IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v30y2021i1p3-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kicking the habit is hard: A hybrid choice model investigation into the role of addiction in smoking behavior

Author

Listed:
  • John Buckell
  • David A Hensher
  • Stephane Hess

Abstract

Use of choice models is growing rapidly in tobacco research. These models are being used to answer key policy questions. However, certain aspects of smokers' choice behavior are not well understood. One such feature is addiction. Here, we address this issue by modeling data from a choice experiment on the US smokers. We model addiction using a latent variable. We use this latent variable to understand the relationship between choices and addiction, giving attention to nicotine levels. We find that more addicted smokers have stronger preferences for cigarettes and are unwilling to switch to e‐cigarettes. Addicted smokers value nicotine in tobacco products to a much greater extent than those that are less addicted. Lastly, we forecast short‐term responses to lowering nicotine levels in cigarettes. The results suggest that current nicotine‐focused policies could be effective at encouraging addicted smokers to less harmful products and lead to substantial public health gains.

Suggested Citation

  • John Buckell & David A Hensher & Stephane Hess, 2021. "Kicking the habit is hard: A hybrid choice model investigation into the role of addiction in smoking behavior," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 3-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:30:y:2021:i:1:p:3-19
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.4173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4173
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.4173?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Bekker-Grob & Bas Donkers & Marcel Jonker & Elly Stolk, 2015. "Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(5), pages 373-384, October.
    2. Philip DeCicca & Donald Kenkel & Michael F. Lovenheim, 2022. "The Economics of Tobacco Regulation: A Comprehensive Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 883-970, September.
    3. David A. Hensher & Camila Balbontin & William H. Greene & Joffre Swait, 2021. "Experience as a conditioning effect on choice: Does it matter whether it is exogenous or endogenous?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2825-2855, October.
    4. Chaloupka, Frank J. & Warner, Kenneth E., 2000. "The economics of smoking," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 29, pages 1539-1627, Elsevier.
    5. Buckell, John & Hess, Stephane, 2019. "Stubbing out hypothetical bias: improving tobacco market predictions by combining stated and revealed preference data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 93-102.
    6. Balbontin, Camila & Hensher, David A. & Collins, Andrew T., 2019. "How to better represent preferences in choice models: The contributions to preference heterogeneity attributable to the presence of process heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 218-248.
    7. Kabindra Regmi & Dinesh Kaphle & Sabina Timilsina & Nik Annie Afiqah Tuha, 2018. "Application of Discrete-Choice Experiment Methods in Tobacco Control: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 5-17, March.
    8. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Budziński, Wiktor, 2019. "Simulation error in maximum likelihood estimation of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 73-85.
    9. Cawley, John & Ruhm, Christopher J., 2011. "The Economics of Risky Health Behaviors," Handbook of Health Economics, in: Mark V. Pauly & Thomas G. Mcguire & Pedro P. Barros (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 95-199, Elsevier.
    10. Daly, Andrew & Hess, Stephane & de Jong, Gerard, 2012. "Calculating errors for measures derived from choice modelling estimates," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 333-341.
    11. Vij, Akshay & Walker, Joan L., 2016. "How, when and why integrated choice and latent variable models are latently useful," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 192-217.
    12. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    13. Hensher, David A. & Ho, Chinh Q., 2016. "Experience conditioning in commuter modal choice modelling – Does it make a difference?," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 164-176.
    14. Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2016. "Discrete choice models’ ρ2: A reintroduction to an old friend," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 60-65.
    15. Greene,William H. & Hensher,David A., 2010. "Modeling Ordered Choices," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521142373.
    16. F. Reed Johnson & Ateesha F. Mohamed & Semra Özdemir & Deborah A. Marshall & Kathryn A. Phillips, 2011. "How does cost matter in health‐care discrete‐choice experiments?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 323-330, March.
    17. Hess, Stephane & Hensher, David A. & Daly, Andrew, 2012. "Not bored yet – Revisiting respondent fatigue in stated choice experiments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 626-644.
    18. Donald S. Kenkel & Sida Peng & Michael F. Pesko & Hua Wang, 2020. "Mostly harmless regulation? Electronic cigarettes, public policy, and consumer welfare," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(11), pages 1364-1377, November.
    19. Greene,William H. & Hensher,David A., 2010. "Modeling Ordered Choices," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521194204.
    20. Hess, Stephane & Spitz, Greg & Bradley, Mark & Coogan, Matt, 2018. "Analysis of mode choice for intercity travel: Application of a hybrid choice model to two distinct US corridors," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 547-567.
    21. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth E. & Polak, John W., 2006. "On the use of a Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a Mixed Logit Model for vehicle choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 147-163, February.
    22. Bhat, Chandra R., 2003. "Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 837-855, November.
    23. Mark V. Pauly & Thomas G. Mcguire & Pedro P. Barros (ed.), 2011. "Handbook of Health Economics," Handbook of Health Economics, Elsevier, volume 2, number 2.
    24. Peter M. Fayers & David J. Hand, 2002. "Causal variables, indicator variables and measurement scales: an example from quality of life," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 165(2), pages 233-253, June.
    25. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    26. Takanori Ida & Rei Goto, 2009. "Simultaneous Measurement Of Time And Risk Preferences: Stated Preference Discrete Choice Modeling Analysis Depending On Smoking Behavior," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1169-1182, November.
    27. Andrew Daly & Stephane Hess & Bhanu Patruni & Dimitris Potoglou & Charlene Rohr, 2012. "Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on rail travel behaviour," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 267-297, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 4th January 2021
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2021-01-04 12:00:05

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Whytcross, David, 2024. "How tobacco excise increases affect smoking behaviours in Australia," Warwick-Monash Economics Student Papers 67, Warwick Monash Economics Student Papers.
    2. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2021. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-033, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2022. "Endogeneity and Measurement Bias of the Indicator Variables in Hybrid Choice Models: A Monte Carlo Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 605-629, November.
    4. Arora, Nikita & Crastes dit Sourd, Romain & Hanson, Kara & Woldesenbet, Dorka & Seifu, Abiy & Quaife, Matthew, 2022. "Linking health worker motivation with their stated job preferences: A hybrid choice analysis in Ethiopia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Buckell & Vrinda Vasavada & Sarah Wordsworth & Dean A. Regier & Matthew Quaife, 2022. "Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 363-381, February.
    2. Arora, Nikita & Crastes dit Sourd, Romain & Hanson, Kara & Woldesenbet, Dorka & Seifu, Abiy & Quaife, Matthew, 2022. "Linking health worker motivation with their stated job preferences: A hybrid choice analysis in Ethiopia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    3. Buckell, John & White, Justin S. & Shang, Ce, 2020. "Can incentive-compatibility reduce hypothetical bias in smokers’ experimental choice behavior? A randomized discrete choice experiment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    4. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Schmid, Basil & Axhausen, Kay W., 2019. "In-store or online shopping of search and experience goods: A hybrid choice approach," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 156-180.
    6. David A. J. Meester & Stephane Hess & John Buckell & Thomas O. Hancock, 2023. "Can decision field theory enhance our understanding of health‐based choices? Evidence from risky health behaviors," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(8), pages 1710-1732, August.
    7. Macea, Luis F. & Serrano, Iván & Carcache-Guas, Camila, 2023. "A reservation-based parking behavioral model for parking demand management in urban areas," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    8. Scorrano, Mariangela & Rotaris, Lucia, 2022. "The role of environmental awareness and knowledge in the choice of a seated electric scooter," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 333-347.
    9. Bernadeta Gołębiowska & Anna Bartczak & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2020. "Energy Demand Management and Social Norms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, July.
    10. Kim, Seheon & Rasouli, Soora, 2022. "The influence of latent lifestyle on acceptance of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS): A hierarchical latent variable and latent class approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 304-319.
    11. Malte Welling & Ewa Zawojska & Julian Sagebiel, 2022. "Information, Consequentiality and Credibility in Stated Preference Surveys: A Choice Experiment on Climate Adaptation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 82(1), pages 257-283, May.
    12. Faccioli, Michela & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Glenk, Klaus & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2020. "Environmental attitudes and place identity as determinants of preferences for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    13. Tsoleridis, Panagiotis & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Hess, Stephane, 2022. "Deriving transport appraisal values from emerging revealed preference data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 225-245.
    14. Dea van Lierop & Francisco J. Bahamonde-Birke, 2023. "Commuting to the future: Assessing the relationship between individuals’ usage of information and communications technology, personal attitudes, characteristics and mode choice," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 353-371, June.
    15. Luis Márquez & Víctor Cantillo & Julián Arellana, 2020. "Assessing the influence of indicators’ complexity on hybrid discrete choice model estimates," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 373-396, February.
    16. Haghani, Milad & Sarvi, Majid, 2018. "Hypothetical bias and decision-rule effect in modelling discrete directional choices," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 361-388.
    17. Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2022. "Endogeneity and Measurement Bias of the Indicator Variables in Hybrid Choice Models: A Monte Carlo Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 605-629, November.
    18. Puteri Paramita & Zuduo Zheng & Md Mazharul Haque & Simon Washington & Paul Hyland, 2018. "User satisfaction with train fares: A comparative analysis in five Australian cities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-26, June.
    19. Abay, Kibrom A., 2013. "Examining pedestrian-injury severity using alternative disaggregate models," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 123-136.
    20. Buckell, John & Hess, Stephane, 2019. "Stubbing out hypothetical bias: improving tobacco market predictions by combining stated and revealed preference data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 93-102.

    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:wly:hlthec:v:30:y:2021:i:1:p:3-19. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.