Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome—An application to social care for older people

Ryan, Mandy; Netten, Ann; Skåtun, Diane; Smith, Paul

doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.01.001

Cited by 140 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with three test-retest studies from health economics (Bryan et al 2000;Ryan et al 2006;Skjoldborg et al 2009, see Sect. 2.3) we first analyse choice consistency at the choice-set level.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“…In their overview McConnell et al (1998) name, among others, the correlation between responses to contingent valuation questions, equality of parameters between the distinct samples, and the equality of willingness-to-pay estimates between the samples as tests. Similarly, test-retest studies regarding the results of choice experiments can test the reliability at various levels as it has been done in several studies from health economics (Bryan et al 2000;Ryan et al 2006;Skjoldborg et al 2009, see Sect. 2.3).…”

Section: Test-retest Reliability and Choice Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, there are no notable differences between estimates derived from multivariate models based on the data from the three survey waves. (2) Ryan et al (2006) conducted a discrete choice experiment to value the quality of outcomes regarding social services for elderly people in the UK. The choice experiment consisted of 14 choice sets which were split equally between two questionnaires, that is, seven sets per questionnaire.…”

Section: Previous Findings In Non-market Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies dealing with test-retest reliability of responses to choice experiments have so far all been carried out in the area of health economics (e.g. Bryan et al 2000;Ryan et al 2006;Skjoldborg et al 2009). Within environmental valuation only one study, dealing with preferences for water quality, has analysed temporal reliability across two independently drawn samples (Bliem et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Liebe

Meyerhoff

Hartje

2012

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents the results of the first test-retest study on choice experiments in environmental valuation. In a survey concerning landscape externalities of onshore wind power in central Germany, respondents answered the same five choice sets at two different points in time. Each choice set comprised three alternatives described by five attributes, and the time interval between the test and the retest was eleven months. The analysis takes place at three different levels, investigating choice consistency at the choice task level and repeatability of the latent construct utility at the level of parametric models as well as at the level of willingness-to-pay estimates. At the choice task level we observed 59 % identical choices. The parametric analysis shows that the test and retest estimates are not equal, even when we control for scale, that is, differences in the error variance. However, comparing the marginal willingness-to-pay estimates among test and retest reveals only a statistically significant difference for one of the attributes. Overall, this indicates a moderate test-retest reliability taking into account that consistency at the choice task level overlooks the stochastic nature of the process underlying discrete choice experiments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Test-retest Reliability and Choice Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Findings In Non-market Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Liebe

Meyerhoff

Hartje

2012

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the health sector, there is a growing sense that narrow measures of health gain may not be sufficient for evaluating the benefits of social care (Ryan, Netten, Skatun, & Smith, 2006), care for older people (Grewal et al, 2006), and mental health care (Simon et al, 2013). This has led to interest in operationalising Sen's capability approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

Al‐Janabi

2017

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryA core feature of the capability approach is that a person's capabilities (what they are able to do and be in their life) can differ from their functionings (what they actually do and are in their life). However, the degree to which capability and functioning differ in practice is unclear. This paper investigates this issue, focusing on capability and functioning differences (CFD) across different aspects of life and different individuals. In the study, the ICECAP‐A capability questionnaire was modified to measure both functionings and capabilities and was completed by U.K.‐based convenience sample of 943 people. Around one third of people reported CFD in at least one area of their life, most commonly in terms of their “achievement.” People were more likely to report CFD when they had a degree‐level education and when they had impaired health. An additional finding was that capability varied more with education whereas functioning varied more with health status. This finding needs further examination, but it suggests that the choice of evaluative space may influence how priorities are set for public spending.

show abstract

References

2015

Quality of Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome—An application to social care for older people

Cited by 140 publications

References 39 publications

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Do capability and functioning differ? A study of U.K. survey responses

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About