Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care

Journal of Health Economics

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 894-901

  Özdemir, Semra ^a   Johnson, F Reed ^b   Hauber, A Brett ^b  

^a IL   (United States)

^b RTI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Cheap talk; Discrete choice; Stated preference methods; Wtp space

Indexed keywords

DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; ESTIMATION METHOD; HEALTH CARE; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LOGIT ANALYSIS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

ADULT; AGED; ARTHRITIS, RHEUMATOID; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE;

EID: 70349257530     PISSN: 01676296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Berkowitz L. Decreased helpfulness with increased group size through lessening the effects of the needy individual's dependency. Journal of Personality 46 2 (1978) 299-312
2. Bryan S., Martin B., Robert S., and Alison G. Magnetic resonance imaging for the investigation of knee injuries: an investigation of preferences. Health Economics 7 (1998) 595-603
3. Brown T.C., Ajzen I., and Hrubes D. Further test of entreaties to avoid hypothetical bias in referendum contingent valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 46 (2003) 353-361
4. Cameron T. A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 15 (1988) 355-379
5. Cameron T., and James M. Estimating willingness-to-pay from survey data: an alternative pre-test-market evaluation procedure. Journal of Marketing Research 24 (1987) 389-395
6. Cummings R.G., and Taylor L.O. Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. American Economic Review 89 (1999) 649-665
7. Cummings R.G., Harrison G.W., and Rutström E.E. Homegrown values and hypothetical surveys: is the dichotomous choice approach incentive-compatible?. American Economic Review 85 (1995) 260-266
8. Fautrel B., Clarke A.E., Guillemin F., Adam V., St Pierre Y., Panaritis T., et al. Valuing a hypothetical cure for rheumatoid arthritis using the contingent valuation methodology: the patient perspective. Journal of Rheumatology 32 3 (2005) 443-453
9. Fraenkel L., Rabidou N., and Dhar R. Are rheumatologists' treatment decisions influenced by patients' age?. Rheumatology (Oxford) 45 12 (2006) 1555-1557
10. Gan T.J., Lubarsky D.A., Flood E.M., et al. Patient preferences for acute pain treatment. British Journal of Anesthesia 92 5 (2004) 681-688
11. Huber J., and Zwerina K. The Importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. Journal of Marketing Research 33 (1996) 307-317
12. Jobanputra P., Wilson J., Douglas K., and Burls A. A survey of British rheumatologists' DMARD preferences for rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 43 2 (2004) 206-210
13. Johnson F.R., Hauber A.B., Osoba D., Hsu M.A., Coombs J., and Copley-Meriman C. Are chemotherapy patients hrqol importance weights consistent with linear scoring rules? A stated-choice approach. Quality of Life Research 15 (2006) 285-298
14. Johnson, F.R., Kanninen, B., Bingham, M., Özdemir, S., 2006b. Experimental Design for Stated Choice Studies in Valuing Environmental Amenities using Stated Choice Studies by B. Kanninen. Springer Press, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
15. Johnson F.R., Fries E., and Banzhaf H.S. Valuing morbidity: an integration of the willingness-to-pay and health-status index literatures. Journal of Health Economics 16 (1998) 641-665
16. Johnson F.R., and Desvousges W.H. Estimating stated preferences with rated-pair data: environmental, health, and employment effects of energy programs. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34 (1997) 79-99
17. Kanninen B. Optimal design for multinomial choice experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 39 (2002) 214-227
18. List J.A. Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportscards. American Economic Review 91 (2001) 1498-1507
19. Lusk J.L. Effects of cheap talk on consumer willingness-to-pay for golden rice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85 4 (2003) 840-856
20. Murphy J.J., Steven T., and Weatherhead D. Is cheap talk effective at eliminating hypothetical bias in a provision point mechanism?. Environmental and Resource Economics 30 (2005) 327-343
21. Revelt D., and Train K. Mixed logit with repeated choices: households' choices of appliance efficiency level. Review of Economics and Statistics 80 4 (1998) 647-657
22. Ryan M., and Hughes J. Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management. Health Economics 6 (1997) 261-273
23. Slothuus U., and Brooks R.G. Willingness to pay in arthritis: a Danish contribution. Rheumatology (Oxford) 39 7 (2000) 791-799
24. Telser H., and Zweifel P. Validity of discrete-choice experiments evidence for health risk reduction. Applied Economics 39 1 (2007) 69-78
25. Thompson M.S., Read J.L., and Liang M. Feasibility of willingness-to-pay measurement in chronic arthritis. Medical Decision Making 4 2 (1984) 195-215
26. Train, K., Weeks, M., 2005. in: Scarpa, R., Alberini, A. (Eds.), Discrete Choice Models in Preference Space and Willingness-to-Pay Space in Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics. Springer Press, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
27. Zwerina K., Huber J., and Kuhfeld W. A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs (1996), Fuqua School of Business, Duke University