Descriptive validity of alternative intertemporal models for health outcomes: an axiomatic test
Intertemporal preferences for health are an important concept when modelling health-affecting behaviour and with respect to informing discounting practice in economic evaluation. The aim of this paper is to test robustly stationarity, the key axiom of the Discounted Utility model, and to test whether the quasi‐hyperbolic or generalised hyperbolic model provides a better description of individual time preferences for health outcomes when stationarity is violated. Very little is known about the descriptive validity of the quasi‐hyperbolic model. The different models can lead to different predictions and it is therefore crucial to test which functional form is more descriptively valid. An axiomatic approach is used. Intertemporal preferences were elicited from 203 university students. The results showed that stationarity is violated. Individuals discounted both initial delay and further delays between outcomes at a decreasing rate. This suggests that the quasi‐hyperbolic model may not be appropriate to use in intertemporal analyses of health behaviour. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Volume (Year): 20 (2011)
Issue (Month): 7 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:20:y:2011:i:7:p:770-782. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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.