TESTING PROCEDURAL INVARIANCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HEALTH

Adam Oliver

Health Economics, 2013, vol. 22, issue 3, 272-288

Abstract: Violations of procedural invariance, epitomised by ‘classic’ preference reversals, have been observed for more than 40 years, and yet the study of this phenomenon in health remains nascent. This is an oversight because such violations pose a challenge to health economics, where choice and valuation methodologies often are used interchangeably. This article reports two experiments that aim to test for preference reversals over outcomes defined by health status, using both ‘open’ and ‘assisted’ valuation procedures. Although systematic preference reversals in the direction generally reported in the literature were not observed, the rates of non‐systematic reversal were substantial, measuring 35–40%. By analysing the respondents’ explanations for their answers, it is clear that many of them used heuristics to answer the questions, and they may have good reasons to do so, which undermines the notion that preferences are always fixed and stable. These results, and others like it, pose a challenge to those who unquestioningly assume procedural invariance and maintain that population preferences should be used to inform health policy. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.2796

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:22:y:2013:i:3:p:272-288

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 ().