Construct validity of the bidding game, binary with follow-up, and a novel structured haggling question format in determining willingness to pay for insecticide-treated mosquito nets

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 90-101

  Onwujekwe, Obinna ^a,b   Fox Rushby, Julia ^c   Hanson, Kara ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA   (South Africa)

^c BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Construct validity; Contingent valuation; Question formats; Structured haggling technique; Theoretical validity; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

INSECTICIDE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BED NET; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MALE; STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADULT; AGED; ANIMALS; BEDDING AND LINENS; COMMERCE; CULICIDAE; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HUMANS; INSECTICIDES; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALARIA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEGOTIATING; NIGERIA; PROTECTIVE DEVICES;

EID: 38349186571     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07308748     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Golan EH, Shechter M. Contingent valuation of supplemental health care in Israel. Med Decis Making. 1993 ; 13 (4). 302 - 10.
2. O'Brien B., Goeree R., Gafni A., et al. Assessing the value of a new pharmaceutical: a feasibility study of contingent valuation in managed care. Med Care. 1998 ; 36 (3). 370 - 84.
3. Corso PS, Hammitt JK, Graaham JD, Dieker RC, Goldie SJ Assessing preferences for prevention versus treatment using willingness to pay. Med Decis Making. 2002 ; 22 (suppl): S92 - 101.
4. Foreit JR, Foreit KG The reliability and validity of willingness to pay surveys for reproductive health pricing decisions in developing countries. Health Policy. 2003 ; 63 (1). 37 - 47.
5. Lenert LA Use of willingness to pay to study values for pharmacotherapies for migraine headache. Med Care. 2003 ; 41 (2). 299 - 308.
6. Mitchell RC, Carson RT Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington (DC): Resources for the Future ; 1989.
7. Diamond P., Hausman J. Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? J Econ Perspect. 1994 ; 8 (4). 45 - 64.
8. Stavem K. Association of willingness to pay with severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, health status and other preference measures. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2002 ; 6 (6). 542 - 9.
9. Baron J. Biases in the quantitative measurement of values for public decisions. Psychol Bull. 1997 ; 122: 72 - 88.
10. Currie GR, Donaldson C., O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW, Drummond MF Willingness to pay for what? A note of alternate definitions of health care program benefits for contingent valuation studies. Med Decis Making. 2002 ; 22 (6). 493 - 7.
11. Shackley P., Donaldson C. Should we use willingness to pay to elicit community preferences for health care? New evidence from using a ''marginal'' approach. J Health Econ. 2002 ; 21 (6). 971 - 91.
12. Klose T. The contingent valuation method in health care. Health Policy. 1999 ; 47: 97 - 123.
13. Asgary A., Willis KG Estimating the benefits of construction measures to mitigate earthquake risks in Iran. Environ Plann B Plann Des. 1997 ; 24 (4). 613 - 24.
14. S treiner DL, Norman GR Health Measurement Scales: Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 2 nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press ; 1995.
15. Carmines EG, Zeller RA Reliability and Validity Assessment. London: Sage ; 1979.
16. Luchini S., Protiere C., Moatti JP Eliciting several willingness to pay in a single contingent valuation survey: application to health care. Health Econ. 2003 ; 12 (1). 51 - 64.
17. Gyldmark M., Morrison GC Demand for health care in Denmark: results of a national sample survey using contingent valuation. Soc Sci Med. 2001 ; 53 (8). 1023 - 36.
18. Dalmau-Matarrodona E. Alternative approaches to obtain optimal bid values in contingent valuation studies and to model protest zeros: estimating the determinants of individual's willingness to pay for home care services in day care surgery. Health Econ. 2001 ; 10: 101 - 18.
19. Donaldson C., Jones AM, Mapp TJ, Olson JA Limited dependent variables in willingness to pay studies: applications in health care. Appl Econ. 1998: 30 ; 667 - 77.
20. Onwujekwe OE, Nwagbo DFE Investigating starting-point bias: a survey of willingness to pay for insecticide-treated nets. Soc Sci Med. 2002 ; 55 (12). 2121 - 30.
21. Onwujekwe OE, Chima R., Shu E., Nwagbo D., Okonkwo P. Hypothetical and actual willingness to pay for insecticide-treated nets: a study in five Nigerian communities. Trop Med Int Health. 2001 ; 6 (7). 545 - 53.
22. Goodman CA, Mnzava AE, Dlamini SS, Sharp BL, Mthembu DJ, Gumede JK Comparison of the cost and cost-effectiveness of insecticide-treated bednets and residual house-spraying in Kwa-Zulu-Natal, South Africa. Trop Med Int Health. 2001 ; 6 (4). 280 - 95.
23. Johannesson M., Jonsson B., Borgquist L. Willingness to pay for anti-hypertensive therapy: results of a Swedish pilot study. J Health Econ. 1991 ; 10 (4). 461 - 74.
24. Hoddinott J. Modelling remittance flows in Kenya. J Afr Econ. 1992 ; 1 (2). 207 - 32.
25. Donaldson C., Farrar S., Mapp T., Walker A., McPhee S. Assessing community values in health care: is the ''willingness to pay'' method feasible? Health Care Anal. 1997 ; 5: 7 - 29.
26. Guyatt HL, Ochola SA, Snow RW Too poor to pay: charging for insecticide-treated bednets in highland Kenya. Trop Med Int Health. 2002 ; 7 (10). 846 - 50.
27. Loomis J., Brown T., Lucero B., Peterson G. Improving validity experiments of contingent valuation methods: results of efforts to reduce the disparity of hypothetical and actual WTP. Land Econ. 1996 ; 72: 450 - 61.
28. Brieger WR, Ramakrishna J., Adeniyi JD Community response to social marketing: filters for guinea worm control. Int Q Community Health Educ. 1989 - 1990 ; 19 (1). 3 - 17.