Testing the predective validity of the time trade-off and the Stardard Gamble
This paper tests the consistency of health utility measurements with individual preferences. We compare three methods, the time trade-off, the standard gamble and a version of the standard gamble that corrects for the deviations from expected utility modelled by prospect theory. Individual preferences are measured both through a ranking task and through a choice task. In decisions involving no risk the time trade-off is most consistent with people’s preferences with the standard gamble a close second. In decisions involving risk the corrected standard gamble is most consistent with people’s preferences. Our data do not support the common assumption in health economics that utility is transferable across decision contexts.
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: c/ Bailén 50. 41001 Sevilla|
Phone: (34) 955 055 210
Fax: (34) 955 055 211
Web page: http://www.centrodeestudiosandaluces.es
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cea:doctra:e2007_14. 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: (Susana Mérida)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.