The influence of the Ratio Bias phenomenon on the elicitation of Standard Gamble utilities
This paper tests whether logically equivalent risk formats can lead to different health state utilities elicited by means of the standard gamble (SG) method. We compare SG utilities elicited when probabilities are framed in terms of frequencies with respect to 100 people in the population (i.e., X out of 100) with SG utilities elicited for frequencies with respect to 1,000 people in the population (i.e., Y out of 1,000). We found that utilities were significant higher when success and failure probabilities were framed as frequencies type “Y out of 1,000” rather than as frequencies type “X out of 100”. This framing effect, known as Ratio Bias, may have important consequences in resource allocation decisions.
|Date of creation:||Jul 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Carretera de Utrera km.1, 41013 Sevilla|
Phone: + 34 954 34 8913
Fax: + 34 954 34 9339
Web page: http://www.upo.es/econ/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Bostic, Raphael & Herrnstein, R. J. & Luce, R. Duncan, 1990. "The effect on the preference-reversal phenomenon of using choice indifferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 193-212, March.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
- Bleichrodt, Han, 2001. "Probability Weighting in Choice under Risk: An Empirical Test," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 185-198, September. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pab:wpaper:06.16. 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: (Publicación Digital - UPO)
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.