Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation: Internet panels and mail surveys

Mandy Ryan* (Corresponding Author), Emmanouil Mentzakis, Catriona Matheson, Christine Bond

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Stated preferences methods are extensively applied in health economics to elicit preferences. Whilst mailed surveys were commonly used to collect data, internet panel (IP) surveys are being increasingly used. This raises questions about the validity of responses and estimated willingness-to-pay (WTP) values generated from IP surveys. We conduct the first study in health to compare a contingent valuation (CV) internet panel survey with a mailed survey using the Electoral Roll. Our IP has a higher response rate and lower item missing response rate. The difference is reduced but remains when restricting comparisons to valid WTPs. Sample characteristics differ, with significant differences between modes for gender, age, income, and attitudes and knowledge. Whilst difference in WTP values exist, with the IP resulting in higher values, we find limited evidence that such differences are statistically significant. The mail survey has lower initial cost per response; however, once restricting samples to valid WTP responses with non-missing respondent information the cost per response across modes is similar. Our results, suggesting that internet panels generate valid and cost-effective values, are encouraging as researchers move increasingly to IPs to collect preference data.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)234-242
Number of pages9
JournalHealth Economics
Volume29
Issue number2
Early online date11 Dec 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2020

Fingerprint

Postal Service
Internet
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health
Surveys and Questionnaires
Economics
Research Personnel

Keywords

  • contingent valuation
  • internet panels
  • mailed survey
  • mode effects
  • willingness to pay

Cite this

Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation : Internet panels and mail surveys. / Ryan, Mandy (Corresponding Author); Mentzakis, Emmanouil; Matheson, Catriona; Bond, Christine.

In: Health Economics, Vol. 29, No. 2, 02.2020, p. 234-242.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ryan, Mandy ; Mentzakis, Emmanouil ; Matheson, Catriona ; Bond, Christine. / Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation : Internet panels and mail surveys. In: Health Economics. 2020 ; Vol. 29, No. 2. pp. 234-242.
@article{ec63b5253aa242d9bb38b5d88481ccb6,
title = "Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation: Internet panels and mail surveys",
abstract = "Stated preferences methods are extensively applied in health economics to elicit preferences. Whilst mailed surveys were commonly used to collect data, internet panel (IP) surveys are being increasingly used. This raises questions about the validity of responses and estimated willingness-to-pay (WTP) values generated from IP surveys. We conduct the first study in health to compare a contingent valuation (CV) internet panel survey with a mailed survey using the Electoral Roll. Our IP has a higher response rate and lower item missing response rate. The difference is reduced but remains when restricting comparisons to valid WTPs. Sample characteristics differ, with significant differences between modes for gender, age, income, and attitudes and knowledge. Whilst difference in WTP values exist, with the IP resulting in higher values, we find limited evidence that such differences are statistically significant. The mail survey has lower initial cost per response; however, once restricting samples to valid WTP responses with non-missing respondent information the cost per response across modes is similar. Our results, suggesting that internet panels generate valid and cost-effective values, are encouraging as researchers move increasingly to IPs to collect preference data.",
keywords = "contingent valuation, internet panels, mailed survey, mode effects, willingness to pay",
author = "Mandy Ryan and Emmanouil Mentzakis and Catriona Matheson and Christine Bond",
note = "Funding Information Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates University of Aberdeen",
year = "2020",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1002/hec.3983",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "234--242",
journal = "Health Economics",
issn = "1057-9230",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation

T2 - Internet panels and mail surveys

AU - Ryan, Mandy

AU - Mentzakis, Emmanouil

AU - Matheson, Catriona

AU - Bond, Christine

N1 - Funding Information Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates University of Aberdeen

PY - 2020/2

Y1 - 2020/2

N2 - Stated preferences methods are extensively applied in health economics to elicit preferences. Whilst mailed surveys were commonly used to collect data, internet panel (IP) surveys are being increasingly used. This raises questions about the validity of responses and estimated willingness-to-pay (WTP) values generated from IP surveys. We conduct the first study in health to compare a contingent valuation (CV) internet panel survey with a mailed survey using the Electoral Roll. Our IP has a higher response rate and lower item missing response rate. The difference is reduced but remains when restricting comparisons to valid WTPs. Sample characteristics differ, with significant differences between modes for gender, age, income, and attitudes and knowledge. Whilst difference in WTP values exist, with the IP resulting in higher values, we find limited evidence that such differences are statistically significant. The mail survey has lower initial cost per response; however, once restricting samples to valid WTP responses with non-missing respondent information the cost per response across modes is similar. Our results, suggesting that internet panels generate valid and cost-effective values, are encouraging as researchers move increasingly to IPs to collect preference data.

AB - Stated preferences methods are extensively applied in health economics to elicit preferences. Whilst mailed surveys were commonly used to collect data, internet panel (IP) surveys are being increasingly used. This raises questions about the validity of responses and estimated willingness-to-pay (WTP) values generated from IP surveys. We conduct the first study in health to compare a contingent valuation (CV) internet panel survey with a mailed survey using the Electoral Roll. Our IP has a higher response rate and lower item missing response rate. The difference is reduced but remains when restricting comparisons to valid WTPs. Sample characteristics differ, with significant differences between modes for gender, age, income, and attitudes and knowledge. Whilst difference in WTP values exist, with the IP resulting in higher values, we find limited evidence that such differences are statistically significant. The mail survey has lower initial cost per response; however, once restricting samples to valid WTP responses with non-missing respondent information the cost per response across modes is similar. Our results, suggesting that internet panels generate valid and cost-effective values, are encouraging as researchers move increasingly to IPs to collect preference data.

KW - contingent valuation

KW - internet panels

KW - mailed survey

KW - mode effects

KW - willingness to pay

U2 - 10.1002/hec.3983

DO - 10.1002/hec.3983

M3 - Article

C2 - 31828891

VL - 29

SP - 234

EP - 242

JO - Health Economics

JF - Health Economics

SN - 1057-9230

IS - 2

ER -