Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A new preference reversal in health utility measurement

Contents:

Author Info

Abstract

A central assumption in health utility measurement is that preferences are invariant to the elicitation method that is used. This assumptioin is challenged by preferences reversals. Previous studies have observed prefrence resersals between choise and matching tasks and between choise and ranking tasks. We present a new preference reversal that entirely choise-based. Because choise is the basic primitive of economics and utility theory, this preference reversal is more fundamental and troubling. The preference reversal was observed in two studies regarding health states after stroke. Both studies involved large representative samples from the Spanish population, interwied professionally and face-to-face. Possible explanations for the preference reversal are the anticipation of disappointment and elation is risky choise anda the impact of ethical co0nsiderations about the value of live.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.centrodeestudiosandaluces.info/PDFS/E200715.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Centro de Estudios Andaluces in its series Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces with number E2007/15.

as in new window
Length: 35 pages
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cea:doctra:e2007_15

Contact details of provider:
Postal: c/ Bailén 50. 41001 Sevilla
Phone: (34) 955 055 210
Fax: (34) 955 055 211
Email:
Web page: http://www.centrodeestudiosandaluces.es
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Health utility measurement; preference reversal; choice behavior;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
  2. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Sutton, Sara E., 1992. "Scale convergence and utility measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 183-215, July.
  3. Tversky, Amos & Slovic, Paul & Kahneman, Daniel, 1990. "The Causes of Preference Reversal," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 204-17, March.
  4. Handa, Jagdish, 1977. "Risk, Probabilities, and a New Theory of Cardinal Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(1), pages 97-122, February.
  5. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
  6. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1986. "Disappointment and Dynamic Consistency in Choice under Uncertainty," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 271-82, April.
  7. Peter Fishburn, 1980. "A simple model for the utility of gambling," Psychometrika, Springer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 435-448, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Ulrich Schmidt & Michael Stolpe, 2011. "Transitivity in health utility measurement: An experimental analysis," Health Economics Review, Springer, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-4, December.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cea:doctra:e2007_15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Teresa Rodríguez).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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