How does cost matter in health-care discrete-choice experiments?

Health Economics

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 323-330

  Johnson, F Reed ^a   Mohamed, Ateesha F ^a   Özdemir, Semra ^a,b   Marshall, Deborah A ^c,d   Phillips, Kathryn A ^e  

^a RTI HEALTH SOLUTIONS   (United States)

^b IL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

decision heuristics; discrete choice experiments; treatment cost; willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INSURANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; THEORETICAL SAMPLE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY ESTIMATION;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HEALTH EXPENDITURES; HUMANS; INCOME; LINEAR MODELS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; RESEARCH DESIGN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 79951533110     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: 10991050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.1591     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Aadland D, Caplan AJ,. 2006. Cheap talk reconsidered: new evidence from CVM. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 60: 562-578. (Pubitemid 44103434)
2. Bryan S, Gold L, Sheldon R, Buxton M,. 2000. Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability. Health Economics 9 (5): 385-395. (Pubitemid 30612142)
3. Cummings RG, Taylor LO,. 1999. Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. American Economic Review 89 (3): 649-666.
4. Hanley N, Ryan M, Wright R,. 2003. Estimating the monetary value of health care: lessons from environmental economics. Health Economics 12 (1): 3-16. (Pubitemid 36149856)
5. Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH,. 2005. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom.
6. Huber J, Zwerina K,. 1996. The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. Journal of Marketing Research 33: 307-317.
7. Just RE, Hueth DL, Schmitz A,. 1982. Applied Welfare Economics and Public Policy. Prentice-Hall, Inc: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
8. Kanninen B,. 2002. Optimal design for multinomial choice experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 39: 214-227.
9. Lancsar E, Savage E,. 2004. Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistency between current methods and random utility and welfare theory. Health Economics 13: 901-907. (Pubitemid 39264236)
10. List JA,. 2001. Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auction experiments. American Economic Review 91 (5): 1498-1507. (Pubitemid 33594711)
11. Maddala T, Phillips KA, Johnson FR,. 2003. An experiment on simplifying conjoint analysis designs for measuring preferences. Health Economics 12 (12): 1037-1047.
12. McCloskey DN,. The Applied Theory of Price (2nd edn). Macmillan Publishing Company: New York, 1982.
13. Murphy JJ, Stevens T, Weatherhead D,. 2005. Is cheap talk effective at eliminating hypothetical bias in a provision point mechanism? Environmental and Resource Economics 30 (3): 327-343. (Pubitemid 40560743)
14. Olsen JA, Smith RD,. 2001. Theory versus practice: a review of 'willingness to pay' in health and health care. Health Economics 10 (1): 39-52.
15. Özdemir S, Johnson FR, Hauber AB,. 2009. Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care. Journal of Health Economics 28 (4): 894-901.
16. Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ,. 1993. The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge University Press: New York, NY.
17. Ryan M,. 2004a. Deriving welfare measures in discrete choice experiments: a comment to Lancsar and Savage (1). Health Economics 13: 909-912. (Pubitemid 39264237)
18. Ryan M,. 2004b. A comparison of stated preference methods for estimating monetary values. Health Economics 13 (3): 291-296. (Pubitemid 38292485)
19. Santos Silva J,. 2004. Deriving welfare measures in discrete choice experiments: a comment to Lancsar and Savage (2). Health Economics 13: 913-918. (Pubitemid 39264238)
20. Tesler H, Zweifel P,. 2002. Measuring willingness/to/pay for risk reduction: an application of conjoint analysis. Health Economics 11 (2): 129-139. (Pubitemid 34257015)
21. Zwerina K, Huber J, Kuhfeld W,. 1996. A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs. Fuqua School of Business, Duke University: Durham.