Learning and Satisficing: An Analysis of Sequence Effects in Health Valuation

Craig, Benjamin M.; Runge, Shannon K.; Rand‐Hendriksen, Kim; Ramos-Goñi, Juan Manuel; Oppe, Mark

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.11.005

Cited by 19 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies were inconclusive about the number of tasks that should be included to avoid respondent fatigue. According to Craig et al [ 36 ], neither randomization nor fewer response tasks would affect response precision, a statement that contradicts prior findings [ 37 – 39 ]. On the other hand, Savage et al [ 40 ] found that respondents suffered fatigue in online surveys with repeated tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Eye tracking to explore attendance in health-state descriptions

Selivanova

Krabbe

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionA crucial assumption in health valuation methods is that respondents pay equal attention to all information components presented in the response task. So far, there is no solid evidence that respondents are fulfilling this condition. The aim of our study is to explore the attendance to various information cues presented in the discrete choice (DC) response tasks.MethodsEye tracking was used to study the eye movements and fixations on specific information areas. This was done for seven DC response tasks comprising health-state descriptions. A sample of 10 respondents participated in the study. Videos of their eye movements were recorded and are presented graphically. Frequencies were computed for length of fixation and number of fixations, so differences in attendance were demonstrated for particular attributes in the tasks.ResultsAll respondents completed the survey. Respondents were fixating on the left-sided health-state descriptions slightly longer than on the right-sided. Fatigue was not observed, as the time spent did not decrease in the final response tasks. The time spent on the tasks depended on the difficulty of the task and the amount of information presented.Discussion and conclusionEye tracking proved to be a feasible method to study the process of paying attention and fixating on health-state descriptions in the DC response tasks. Eye tracking facilitates the investigation of whether respondents fully read the information in health descriptions or whether they ignore particular elements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Eye tracking to explore attendance in health-state descriptions

Selivanova

Krabbe

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, limitations common to DCEs are ordering effects, hypothetical bias, and framing effects. First, ordering effects were minimized by randomizing participants to one of the survey versions because randomizing the order of choice tasks and attributes for each participant was not possible in a paper-based survey ( 39 ). Second, the predicted uptake of upper endoscopy was high.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment

Peters

Siersema²

2020

Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION: As novel, less invasive (non)endoscopic techniques for detection of Barrett's esophagus (BE) have been developed, there is now renewed interest in screening for BE and related neoplasia. We aimed to determine public preferences for esophageal adenocarcinoma screening to understand the potential of minimally invasive screening modalities. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted in 1,500 individuals, aged 50–75 years, from the general population. Individuals were repeatedly asked to choose between screening scenarios based on conventional upper endoscopy, transnasal endoscopy, nonendoscopic cell collection devices, breath analysis, and a blood test, combined with various levels of test sensitivity and specificity, and no screening. A multinomial logit model was used to estimate individuals' preferences and to calculate expected participation rates. RESULTS: In total, 554 respondents (36.9%) completed the survey. The average predicted uptake was 70.5% (95% confidence interval: 69.1%–71.8%). Test sensitivity (47.7%), screening technique (32.6%), and specificity (19.7%) affected screening participation (all P < 0.05). A low test sensitivity had the highest impact on screening participation, resulting in a 25.0% (95% confidence interval: 22.6%–27.7%) decrease. Respondents preferred noninvasive screening tests over endoscopic and capsule-based techniques, but only if sensitivity and specificity were above 80%. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that individuals generally prefer noninvasive BE screening tests. However, these tests would unlikely improve screening uptake when associated with a much lower accuracy for detecting BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma compared with conventional upper endoscopy. Improving accuracy of minimally invasive screening strategies and informing the target population about these accuracies is therefore essential to maximally stimulate screening participation.

show abstract

“…There is a significant literature addressing sequence effects, when/how they occur, and implications for welfare estimation (e.g., Boyle, Bishop, and Welsh 1993;Carson and Mitchell 1995;Bateman and Langford 1997;Carson, Flores, and Hanemann 1998;Holmes and Boyle 2005;Day and Prades 2010;Bech, Kjaer, and Lauridsen 2011;Day et al 2012;Craig et al 2015). If each choice task presented to a respondent is presumed to be independent of the other choices in the sequence, then the absence of a sequencing effect is desirable.…”

Section: Number Of Valuation Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies

Johnston

Boyle

Adamowicz

et al. 2017

Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Econom

806

701

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article proposes contemporary best-practice recommendations for stated preference (SP) studies used to inform decision making, grounded in the accumulated body of peer-reviewed literature. These recommendations consider the use of SP methods to estimate both use and non-use (passive-use) values, and cover the broad SP domain, including contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments. We focus on applications to public goods in the context of the environment and human health but also consider ways in which the proposed recommendations might apply to other common areas of application. The recommendations recognize that SP results may be used and reused (benefit transfers) by governmental agencies and nongovernmental organizations, and that all such applications must be considered. The intended result is a set of guidelines for SP studies that is more comprehensive than that of the original National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Blue Ribbon Panel on contingent valuation, is more germane to contemporary applications, and reflects the two decades of research since that time. We also distinguish between practices for which accumulated research is sufficient to support recommendations and those for which greater uncertainty remains. The goal of this article is to raise the quality of SP studies used to support decision making and promote research that will further enhance the practice of these studies worldwide.

show abstract

Learning and Satisficing: An Analysis of Sequence Effects in Health Valuation

Cited by 19 publications

References 24 publications

Eye tracking to explore attendance in health-state descriptions

Eye tracking to explore attendance in health-state descriptions

Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment

Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About