Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

86 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study presents the first comparison of willingness to pay estimates derived from the payment card (PC) contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods. A within-sample experiment was used to elicit women's preferences for Chlamydia screening. The willingness to pay estimate derived from the DCE was larger than that derived from the PC. To investigate why the willingness to pay estimates were different, a range of validity tests were conducted. Both methods produced theoretically valid results, and there was no difference in the reported difficulty of completing the tasks. Evidence of a prominence effect was found in the PC responses. Responses to the DCE satisfied tests of non-satiation. Responses to both methods were compared with revealed preference data. There were significant differences between stated screening intention in both methods and actual screening uptake. Future work should address the external validity of stated preference methods. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)389-401
Number of pages13
JournalHealth Economics
Volume18
Issue number4
Early online date1 Aug 2008
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2009

Keywords

  • contingent valuation
  • payment card
  • discrete choice experiments
  • willingness-to-pay
  • stated preference methods

Cite this

Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments. / Ryan, Mandy; Watson, Verity.

In: Health Economics, Vol. 18, No. 4, 04.2009, p. 389-401.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f656b89210e94bbd87a223cf22aaa92d,
title = "Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments",
abstract = "This study presents the first comparison of willingness to pay estimates derived from the payment card (PC) contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods. A within-sample experiment was used to elicit women's preferences for Chlamydia screening. The willingness to pay estimate derived from the DCE was larger than that derived from the PC. To investigate why the willingness to pay estimates were different, a range of validity tests were conducted. Both methods produced theoretically valid results, and there was no difference in the reported difficulty of completing the tasks. Evidence of a prominence effect was found in the PC responses. Responses to the DCE satisfied tests of non-satiation. Responses to both methods were compared with revealed preference data. There were significant differences between stated screening intention in both methods and actual screening uptake. Future work should address the external validity of stated preference methods. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.",
keywords = "contingent valuation, payment card, discrete choice experiments, willingness-to-pay, stated preference methods",
author = "Mandy Ryan and Verity Watson",
year = "2009",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1002/hec.1364",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "389--401",
journal = "Health Economics",
issn = "1057-9230",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments

AU - Ryan, Mandy

AU - Watson, Verity

PY - 2009/4

Y1 - 2009/4

N2 - This study presents the first comparison of willingness to pay estimates derived from the payment card (PC) contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods. A within-sample experiment was used to elicit women's preferences for Chlamydia screening. The willingness to pay estimate derived from the DCE was larger than that derived from the PC. To investigate why the willingness to pay estimates were different, a range of validity tests were conducted. Both methods produced theoretically valid results, and there was no difference in the reported difficulty of completing the tasks. Evidence of a prominence effect was found in the PC responses. Responses to the DCE satisfied tests of non-satiation. Responses to both methods were compared with revealed preference data. There were significant differences between stated screening intention in both methods and actual screening uptake. Future work should address the external validity of stated preference methods. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

AB - This study presents the first comparison of willingness to pay estimates derived from the payment card (PC) contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods. A within-sample experiment was used to elicit women's preferences for Chlamydia screening. The willingness to pay estimate derived from the DCE was larger than that derived from the PC. To investigate why the willingness to pay estimates were different, a range of validity tests were conducted. Both methods produced theoretically valid results, and there was no difference in the reported difficulty of completing the tasks. Evidence of a prominence effect was found in the PC responses. Responses to the DCE satisfied tests of non-satiation. Responses to both methods were compared with revealed preference data. There were significant differences between stated screening intention in both methods and actual screening uptake. Future work should address the external validity of stated preference methods. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

KW - contingent valuation

KW - payment card

KW - discrete choice experiments

KW - willingness-to-pay

KW - stated preference methods

U2 - 10.1002/hec.1364

DO - 10.1002/hec.1364

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 389

EP - 401

JO - Health Economics

JF - Health Economics

SN - 1057-9230

IS - 4

ER -