Date of this Version
Judgment and Decision Making
Open-ended methods that elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) in terms of absolute dollars often result in high rates of questionable and highly skewed responses, insensitivity to changes in health state, and raise an ethical issue related to its association with personal income. We conducted a 2x2 randomized trial over the Internet to test 4 WTP formats: 1) WTP in dollars; 2) WTP as a percentage of financial resource; 3) WTP in terms of monthly payments; and 4) WTP as a single lump-sum amount. WTP as a percentage of financial resources generated fewer questionable values, had better distribution properties, greater sensitivity of health states, and was not associated with income. WTP elicited on a monthly basis also showed promise.
© 2007 Society for Judgment and Decision Making
Readers are reminded that this work is protected by copyright. While they are free to use the ideas expressed in it, they may not copy, distribute or publish the work or part of it, in any form, printed, electronic or otherwise, except for reasonable quoting, clearly indicating the source. Readers are permitted to make copies, electronically or printed, for personal and classroom use.
health, contingent valuation, willingness-to-pay, computerized elicitation, income
Damschroder, L. J., Ubel, P. A., Riis, J., & Smith, D. M. (2007). An Alternative Approach for Eliciting Willingness-to-Pay: A Randomized Internet Trial. Judgment and Decision Making, 2 (2), 96-106. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers/407
Date Posted: 15 June 2018
This document has been peer reviewed.