IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v17y1997i2p208-216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experimental Test of a Theoretical Foundation for Rating-scale Valuations

Author

Listed:
  • Han Bleichrodt
  • Magnus Johannesson

Abstract

A major advantage of using a rating scale in health-utility measurement is its practical applicability: the method is relatively easy to understand, and various health states can be assessed simultaneously. However, a theoretical foundation for rating-scale valuations has not been established. The primary aim of this paper is to present a theoretical foundation for rating-scale valuations based on the theory of measurable value functions and to provide a consistency test to see whether rating-scale valuations do indeed elicit a measurable value function. If rating-scale valuations elicit a measurable value function, then Dyer and Sarin have shown how they are related to von Neumann-Morgenstern (vNM) utilities. The appropriate technique to measure vNM utilities is the standard gamble. Torrance has suggested that rating-scale valuations and standard-gamble valuations are related by a power function. A secondary aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between rating-scale valuations and standard-gamble valuations hypothesized by Torrance. An experiment was designed to test consistency of rating-scale valuations and the relationship between rating-scale valuations and standard-gamble valuations. The experiment tested whether rating-scale valuations are independent of the context in which they are elicited, as they should be if they elicit points on a measurable value function. 80 Swedish and 92 Dutch respondents participated in the experiment. The results showed that rating-scale valuations depend on the number of preferred alternatives in the task and thus violate a basic property of measurable value functions. The estimation of the power function did not result in stable results: parameter estimates varied, in some cases there was indication of misspecification, and in most cases there was indication of heteroskedastic errors. The implications of these findings for the common use of rating-scale valuations in cost-utility analysis are serious: the dependency of the rating-scale valuations on the other health states included in the task casts serious doubts on the validity of the rating-scale method. Key words: QALYs; rating scale; cost-utility analysis; medical decision making. (Med Decis Making 1997;17:208-216))

Suggested Citation

  • Han Bleichrodt & Magnus Johannesson, 1997. "An Experimental Test of a Theoretical Foundation for Rating-scale Valuations," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 17(2), pages 208-216, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:17:y:1997:i:2:p:208-216
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9701700212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9701700212
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X9701700212?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. George W. Torrance & Michael H. Boyle & Sargent P. Horwood, 1982. "Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory to Measure Social Preferences for Health States," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1043-1069, December.
    2. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
    3. Rakesh Kumar Sarin, 1982. "Strength of Preference and Risky Choice," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 982-997, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Brazier, J, 2005. "Current state of the art in preference-based measures of health and avenues for further research," MPRA Paper 29762, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Stevens, Katherine & McCabe, Christopher & Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer, 2007. "Multi-attribute utility function or statistical inference models: A comparison of health state valuation models using the HUI2 health state classification system," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 992-1002, September.
    3. Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Johannesson, Magnus, 1999. "New estimates of the demand for health: results based on a categorical health measure and Swedish micro data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(10), pages 1325-1332, November.
    4. Paul F. M. Krabbe & Elly A. Stolk & Nancy J. Devlin & Feng Xie & Elise H. Quik & A. Simon Pickard, 2017. "Head-to-head comparison of health-state values derived by a probabilistic choice model and scores on a visual analogue scale," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(8), pages 967-977, November.
    5. Julie Ratcliffe & John Brazier & Aki Tsuchiya & Tara Symonds & Martin Brown, 2009. "Using DCE and ranking data to estimate cardinal values for health states for deriving a preference‐based single index from the sexual quality of life questionnaire," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(11), pages 1261-1276, November.
    6. Gerdtham, U. -G. & Johannesson, M. & Lundberg, L. & Isacson, D., 1999. "A note on validating Wagstaff and van Doorslaer's health measure in the analysis of inequalities in health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 117-124, January.
    7. L. M. Lamers & J. McDonnell & P. F. M. Stalmeier & P. F. M. Krabbe & J. J. V. Busschbach, 2006. "The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ‐5D valuation studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(10), pages 1121-1132, October.
    8. Oliver, Adam, 2006. "Further evidence of preference reversals: Choice, valuation and ranking over distributions of life expectancy," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 803-820, September.
    9. D. Stratmann‐Schoene & T. Kuehn & R. Kreienberg & R. Leidl, 2006. "A preference‐based index for the SF‐12," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 553-564, June.
    10. Edward J. D. Webb & John O’Dwyer & David Meads & Paul Kind & Penny Wright, 2020. "Transforming discrete choice experiment latent scale values for EQ-5D-3L using the visual analogue scale," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(5), pages 787-800, July.

    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. Hillebrand, Eric & Schnabl, Gunther & Ulu, Yasemin, 2009. "Japanese foreign exchange intervention and the yen-to-dollar exchange rate: A simultaneous equations approach using realized volatility," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 490-505, July.
    2. Giuseppe Croce & Emanuela Ghignoni, 2011. "Overeducation and spatial flexibility in Italian local labour markets," Working Papers in Public Economics 145, Department of Economics and Law, Sapienza University of Roma.
    3. Darrian Collins & Clem Tisdell, 2004. "Outbound Business Travel Depends on Business Returns: Australian Evidence," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 192-207, June.
    4. Jongeneel, Roelof A. & Ge, Lan, 2005. "Explaining Growth in Dutch Agriculture: Prices, Public R&D, and Technological Change," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24573, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Barnett, William A. & Serletis, Apostolos, 2008. "Consumer preferences and demand systems," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 210-224, December.
    6. Hany Eldemerdash & Hugh Metcalf & Sara Maioli, 2014. "Twin deficits: new evidence from a developing (oil vs. non-oil) countries’ perspective," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 825-851, November.
    7. Rao, Surekha & Ghali, Moheb & Krieg, John, 2008. "On the J-test for nonnested hypotheses and Bayesian extension," MPRA Paper 14637, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Schimmelpfennig, Axel, 1998. "The celtic tiger faces the factor price frontier: Labour market adjustment in Ireland," Kiel Working Papers 855, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    9. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    10. Maria Iacovou, 2002. "Class Size in the Early Years: Is Smaller Really Better?," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 261-290.
    11. Maarten A. Allers & Corine Hoeben, 2010. "Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 405-428, March.
    12. C. Lanier Benkard, 2000. "Learning and Forgetting: The Dynamics of Aircraft Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1034-1054, September.
    13. Bergman, Mats A. & Johansson, Per & Bergman, M.A., 2002. "Large investments in the pulp and paper industry: a count data regression analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 29-52.
    14. Hongbin Li & Mark Rosenzweig & Junsen Zhang, 2010. "Altruism, Favoritism, and Guilt in the Allocation of Family Resources: Sophie's Choice in Mao's Mass Send-Down Movement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(1), pages 1-38, February.
    15. Nguyen, Bach & Tran, Hai-Anh & Stephan, Ute & Van, Ha Nguyen & Anh, Pham Thi Hoang, 2024. "“I can't get it out of my mind” - Why, how, and when crisis rumination leads entrepreneurs to act and pivot during crises," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 39(4).
    16. Alfò, Marco & Carbonari, Lorenzo & Trovato, Giovanni, 2023. "On the effects of taxation on growth: an empirical assessment," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(5), pages 1289-1318, July.
    17. Ongo Nkoa, Bruno Emmanuel & Song, Jacques Simon, 2020. "Does institutional quality affect financial inclusion in Africa? A panel data analysis," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(4).
    18. de Lima, Pedro J. F., 1997. "On the robustness of nonlinearity tests to moment condition failure," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1-2), pages 251-280.
    19. Kapteyn, Arie & Kleinjans, Kristin J. & van Soest, Arthur, 2009. "Intertemporal consumption with directly measured welfare functions and subjective expectations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 425-437, October.
    20. Rigobon, Roberto & Karolyi, Andrew, 2001. "Comments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 123126, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:sae:medema:v:17:y:1997:i:2:p:208-216. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.