IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity of discrete-choice experiments evidence for health risk reduction


  • Harry Telser
  • Peter Zweifel


There is growing interest in discrete-choice experiment (DCE) as a method to elicit consumers' preferences in the health care sector. Increasingly this method is used to determine willingness to pay (WTP) for health-related goods. However, its external validity in the health care domain has not been investigated until now. This paper examines the external validity of DCE concerning the reduction of a health risk. Convergent validity is examined by comparing the value of a statistical life with other preference elicitation techniques, such as revealed preference. Criterion validity is shown by comparing WTP values derived from stated choices in the experiment with those derived from actual choices made by the same individuals. Both tests provide strong evidence in favour of external validity of the DCE method.

Suggested Citation

  • Harry Telser & Peter Zweifel, 2007. "Validity of discrete-choice experiments evidence for health risk reduction," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 69-78.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:39:y:2007:i:1:p:69-78
    DOI: 10.1080/00036840500427858

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Buzby, Jean C. & Roberts, Tanya & Lin, Chung-Tung Jordan & MacDonald, James M., 1996. "Bacterial Foodborne Disease: Medical Costs and Productivity Losses," Agricultural Economics Reports 33991, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    3. Johansson-Stenman , Olof & Svedsäter, Henrik, 2003. "Self Image And Choice Experiments: Hypothetical And Actual Willingness To Pay," Working Papers in Economics 94, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    4. Tami L. Mark & Joffre Swait, 2004. "Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(6), pages 563-573.
    5. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, March.
    6. Barefield, Eric, 1996. "Osteoporosis-Related Hip Fractures Cost $13 Billion to $18 Billion Yearly," Food Review: The Magazine of Food Economics, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 19(1).
    7. Quigley, John M., 2006. "Urban Economics," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt0jr0p2tk, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
    8. Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Madeleine King & Jordan Louviere & Rosalie Viney & Angela Yeoh, 2002. "Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 457-465.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Andriy Danyliv & Milena Pavlova & Irena Gryga & Wim Groot, 2015. "Preferences for physician services in Ukraine: a discrete choice experiment," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 346-365, October.
    2. Özdemir, Semra & Johnson, F. Reed & Hauber, A. Brett, 2009. "Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 894-901, July.
    3. Debby van Helvoort-Postulart & Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Trudy van der Weijden & Maarten F. von Meyenfeldt & Carmen D. Dirksen, 2009. "Discrete choice experiments for complex health-care decisions: does hierarchical information integration offer a solution?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(8), pages 903-920.
    4. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Anika Kaczynski & Peter Zweifel & F. Reed Johnson, 2016. "Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: an overview," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14, December.
    5. Susanne Neckermann & Bruno S. Frey, 2008. "Awards as Incentives," IEW - Working Papers 334, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. Axel Mühlbacher & Anika Kaczynski & Peter Zweifel & F. Johnson, 2015. "Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: an overview," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Mark Harrison & Dan Rigby & Caroline Vass & Terry Flynn & Jordan Louviere & Katherine Payne, 2014. "Risk as an Attribute in Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review of the Literature," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, vol. 7(2), pages 151-170, June.
    8. Peter Zweifel & Ilja Neustadt, 2013. "Why Does Income Redistribution Differ Between Countries? Comparative Evidence From Germany and Switzerland," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 11(3), pages 39-47, October.
    9. Rinaldo Brau & Matteo Lippi Bruni & Anna Maria Pinna, 2010. "Public versus private demand for covering long-term care expenditures," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(28), pages 3651-3668.
    10. Finkelstein, Eric A. & Bilger, Marcel & Flynn, Terry N. & Malhotra, Chetna, 2015. "Preferences for end-of-life care among community-dwelling older adults and patients with advanced cancer: A discrete choice experiment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(11), pages 1482-1489.
    11. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Peter Zweifel & Anika Kaczynski & F. Reed Johnson, 2016. "Experimental measurement of preferences in health care using best-worst scaling (BWS): theoretical and statistical issues," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, December.
    12. Neckermann, Susanne & Frey, Bruno S., 2013. "And the winner is…? The motivating power of employee awards," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 66-77.
    13. Mandy Ryan & Karen Gerard & Gillian Currie, 2012. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics," Chapters,in: The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 41 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. repec:ces:ifodic:v:11:y:2013:i:3:p:19099103 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:applec:v:39:y:2007:i:1:p:69-78. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.