What works better for preference elicitation among older people? Cognitive burden of discrete choice experiment and case 2 best-worst scaling in an online setting

Sebastian Himmler, Vikas Soekhai, Job van Exel and Werner Brouwer

Journal of choice modelling, 2021, vol. 38, issue C

Abstract: To appropriately weight dimensions of quality of life instruments for health economic evaluations, population and patient preferences need to be elicited. Two commonly used elicitation methods for this purpose are discrete choice experiments (DCE) and case 2 best-worst scaling (BWS). These methods differ in terms of their cognitive burden, which is especially relevant when eliciting preferences among older people. Using a randomised experiment with respondents from an online panel, this paper examines the cognitive burden associated with colour-coded and level overlapped DCE, colour-coded BWS, and ‘standard’ BWS choice tasks in a complex health state valuation setting. Our sample included 469 individuals aged 65 and above. Based on both revealed and stated cognitive burden, we found that the DCE tasks were less cognitively burdensome than case 2 BWS. Colour coding case 2 BWS cannot be recommended as its effect on cognitive burden was less clear and the colour coding lead to undesired choice heuristics. Our results have implications for future health state valuations of complex quality of life instruments and at least serve as an example of assessing cognitive burden associated with different types of choice experiments.

Keywords: Discrete choice experiment; Best-worst scaling; Cognitive burden; Response efficiency; Colour coding (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534520300622
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:38:y:2021:i:c:s1755534520300622

DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2020.100265

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of choice modelling is currently edited by S. Hess and J.M. Rose

More articles in Journal of choice modelling from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().