@article{60007,
  author       = {{Engler, Daniel and Gutsche, Gunnar and Simixhiu, Amantia and Ziegler, Andreas}},
  issn         = {{0140-9883}},
  journal      = {{Energy Economics}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier BV}},
  title        = {{{On the relationship between corporate CO2 offsetting and pro-environmental activities in small- and medium-sized firms in Germany}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106487}},
  volume       = {{118}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@article{15073,
  abstract     = {{<jats:p> In this paper, we analyze the effect of light conditions on road accidents and estimate the long run consequences of different time regimes for road safety. Identification is based on variation in light conditions induced by differences in sunrise and sunset times across space and time. We estimate that darkness causes annual costs of more than £500 million in Great Britain. By setting daylight saving time year-round 8 percent of these costs could be saved. Thus, focusing solely on the short run costs related to the transition itself underestimates the total costs of the current time regime. </jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Bünnings, Christian and Schiele, Valentin}},
  issn         = {{0034-6535}},
  journal      = {{The Review of Economics and Statistics}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{165--176}},
  title        = {{{Spring Forward, Don't Fall Back: The Effect of Daylight Saving Time on Road Safety}}},
  doi          = {{10.1162/rest_a_00873}},
  volume       = {{103}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@techreport{46540,
  abstract     = {{Individual cognitive functioning declines over time. We seek to understand how adverse physical health shocks in older ages contribute to this development. By use of event-study methods and data from the USA, England and several countries in Continental Europe we find evidence that health shocks lead to an immediate and persistent decline in cognitive functioning. This robust finding holds in all regions representing different health insurance systems and seems to be independent of underlying individual demographic characteristics such as sex and age. We also ask whether variables that are susceptible to policy action can reduce the negative consequences of a health shock. Our results suggest that neither compulsory education nor retirement regulations moderate the effects, thus emphasizing the importance of maintaining good physical health in old age for cognitive functioning.}},
  author       = {{Schiele, Valentin and Schmitz, Hendrik}},
  keywords     = {{Cognitive decline, health shocks, retirement, education, event study}},
  publisher    = {{RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen}},
  title        = {{{Understanding cognitive decline in older ages: The role of health shocks}}},
  volume       = {{919}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@techreport{46537,
  abstract     = {{We study effects of retirement on cognitive abilities (up to ten years after retirement) using data from 21 countries in Continental Europe, England, and the US, and exploiting early-retirement thresholds for identification. For this purpose, combines event-study estimations with the marginal treatment effect framework to allow for effect heterogeneity. This helps to decompose event-study estimates into true medium-run effects of retirement and effects driven by differential retirement preferences. Our results suggest considerable negative effects of retirement on cognitive abilities. We also detect substantial effect heterogeneity: Those who retire as early as possible are not affected while those who retire later exhibit negative effects.}},
  author       = {{Schmitz, Hendrik and Westphal, Matthias}},
  keywords     = {{Cognitive abilities, retirement, event study, marginal treatment effects}},
  publisher    = {{RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen}},
  title        = {{{The dynamic and heterogeneous effects of retirement on cognitive decline}}},
  volume       = {{918}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{58508,
  author       = {{Engler, Daniel and Groh, Elke D. and Gutsche, Gunnar and Ziegler, Andreas}},
  issn         = {{1469-3062}},
  journal      = {{Climate Policy}},
  number       = {{10}},
  pages        = {{1281--1297}},
  publisher    = {{Informa UK Limited}},
  title        = {{{Acceptance of climate-oriented policy measures under the COVID-19 crisis: an empirical analysis for Germany}}},
  doi          = {{10.1080/14693062.2020.1864269}},
  volume       = {{21}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{60009,
  author       = {{Fischer, Beate and Gutsche, Gunnar and Wetzel, Heike}},
  issn         = {{2214-6296}},
  journal      = {{Energy Research &amp; Social Science}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier BV}},
  title        = {{{Who wants to get involved? Determining citizen willingness to participate in German renewable energy cooperatives}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.erss.2021.102013}},
  volume       = {{76}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{60008,
  author       = {{Gutsche, Gunnar and Nakai, Miwa and Arimura, Toshi H.}},
  issn         = {{2214-6350}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier BV}},
  title        = {{{Revisiting the determinants of individual sustainable investment—The case of Japan}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.jbef.2021.100497}},
  volume       = {{30}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{30234,
  author       = {{Schmitz, Hendrik and Stroka‐Wetsch, Magdalena A.}},
  issn         = {{1057-9230}},
  journal      = {{Health Economics}},
  keywords     = {{Health Policy}},
  number       = {{7}},
  pages        = {{766--777}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{Determinants of nursing home choice: Does reported quality matter?}}},
  doi          = {{10.1002/hec.4018}},
  volume       = {{29}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@article{31802,
  abstract     = {{<jats:p> Much work on innovation strategy assumes or theorizes that competition in innovation elicits duplication of research and that disclosure decreases such duplication. We validate this empirically using the American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA), three complementary identification strategies, and a new measure of blocked future patent applications. We show that AIPA—intended to reduce duplication, through default disclosure of patent applications 18 months after filing—reduced duplication in the U.S. and European patent systems. The blocking measure provides a clear and micro measure of technological competition that can be aggregated to facilitate the empirical investigation of innovation, firm strategy, and the positive and negative externalities of patenting. </jats:p><jats:p> This paper was accepted by Joshua Gans, business strategy. </jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Lück, Sonja and Balsmeier, Benjamin and Seliger, Florian and Fleming, Lee}},
  issn         = {{0025-1909}},
  journal      = {{Management Science}},
  keywords     = {{Management Science and Operations Research, Strategy and Management}},
  number       = {{6}},
  pages        = {{2677--2685}},
  publisher    = {{Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)}},
  title        = {{{Early Disclosure of Invention and Reduced Duplication: An Empirical Test}}},
  doi          = {{10.1287/mnsc.2019.3521}},
  volume       = {{66}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@techreport{46541,
  abstract     = {{Theoretical papers show that optimal prevention decisions in the sense of selfprotection (i.e., primary prevention) depend not only on the level of (second-order) risk aversion but also on higher-order risk preferences such as prudence (third-order risk aversion). We study empirically whether these theoretical results hold and whether prudent individuals show less preventive (self-protection) effort than non-prudent individuals. We use a unique dataset that combines data on higher-order risk preferences and various measures of observed real-world prevention behavior. We find that prudent individuals indeed invest less in self-protection as measured by influenza vaccination. This result is driven by high risk individuals such as individuals >60 years of age or chronically ill. We do not find a clear empirical relationship between riskpreferences and prevention in the sense of self-insurance (i.e. secondary prevention). Neither risk aversion nor prudence is related to cancer screenings such as mammograms, Pap smears or X-rays of the lung.}},
  author       = {{Mayrhofer, Thomas and Schmitz, Hendrik}},
  keywords     = {{prudence, risk preferences, prevention, vaccination, screening}},
  publisher    = {{RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen}},
  title        = {{{Prudence and prevention: Empirical evidence}}},
  volume       = {{863}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@article{60041,
  abstract     = {{<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Given the increasing role of socially responsible investing (SRI), but still limited participation of individual (i.e. small, retail) investors, the objective of this study is twofold: (i) We aim to identify investment barriers regarding SRI for individual investors and analyze to what extent these barriers vary across different investor groups. (ii) We analyze to what extent sustainability or transparency labels can help to overcome these barriers. To this end, we empirically analyze data from a survey and a stated choice experiment for a broad sample of financial decision makers in German households. The results suggest that a considerable amount of respondents can imagine to invest in a socially responsible manner, which is promising for policymakers and practitioners who aim to foster sustainable development and SRI. However, too high information costs are a severe barrier for potential future investors and a considerable share of respondents distrusts providers of socially responsible investment products. Banks, who could help to solve this problem, appear not to fulfill their role as intermediaries. But we find that labels might serve as a complement to banks. Especially sustainability certificates that confirm the consideration of sustainability criteria could decrease information costs and overcome at least some barriers for some investor groups, particularly for new investors. However, the results also suggest that a certain degree of basic knowledge and trust in providers of socially responsible investment products is required before labels work efficiently.</jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Gutsche, Gunnar and Zwergel, Bernhard}},
  issn         = {{1439-2917}},
  journal      = {{Schmalenbach Business Review}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{111--157}},
  publisher    = {{Springer Science and Business Media LLC}},
  title        = {{{Investment Barriers and Labeling Schemes for Socially Responsible Investments}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s41464-020-00085-z}},
  volume       = {{72}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@article{15075,
  author       = {{Bünnings, Christian and Schmitz, Hendrik and Tauchmann, Harald and Ziebarth, Nicolas R.}},
  issn         = {{0022-4367}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Risk and Insurance}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{415--449}},
  title        = {{{The Role of Prices Relative to Supplemental Benefits and Service Quality in Health Plan Choice}}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/jori.12219}},
  volume       = {{86}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@article{58507,
  author       = {{Gutsche, Gunnar and Ziegler, Andreas}},
  issn         = {{0378-4266}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Banking &amp; Finance}},
  pages        = {{193--214}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier BV}},
  title        = {{{Which private investors are willing to pay for sustainable investments? Empirical evidence from stated choice experiments}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.jbankfin.2019.03.007}},
  volume       = {{102}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@article{3081,
  author       = {{Kolodziej, Ingo WK and Reichert, Arndt R and Schmitz, Hendrik}},
  journal      = {{Health services research}},
  number       = {{4}},
  title        = {{{New Evidence on Employment Effects of Informal Care Provision in Europe}}},
  doi          = {{10.111/1475-6773.12840}},
  volume       = {{53}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}

@misc{5235,
  author       = {{Schmitz, Hendrik and Winkler, Svenja}},
  booktitle    = {{Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance}},
  publisher    = {{Oxford University Press}},
  title        = {{{Information, Risk Aversion, and Health Care Economics}}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}

@article{31807,
  abstract     = {{Drawing upon recent advances in machine learning and natural language processing, we introduce new tools that automatically ingest, parse, disambiguate, and build an updated database using U.S. patent data. The tools identify unique inventor, assignee, and location entities mentioned on each granted U.S. patent from 1976 to 2016. We describe data flow, algorithms, user interfaces, descriptive statistics, and a novelty measure based on the first appearance of a word in the patent corpus. We illustrate an automated coinventor network mapping tool and visualize trends in patenting over the last 40 years.}},
  author       = {{Balsmeier, Benjamin and Assaf, Mohamad and Chesebro, Tyler and Fierro, Gabe and Johnson, Kevin and Johnson, Scott and Li, Guan‐Cheng and Lück, Sonja and O'Reagan, Doug and Yeh, Bill and Zang, Guangzheng and Fleming, Lee}},
  issn         = {{1058-6407}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Economics & Management Strategy}},
  keywords     = {{Management of Technology and Innovation, Strategy and Management, Economics and Econometrics, General Business, Management and Accounting, General Medicine}},
  number       = {{3}},
  pages        = {{535--553}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley}},
  title        = {{{Machine learning and natural language processing on the patent corpus: Data, tools, and new measures}}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/jems.12259}},
  volume       = {{27}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}

@techreport{46544,
  author       = {{Bünnings, Christian and Schiele, Valentin}},
  keywords     = {{road accidents, light conditions, daylight saving time}},
  publisher    = {{RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen}},
  title        = {{{Spring forward, don’t fall back: The effect of daylight saving time on road safety}}},
  volume       = {{768}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}

@article{58506,
  author       = {{Gutsche, Gunnar and Köbrich León, Anja and Ziegler, Andreas}},
  issn         = {{0030-7653}},
  journal      = {{Oxford Economic Papers}},
  number       = {{3}},
  pages        = {{756--776}},
  publisher    = {{Oxford University Press (OUP)}},
  title        = {{{On the relevance of contextual factors for socially responsible investments: an econometric analysis}}},
  doi          = {{10.1093/oep/gpy051}},
  volume       = {{71}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}

@article{5236,
  author       = {{Schmitz, Hendrik and Schiele, Valentin}},
  journal      = {{Atlas of Science}},
  title        = {{{Sick already? Job loss makes it even worse}}},
  year         = {{2017}},
}

@inbook{5238,
  author       = {{Schmitz, Hendrik}},
  booktitle    = {{Krankenversicherung im Rating}},
  editor       = {{Adolph, T.}},
  publisher    = {{Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH}},
  title        = {{{Preis, Service oder Leistungen: Was beeinflusst besonders die Krankenkassenwahl von gesetzlich Versicherten?}}},
  year         = {{2017}},
}