Best-worst scaling vs. discrete choice experiments: An empirical comparison using social care data

Dimitris Potoglou, Peter Burge, Terry Flynn, Ann Netten, Juliette Malley (), Julien Forder and John Brazier ()

Social Science & Medicine, 2011, vol. 72, issue 10, 1717-1727

Abstract: This paper presents empirical findings from the comparison between two principal preference elicitation techniques: discrete choice experiments and profile-based best-worst scaling. Best-worst scaling involves less cognitive burden for respondents and provides more information than traditional "pick-one" tasks asked in discrete choice experiments. However, there is lack of empirical evidence on how best-worst scaling compares to discrete choice experiments. This empirical comparison between discrete choice experiments and best-worst scaling was undertaken as part of the Outcomes of Social Care for Adults project, England, which aims to develop a weighted measure of social care outcomes. The findings show that preference weights from best-worst scaling and discrete choice experiments do reveal similar patterns in preferences and in the majority of cases preference weights - when normalised/rescaled - are not significantly different.

Keywords: UK; Best-worst; scaling; Discrete; choice; experiments; Stated; choice; Discrete; choice; models; Social; care; Social; care; outcomes; Quality; of; life (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (43)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953611001900
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:socmed:v:72:y:2011:i:10:p:1717-1727

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().