IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v34y2025i10p1907-1920.html

The Impact of Incentives on Valuing Health Risks

Author

Listed:
  • Maria José Gil‐Moltó
  • Arne Risa Hole
  • Henrik Andersson
  • Geir Godager

Abstract

Recent research has found that health risk values elicited using Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) may be inadequately sensitive to the magnitude of the risk reduction, a phenomenon referred to as insensitivity to scope. This paper investigates the use of DCEs to estimate the value of a statistical life (VSL) under different experimental conditions. In particular, we use an experimental design where in one experimental arm we carry out a standard unincentivised DCE as in the existing literature, while in the other experimental arm we carry out an incentivized version of the DCE with real payments. Our findings suggest that the incentive has an impact on the results, in the sense that the VSL estimates are higher in the unincentivised arm of the experiment. However, we find evidence of external insensitivity to scope in both experimental arms and only weak evidence of stronger internal sensitivity to scope in the incentivized arm. Hence, our results suggest that a lack of scope sensitivity is unrelated to the hypothetical nature of the payments in stated‐preference valuations of health risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria José Gil‐Moltó & Arne Risa Hole & Henrik Andersson & Geir Godager, 2025. "The Impact of Incentives on Valuing Health Risks," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(10), pages 1907-1920, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:34:y:2025:i:10:p:1907-1920
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.70011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.70011
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.70011?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. Corso, Phaedra S & Hammitt, James K & Graham, John D, 2001. "Valuing Mortality-Risk Reduction: Using Visual Aids to Improve the Validity of Contingent Valuation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 165-184, September.
    2. Hammitt, James K & Graham, John D, 1999. "Willingness to Pay for Health Protection: Inadequate Sensitivity to Probability?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 33-62, April.
    3. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2008. "How Much is Too Much?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(2), pages 165-176, June.
    4. Arne Hole & Julie Kolstad, 2012. "Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 445-469, April.
    5. Karen Blumenschein & Glenn C. Blomquist & Magnus Johannesson & Nancy Horn & Patricia Freeman, 2008. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 114-137, January.
    6. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    7. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    8. Jerry Hausman, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: From Dubious to Hopeless," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
    9. Richard C. Ready & Patricia A. Champ & Jennifer L. Lawton, 2010. "Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 363-381.
    10. Burton, Michael, "undated". "Model invariance when estimating random parameters with categorical variables," Working Papers 273051, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    11. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Kenneth Train, 2008. "Utility in Willingness to Pay Space: A Tool to Address Confounding Random Scale Effects in Destination Choice to the Alps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 994-1010.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    2. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, "undated". "The Presence of Hypothetical Bias within Spatial Decay and Charismatic Species: An Application of Monarch and Viceroy Butterflies," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258204, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Andersson, Henrik & Hole, Arne Risa & Svensson, Mikael, 2016. "Valuation of small and multiple health risks: A critical analysis of SP data applied to food and water safety," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 41-53.
    4. Ladenburg, Jacob & Skotte, Maria, 2022. "Heterogeneity in willingness to pay for the location of offshore wind power development: An application of the willingness to pay space model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    5. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, 2016. "Making the Most of Cheap Talk in an Online Survey," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236171, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Andersson, Henrik & Ouvrard, Benjamin, 2023. "Priming and the value of a statistical life: A cross country comparison," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    7. Andersson, Henrik & Ouvrard, Benjamin, 2023. "Priming and the Value of a Statistical Life: A Cross Country Comparison," TSE Working Papers 23-1439, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    8. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & Macario Rodríguez-Entrena, 2025. "Impact of consequentiality in willingness to accept: evidence from a choice experiment with land managers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    9. Abbie A. Rogers & Michael P. Burton & Jonelle A. Cleland & John C. Rolfe & Jessica J. Meeuwig & David J. Pannell, 2020. "Expert judgements and community values: preference heterogeneity for protecting river ecology in Western Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(2), pages 266-293, April.
    10. Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Hammitt, James K., 2022. "Valuing non-marginal changes in mortality and morbidity risk," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Soliño, M. & Alía, R. & Agúndez, D., 2020. "Citizens' preferences for research programs on forest genetic resources: A case applied to Pinus pinaster Ait. in Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    12. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    13. John C. Whitehead & Gregory Howard & Louis Cornicelli, 2025. "Total Economic Valuation of Great Lakes Recreational Fisheries: Attribute Nonattendance, Hypothetical Bias, and Insensitivity to Scope," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 101(4), pages 550-565.
    14. Arne Hole & Julie Kolstad, 2012. "Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 445-469, April.
    15. Henrik Andersson & James Hammitt & Gunnar Lindberg & Kristian Sundström, 2013. "Erratum to: Willingness to Pay and Sensitivity to Time Framing: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application on Car Safety," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 457-457, November.
    16. Henrik Andersson & Nicolas Treich, 2011. "The Value of a Statistical Life," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Weller, Priska & Elsasser, Peter, 2018. "Preferences for forest structural attributes in Germany – Evidence from a choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-9.
    18. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bylicki, Michał & Budziński, Wiktor & Buczyński, Mateusz, 2022. "Valuing externalities of outdoor advertising in an urban setting – the case of Warsaw," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    19. Bougherara, Douadia & Lapierre, Margaux & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2021. "Do farmers prefer increasing, decreasing, or stable payments in Agri-environmental schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    20. Rheinberger, Christoph M. & Schläpfer, Felix & Lobsiger, Michael, "undated". "A Novel Approach to Estimating the Demand Value of Road Safety," ETA: Economic Theory and Applications 254045, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).

    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:34:y:2025:i:10:p:1907-1920. 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.