Yoo, H. and Doiron, D. (2013) 'The use of alternative preference elicitation methods in complex discrete choice experiments.', Journal of health economics., 32 (6). pp. 1166-1179.
We analyse stated preference data over nursing jobs collected from two different discrete choice experiments: a multi-profile case best-worst scaling experiment (BWS) prompting selection of the best and worst among alternative jobs, and a profile case BWS wherein the respondents choose the best and worst job attributes. The latter allows identification of additional utility parameters and is believed to be cognitively easier. Results suggest that respondents place greater value on pecuniary over non-pecuniary gains in the multi-profile case. There is little evidence that this discrepancy is induced by the extra cognitive burden of processing several profiles at once in the multi-profile case. We offer thoughts on other likely mechanisms.
|Full text:||(AM) Accepted Manuscript|
Download PDF (441Kb)
|Publisher Web site:||http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2013.09.009|
|Publisher statement:||NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Health Economics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Health Economics, 32, December 2013, 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2013.09.009.|
|Record Created:||26 Jul 2016 11:35|
|Last Modified:||26 Jul 2016 11:52|
|Social bookmarking:||Export: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex|
|Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library|