Associate Professor of Management
Ph.D., Northwestern University (MEDS)
M. A., Beijing University, China
B. A., Beijing University, China
Professor Susan Feng Lu joined the Krannert Faculty in 2014. She earned her Ph.D in the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. Before coming to Purdue, she was an assistant professor of economics and management at the University of Rochester.
In her research, Professor Lu examines how information problems affect individual behavior and the organization of firms and markets, especially the structure of those industries related to health care. Her current research focuses on three lines concerning information and reputation. The first and main line of research investigates how information affects the behavior of nursing homes. The second line of her research focuses on health analytics with an emphasis on how new information technology changes the landscape of healthcare delivery. In the third line of research, she studies the impact of scientific misconducts on the reputation of individual researchers, and on innovation of a scientific field due to asymmetric information.
Professor Lu's work has appeared in journals including Science, Nature Scientific Reports, Review of Economics and Statistics, Management Science, and Journal of Health Economics. Some of her work have been covered by media such as the Nature, the Freakeconomics, Vox and the Retraction Watch. She won the American Society of Health Economists (ASHE) student paper award, the Early Career Investigator by the NIH-funded HMORN conference, the Health Information Technology (WHITE) best paper award and the 52th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences best paper award.
Who Gets Blamed When a Group Project Goes Wrong?
Consequences stick to some team members more than others, according to a new study of retracted academic papers based on research co-authored by Krannert Professor Susan Feng Lu. The researchers looked at retracted academic articles with multiple authors and compared how frequently each author continued to be cited by fellow scholars following the retraction. Crunching the numbers, they found that the more junior members of the team saw a substantial decline in citations of their work, while the more eminent members experienced little or no change.
- Three-Day Stay Rule Generates Up to $447M in Extra Medicare Spending
The three-day hospital stay rule required for Medicare to cover subsequent skilled nursing facility stays may have generated millions in extra payments to SNFs, a new working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests.
- Study by Krannert prof Susan Lu shows cardiac surgeons’ online ratings prove reliable
Looking for a high-caliber surgeon may be easier than previously thought. Critics of online rating platforms have stated that online physicians’ ratings are nothing more than a popularity contest, based on the interpersonal encounter a patient has with their doctor, rather than on the doctor’s attentiveness to current best practices. Even though the system has been met with skepticism, a new study suggests that the time-honored word-of-mouth method for finding quality health care may hold up after all.
- Economics gets out more often: Using extramural citations to assess economic scholarship
Economics, and economists, are often accused of insularity and hubris, and of talking primarily to themselves in their research. This column, coauthored by Krannert's Susan Lu, uses a recent analysis of citations to and from other disciplines to show that this is no longer the case.
- Checking the pulse on health-care staffing
Working long hours takes a toll. It also can be counterproductive and is commonly linked to more stress and errors.
- Doing the right thing: Scientists reward authors who report their own errors, says study
We’ve always like to highlight cases in which scientists do the right thing and retract problematic papers themselves, rather than being forced to by editors and publishers.