY MEASURES OF EXPONENTIAL-GROWTH BIAS AND PRESENT BIAS ECONOMIC INQUIRY 2019; 57 (3): 1636–58
- THE EFFECTS OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT ON HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE AND LABOR MARKET OUTCOMES NATIONAL TAX JOURNAL 2019; 72 (2): 261–322
- Work incentives in the Social Security Disability benefit formula JOURNAL OF PENSION ECONOMICS & FINANCE 2019; 18 (2): 165–89
- HETEROGENEITY IN STATE-DEPENDENT UTILITY: EVIDENCE FROM STRATEGIC SURVEYS ECONOMIC INQUIRY 2016; 54 (2): 847-861
- What will my account really be worth? Experimental evidence on how retirement income projections affect saving JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS 2014; 119: 80-92
Does widowhood explain gender differences in out-of-pocket medical spending among the elderly?
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS
2013; 32 (3): 647-658
Despite the presence of Medicare, out-of-pocket medical spending is a large expenditure risk facing the elderly. While women live longer than men, elderly women incur higher out-of-pocket medical spending than men at each age. In this paper, we examine whether differences in marital status and living arrangements can explain this difference. We find that out-of-pocket medical spending is approximately 24 percent higher when an individual becomes widowed, a large portion of which is spending on nursing homes. Our results suggest a substantial role of living arrangements in out-of-pocket medical spending. Our estimates combined with differences in rates of widowhood across gender suggest that marital status can explain about one third of the gender difference in total out-of-pocket medical spending, leaving a large portion unexplained. On the other hand, gender differences in widowhood more than explain the observed gender difference in out-of-pocket spending on nursing homes.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2012.10.011
View details for Web of Science ID 000319238100013
View details for PubMedID 23477686
Does Stock Market Performance Influence Retirement Intentions?
JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCES
2012; 47 (4): 1055-1081
View details for Web of Science ID 000310856700007
Long-Term Care Insurance Demand Limited By Beliefs About Needs, Concerns About Insurers, And Care Available From Family
2012; 31 (6): 1294-1302
In spite of the high costs and major financial risks involved in long-term care, the majority of older Americans do not own long-term care insurance. We conducted a survey designed to learn more about the role of the following four broad factors in affecting the demand for long-term care insurance: preferences and beliefs, such as notions about the likelihood that one will become disabled; substitutes for insurance, such as savings that could be spent on long-term care; substitutes for formal care, such as care provided by family members; and features of the private market, such as concerns about the high costs of coverage. We found evidence that each of these factors was important in explaining low demand for long-term care insurance. For example, people who believed they might need long-term care were more likely to purchase long-term care coverage. People who had alternative ways to pay for care, such as through savings, or those who could use unpaid care from family members, were less likely to purchase insurance. Features of the private market, such as people's lack of trust in insurers and the high cost of coverage, made people less likely to buy long-term care insurance. We conclude that policy interventions designed to address only one factor limiting the purchase of long-term care insurance are unlikely to dramatically increase demand for long-term care insurance.
View details for DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1307
View details for Web of Science ID 000305130900018
View details for PubMedID 22665842
- The impact of state tax subsidies for private long-term care insurance on coverage and Medicaid expenditures JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS 2011; 95 (7-8): 744-757
Income and the utilization of long-term care services: Evidence from the Social Security benefit notch
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS
2011; 30 (4): 719-729
This paper estimates the impact of income on the long-term care utilization of elderly Americans using a natural experiment that led otherwise similar retirees to receive significantly different Social Security payments based on their year of birth. Using data from the 1993 and 1995 waves of the AHEAD, we estimate instrumental variables models and find that a positive permanent income shock lowers nursing home use but increases the utilization of paid home care services. We find some suggestive evidence that the effects are due to substitution of home care for nursing home utilization. The magnitude of these estimates suggests that moderate reductions in post-retirement income would significantly alter long-term utilization patterns among elderly individuals.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2011.04.001
View details for Web of Science ID 000294393500011
View details for PubMedID 21641063
- Fertility and the Personal Exemption: Comment AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 2011; 101 (4): 1616-1628
HOW WELL ARE SOCIAL SECURITY RECIPIENTS PROTECTED FROM INFLATION?
NATIONAL TAX JOURNAL
2011; 64 (2): 429-449
View details for Web of Science ID 000291189100009
- What Explains Changes in Retirement Plans during the Great Recession? AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 2011; 101 (3): 29-34
Do markets respond to quality information? The case of fertility clinics
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS
2009; 28 (3): 718-727
Although policymakers have increasingly turned to provider report cards as a tool to improve health care quality, existing studies provide mixed evidence on whether they influence consumer choices. We examine the effects of providing consumers with quality information in the context of fertility clinics providing Assisted Reproductive Therapies (ART). We report three main findings. First, clinics with higher birth rates had larger market shares after the adoption of report cards relative to before. Second, clinics with a disproportionate share of young, relatively easy-to-treat patients had lower market shares after adoption versus before. This suggests that consumers take into account information on patient mix when evaluating clinic outcomes. Third, report cards had larger effects on consumers and clinics from states with ART insurance coverage mandates. We conclude that consumers respond to quality report cards when choosing among providers of ART.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.01.001
View details for PubMedID 19328568