Choice-Matching Preference Reversals in Health Outcome Assessments

Walton Sumner and Robert F. Nease
Additional contact information
Walton Sumner: Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Robert F. Nease: Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

Medical Decision Making, 2001, vol. 21, issue 3, 208-218

Abstract: Background . Health outcome utility assessments generally assume procedural invariance. Preference reversals violating procedural invariance occur in economic scenarios when the assessment process shifts from a choiceto a fill-in-the-blanktask. Purpose . To determine if similar reversals occur in utility assessments. Methods . One hundred thirty-six volunteer subjects completed 6 preference assessments of 4 personal health scenarios. Patients responded to otherwise identical tasks using either choice or fill-in-the-blank processes in a randomized crossover design. The authors determined the percentage of subjects preferring, or inferred to prefer, a given choice. Results . Preference reversals occurred in all assessment scenarios. Conclusions . These preference reversals are a potential source of confusion for utility assessment and informed consent. They could be manipulated to achieve ends other than the best interest of patients. Anchoring or the prominence hypothesis may explain these findings.

Keywords: preference reversal; utility assessment; choice-matching judgment; prominence hypothesis; decision making (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2001
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0102100306 (text/html)

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:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:3:p:208-218

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100306

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().