The Role of Board Certification as a Cue to Competence of Eye Care Providers: An Empirical Analysis

Authors

  • Thomas J. Maronick Department of Marketing Towson University Towson, Maryland USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18533/ijbsr.v6i1.914

Keywords:

Credence services, health care, board certification, optometrists

Abstract

Authors have long known of the need for “cues” to assess the competence and training of providers of credence services.  In the case of health care providers such as eye care professionals, one such cue is whether the eye care professional is “board certified.” This study of 500 consumers who had had an eye exam either from an optometrist or an ophthalmologist examines four questions: what factors are important to a consumer seeking an eye-care provider, what is communicated by an eye-care provider’s claim of being board certified, whether there are differences in perception between board certification as applied to an optometrist and an ophthalmologist, and whether there are differences in the perceptions of optometrists who are board certified compared to those who are not board certified. The results show that board certification is an important cue for consumers in assessing the competence and expertise of optometrists and that board certification can be used to distinguish between an optometrist and an ophthalmologist. The results also show that optometrists who are board certified as seen as better trained and more competent than optometrists who are not board certified. The results also raise questions about at the effectiveness of board certification as a cue for competence and expertise since most consumers believe optometrists are board certified when, in fact, board certification is voluntary and a very small percentage of optometrists licensed to practice in any state are actually board certified by either of the major certifying optometric organizations. Policy implications are also discussed, including the need for uniform standards for certification at the Federal and State level and the need for rigorous certification practices by third-party certifying organizations, including additional coursework and periodic assessment of optometrists’ performance to accurately reflect the enhanced quality and competence possessed by optometrists who are board certified.

Author Biography

  • Thomas J. Maronick, Department of Marketing Towson University Towson, Maryland USA
    Professor of Marketing

References

Adams, A. F., Ekelund, R. and Jackson, J., (2002).Occupational Licensing of a Credence Good: The Regulation of Midwifery. Southern Economic Journal, 69 (3): 659-675.

American Optometric Society, Inc. vs American Board of Optometry, Inc., (2011). United States District Court for Central District of California.

Babakus, E, Remington, S., Lucas, G., and Carnell, C., (1991). Issues in the Practice of Cosmetic Surgery: Consumers’ Use of Information and Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Health Care Management, 11 (3): 12-18.

Baldwin, S., McKenzie, J., Capwell, E., and Hanson , C., (2011). The Contributions of Credentialing and the Code of Ethics to Quality Assurance in the Health Education/Promotion Profession. American Journal of Health Studies, 26 (4): 217-229.

Darby, M. and Karni, E., (1973). Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud. Journal of Law and Economics, 16 (1): 67-88.

Grosch, E., (2006). Does Specialty Board Certification Influence Clinical Outcomes. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12 (5): 473-481.

Hirvoneh, P. and Helander, N., (2001). Toward Joint Value Creation Processes in Professional Services. Total Quality Magazine, 13 (4): 281-291.

Hsieh, Y., and Hiang, S., (2004) A Study of the Impacts of Service Quality on Relationship Quality in Search-Experience-Credence Services. Total Quality Management, 15 (1): 43-58.

Lapierre, J., (1997). What Does Value Mean in Business-to-Business Professional Services? International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8 (5): 195-203.

Mitchell, V.W., (1994). Problems and Risks Associated with Purchasing Consultancy Services. The Service Industries Journal, 14 (3): 315-339.

Mitra, K., Reiss, M., and Capella, L., (1999). An Examination of Perceived Risk, Information Search, and Behavioral Intentions in Search, Experience, and Credence Services. Journal of Services Marketing, 13 (3): 208-232.

Mortimer, K., and Pressey. A., (2013). Consumer Information Search and Credence Services: Implications for Service Providers. Journal of Services Marketing, 27 (1): 49-58.

Nelson, P., (1970). Information and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78 (2): 311-329.

Ostrom, A, and Iacobucci, D (1995), “Consumer Trade-Offs and the Evaluation of Services,” Journal of Marketing, 59 (1), 17-28.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., and Berry, L., (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and its Implication for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49 (Fall): 41-50.

Sun, J.,Keh, H.T., and Lee, A., (2012). The Effect of Attribute Alignability on Service Evaluation: The Moderating Role of Uncertainty. Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (December): 831-847.

Zeithaml, V., and Bitner, M.J., (2000), Services Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus Across the Firm (2nd Edition). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Downloads

Published

2016-02-20

Issue

Section

Article