We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

Durham Research Online
You are in:

How common is the prominence effect ? additional evidence to Whynes et al.

Covey, J. and Smith, R. D. (2006) 'How common is the prominence effect ? additional evidence to Whynes et al.', Health economics., 15 (2). pp. 205-210.


In a recent issue of Health Economics Letters, Whynes et al. report an observation not previously reported in the willingness-to-pay (WTP) literature; that when people are asked to provide an estimate using payment scales they tend to disproportionately select prominent values (that is, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, etc.). However, it remains an open question just how common this prominence effect actually is. Here we present data from several additional contingent valuation (CV) studies, which suggest that although prominence occurs, it does not reach statistical significance, as found by Whynes et al. A number of reasons are outlined to explain this.

Item Type:Article
Additional Information:
Keywords:CBA, Outcomes, Research, Willingness to pay, Contingent valuation.
Full text:Full text not available from this repository.
Publisher Web site:
Record Created:28 Mar 2007
Last Modified:08 Apr 2009 16:28

Social bookmarking: del.icio.usConnoteaBibSonomyCiteULikeFacebookTwitterExport: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex
Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library