The role of ‘reference goods’ in contingent valuation: should we help respondents to ‘construct’ their willingness to pay?

Richard D. Smith

Health Economics, 2007, vol. 16, issue 12, 1319-1332

Abstract: A general population sample of 135 Australian respondents completed one of four contingent valuation surveys that asked them to value health benefits either in the absence of an explicit reference good or in the presence of one of three different forms of reference good. Results suggest that respondents have a ‘ball‐park’ figure that is then challenged by the reference good. For values that appear far lower than, or similar to, this ‘ball‐park’ figure, the reference good has little quantitative effect, but qualitatively appears to help respondents in their confidence in this value being their actual WTP. The implications for CV research in health care are outlined in the discussion. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Date: 2007
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1227

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:wly:hlthec:v:16:y:2007:i:12:p:1319-1332

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics is currently edited by Alan Maynard, John Hutton and Andrew Jones

More articles in Health Economics from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().