IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uiiexx/v47y2015i10p1112-1121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling dependence in health behaviors

Author

Listed:
  • Brandon Pope
  • Abhijit Deshmukh
  • Andrew Johnson
  • J. James Rohack

Abstract

The prediction and control of distributed healthcare behaviors within a population such as smoking, diet, and physical activity are of great concern to those who pay for healthcare, including employers, insurers, and public policy makers, given the significant effect on costs. In considering the selection of multiple health behaviors, the nature of dependence between behaviors must be considered because simplifying assumptions such as independence are untenable. Using data from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, we find strong evidence to reject the hypothesis of independence between the aforementioned behaviors, while finding some evidence of conditional independence. In this article, several alternatives to the assumption of independence are presented, each of which significantly improves the ability to predict combined behavior. We present models of dependence through marginal probabilities and, taking inspiration from non-expected utility maximizing behavior, through attractions to behavioral alternatives. We find that consistently healthy (or unhealthy) combinations of behaviors are more likely to occur relative to the assumption of independence. We discuss how our results could be used in designing policies to curtail costs and improve health.

Suggested Citation

  • Brandon Pope & Abhijit Deshmukh & Andrew Johnson & J. James Rohack, 2015. "Modeling dependence in health behaviors," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(10), pages 1112-1121, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uiiexx:v:47:y:2015:i:10:p:1112-1121
    DOI: 10.1080/0740817X.2015.1009197
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0740817X.2015.1009197
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0740817X.2015.1009197?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:uiiexx:v:47:y:2015:i:10:p:1112-1121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uiie .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.