Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics 3/2020

Open Access 01-04-2020 | Original Paper

A comparison of individual and collective decision making for standard gamble and time trade-off

Authors: Arthur E. Attema, Han Bleichrodt, Olivier l’Haridon, Stefan A. Lipman

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 3/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) are typically derived from individual preferences over health episodes. This paper reports the first experimental investigation into the effects of collective decision making on health valuations, using both time trade-off (TTO) and standard gamble (SG) tasks. We investigated collective decision making in dyads, by means of a mixed-subjects design where we control for learning effects. Our data suggest that collective decision making has little effect on decision quality, as no effects were observed on decision consistency and monotonicity for both methods. Furthermore, QALY weights remained similar between individual and collective decisions, and the typical difference in elicited weights between TTO and SG was not affected. These findings suggest that consulting with others has little effect on health state valuation, although learning may have. Additionally, our findings add to the literature of the effect of collective decision making, suggesting that no such effect occurs for TTO and SG.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
We will use the term ‘biases’ to refer to phenomena that yield violations of the linear QALY model and EU, the models that are used to calculate SG and TTO weights in practice.
 
2
SG and TTO weights can be derived in more general models, which can account for some of the biases driving the differences between SG and TTO (see [10]). However, such derivations are beyond the scope of this paper.
 
3
Sample size was informed by earlier studies on collective decision making in the economic literature. For example, the average sample size for all empirical studies on collective decision making cited in our Introduction is n = 103, with an average of n = 40 observations for groups (with sizes ranging from 2 to 5). Ethical approval was received from Erasmus Research Institute of Management’s Internal Review Board, Section Experiments.
 
4
Often, health state valuation studies use a 10-year duration [43]. For this student sample a 10-year duration followed by death would obviously entail a large decrease in life expectancy. It has been found that such a mismatch between durations in health state valuation and expectations about length of life may lead to biases in health state valuation [44, 45]. Hence, we chose a much longer duration, more closely matched to our respondents’ actual life expectancy.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Dolan, P.: The measurement of health-related quality of life for use in resource allocation decisions in health care. Handb. Health Econ. 1, 1723–1760 (2000)CrossRef Dolan, P.: The measurement of health-related quality of life for use in resource allocation decisions in health care. Handb. Health Econ. 1, 1723–1760 (2000)CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21, 271–292 (2002)PubMedCrossRef Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21, 271–292 (2002)PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Devlin, N.J., Shah, K.K., Feng, Y., et al.: Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5 D-5 L value set for England. Health Econ. 27, 7–22 (2018)PubMedCrossRef Devlin, N.J., Shah, K.K., Feng, Y., et al.: Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5 D-5 L value set for England. Health Econ. 27, 7–22 (2018)PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Bleichrodt, H., Johannesson, M.: Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs. J. Health Econ. 16, 155–175 (1997)PubMedCrossRef Bleichrodt, H., Johannesson, M.: Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs. J. Health Econ. 16, 155–175 (1997)PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Read, J.L., Quinn, R.J., Berwick, D.M., et al.: Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods. Med. Decis. Mak. 4, 315–329 (1984)CrossRef Read, J.L., Quinn, R.J., Berwick, D.M., et al.: Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods. Med. Decis. Mak. 4, 315–329 (1984)CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Sackett, D.L., Torrance, G.W.: The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J. Chronic Dis. 31, 697–704 (1978)PubMedCrossRef Sackett, D.L., Torrance, G.W.: The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J. Chronic Dis. 31, 697–704 (1978)PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Wakker, P., Deneffe, D.: Eliciting von Neumann–Morgenstern utilities when probabilities are distorted or unknown. Manag. Sci. 42, 1131–1150 (1996)CrossRef Wakker, P., Deneffe, D.: Eliciting von Neumann–Morgenstern utilities when probabilities are distorted or unknown. Manag. Sci. 42, 1131–1150 (1996)CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Abellan-Perpinan, J.M., Pinto-Prades, J.L., Mendez-Martinez, I., et al.: Towards a better QALY model. Health Econ. 15, 665–676 (2006)PubMedCrossRef Abellan-Perpinan, J.M., Pinto-Prades, J.L., Mendez-Martinez, I., et al.: Towards a better QALY model. Health Econ. 15, 665–676 (2006)PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Starmer, C.: Developments in non-expected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. J. Econ. Lit. 38, 332–382 (2000)CrossRef Starmer, C.: Developments in non-expected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. J. Econ. Lit. 38, 332–382 (2000)CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lipman, S.A., Brouwer, W.B.F., Attema, A.E.: QALYs without bias? Non-parametric correction of time trade-off and standard gamble weights based on prospect theor. Health Econ. 28, 843–854 (2019)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Lipman, S.A., Brouwer, W.B.F., Attema, A.E.: QALYs without bias? Non-parametric correction of time trade-off and standard gamble weights based on prospect theor. Health Econ. 28, 843–854 (2019)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Denant-Boemont, L., Diecidue, E., l’Haridon, O.: Patience and time consistency in collective decisions. Exp. Econ. 20, 181–208 (2017)CrossRef Denant-Boemont, L., Diecidue, E., l’Haridon, O.: Patience and time consistency in collective decisions. Exp. Econ. 20, 181–208 (2017)CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Ambrus, A., Greiner, B., Pathak. P:. Group versus individual decision-making: Is there a shift. Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science Economics Working Paper, p. 91 (2009) Ambrus, A., Greiner, B., Pathak. P:. Group versus individual decision-making: Is there a shift. Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science Economics Working Paper, p. 91 (2009)
13.
go back to reference Brunette, M., Cabantous, L., Couture, S.: Are individuals more risk and ambiguity averse in a group environment or alone? Results from an experimental study. Theory 78, 357–376 (2015) Brunette, M., Cabantous, L., Couture, S.: Are individuals more risk and ambiguity averse in a group environment or alone? Results from an experimental study. Theory 78, 357–376 (2015)
14.
go back to reference Deck, C., Lee, J., Reyes, J., et al.: Risk-taking behavior: an experimental analysis of individuals and Dyads. Southern Econ. J. 79, 277–299 (2012)CrossRef Deck, C., Lee, J., Reyes, J., et al.: Risk-taking behavior: an experimental analysis of individuals and Dyads. Southern Econ. J. 79, 277–299 (2012)CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Zhang, J., Casari, M.: How groups reach agreement in risky choices: an experiment. Econ. Inq. 50, 502–515 (2012)CrossRef Zhang, J., Casari, M.: How groups reach agreement in risky choices: an experiment. Econ. Inq. 50, 502–515 (2012)CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Shupp, R.S., Williams, A.W.: Risk preference differentials of small groups and individuals. Econ. J. 118, 258–283 (2007)CrossRef Shupp, R.S., Williams, A.W.: Risk preference differentials of small groups and individuals. Econ. J. 118, 258–283 (2007)CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Keck, S., Diecidue, E., Budescu, D.V.: Group decisions under ambiguity: convergence to neutrality. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 103, 60–71 (2014)CrossRef Keck, S., Diecidue, E., Budescu, D.V.: Group decisions under ambiguity: convergence to neutrality. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 103, 60–71 (2014)CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Keller, L.R., Sarin, R.K., Sounderpandian, J.: An examination of ambiguity aversion: are two heads better than one? (2007) Keller, L.R., Sarin, R.K., Sounderpandian, J.: An examination of ambiguity aversion: are two heads better than one? (2007)
19.
go back to reference Abdellaoui, M., Haridon, O., Paraschiv, C.: Individual vs. couple behavior: an experimental investigation of risk preferences. Theory Dec. 75, 175–191 (2013)CrossRef Abdellaoui, M., Haridon, O., Paraschiv, C.: Individual vs. couple behavior: an experimental investigation of risk preferences. Theory Dec. 75, 175–191 (2013)CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Bone, J., Hey, J., Suckling, J.: Are groups more (or less) consistent than individuals? J. Risk Uncertain. 18, 63–81 (1999)CrossRef Bone, J., Hey, J., Suckling, J.: Are groups more (or less) consistent than individuals? J. Risk Uncertain. 18, 63–81 (1999)CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Rockenbach, B., Sadrieh, A., Mathauschek, B.: Teams take the better risks. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 63, 412–422 (2007)CrossRef Rockenbach, B., Sadrieh, A., Mathauschek, B.: Teams take the better risks. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 63, 412–422 (2007)CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Bleichrodt, H.: A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities. Health Econ. 11, 447–456 (2002)PubMedCrossRef Bleichrodt, H.: A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities. Health Econ. 11, 447–456 (2002)PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference van der Pol, M., Roux, L.: Time preference bias in time trade-off. Eur. J. Health Econ. 6, 107–111 (2005)PubMedCrossRef van der Pol, M., Roux, L.: Time preference bias in time trade-off. Eur. J. Health Econ. 6, 107–111 (2005)PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Attema, A.E., Brouwer, W.B.: Deriving time discounting correction factors for TTO tariffs. Health Econ. 23, 410–425 (2014)PubMedCrossRef Attema, A.E., Brouwer, W.B.: Deriving time discounting correction factors for TTO tariffs. Health Econ. 23, 410–425 (2014)PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference McIntosh, C.N., Gorber, S.C., Bernier, J., et al.: Eliciting Canadian population preferences for health states using the Classification and Measurement System of Functional Health (CLAMES). Chronic Dis. Can. 28, 29–41 (2007)PubMed McIntosh, C.N., Gorber, S.C., Bernier, J., et al.: Eliciting Canadian population preferences for health states using the Classification and Measurement System of Functional Health (CLAMES). Chronic Dis. Can. 28, 29–41 (2007)PubMed
26.
go back to reference Karimi, M., Brazier, J., Paisley, S.: The effect of reflection and deliberation on health state values. Health Econ. Decis. Sci. Discus. Pap. 16, 20 (2016) Karimi, M., Brazier, J., Paisley, S.: The effect of reflection and deliberation on health state values. Health Econ. Decis. Sci. Discus. Pap. 16, 20 (2016)
27.
go back to reference Krabbe, P.F., Essink-Bot, M.-L., Bonsel, G.J.: On the equivalence of collectively and individually collected responses: standard-gamble and time-tradeoff judgments of health states. Med. Decis. Mak. 16, 120–132 (1996)CrossRef Krabbe, P.F., Essink-Bot, M.-L., Bonsel, G.J.: On the equivalence of collectively and individually collected responses: standard-gamble and time-tradeoff judgments of health states. Med. Decis. Mak. 16, 120–132 (1996)CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Janis, I.L.: Victims of groupthink: a psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes (1972) Janis, I.L.: Victims of groupthink: a psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes (1972)
29.
go back to reference Esser, J.K.: Alive and well after 25 years: a review of groupthink research. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 73, 116–141 (1998)PubMedCrossRef Esser, J.K.: Alive and well after 25 years: a review of groupthink research. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 73, 116–141 (1998)PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Akunne, A.F., Bridges, J.F., Sanon, M., et al.: Comparison of individual and group valuation of health state scenarios across communities in West Africa. Appli. Health Econ. Health Policy 5, 261–268 (2006)CrossRef Akunne, A.F., Bridges, J.F., Sanon, M., et al.: Comparison of individual and group valuation of health state scenarios across communities in West Africa. Appli. Health Econ. Health Policy 5, 261–268 (2006)CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Robinson, S., Bryan, S.: Does the process of deliberation change individuals’ health state valuations? An exploratory study using the person trade-off technique. Value Health. 16, 806–813 (2013)PubMedCrossRef Robinson, S., Bryan, S.: Does the process of deliberation change individuals’ health state valuations? An exploratory study using the person trade-off technique. Value Health. 16, 806–813 (2013)PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Augestad, L.A., Rand-Hendriksen, K., Kristiansen, I.S., et al.: Learning effects in time trade-off based valuation of EQ-5D health states. Value Health. 15, 340–345 (2012)PubMedCrossRef Augestad, L.A., Rand-Hendriksen, K., Kristiansen, I.S., et al.: Learning effects in time trade-off based valuation of EQ-5D health states. Value Health. 15, 340–345 (2012)PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Lipman, S.A., Brouwer, W.B.F., Attema, A.E.: The corrective approach: policy implications of recent developments in QALY measurement based on prospect theory. Value Health 22, 816–821 (2019)PubMedCrossRef Lipman, S.A., Brouwer, W.B.F., Attema, A.E.: The corrective approach: policy implications of recent developments in QALY measurement based on prospect theory. Value Health 22, 816–821 (2019)PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Miyamoto, J.M., Eraker, S.A.: Parametric models of the utility of survival duration: tests of axioms in a generic utility framework. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 44, 166–202 (1989)CrossRef Miyamoto, J.M., Eraker, S.A.: Parametric models of the utility of survival duration: tests of axioms in a generic utility framework. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 44, 166–202 (1989)CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Pliskin, J.S., Shepard, D.S., Weinstein, M.C.: Utility functions for life years and health status. Oper Res. 28, 206–224 (1980)CrossRef Pliskin, J.S., Shepard, D.S., Weinstein, M.C.: Utility functions for life years and health status. Oper Res. 28, 206–224 (1980)CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Ameriks, J., Caplin, A., Leahy, J., et al.: Measuring self-control problems. Am. Econ. Rev. 97, 966–972 (2007)CrossRef Ameriks, J., Caplin, A., Leahy, J., et al.: Measuring self-control problems. Am. Econ. Rev. 97, 966–972 (2007)CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Holt, C.A., Laury, S.K.: Risk aversion and incentive effects. Am. Econ. Rev. 92, 1644–1655 (2002)CrossRef Holt, C.A., Laury, S.K.: Risk aversion and incentive effects. Am. Econ. Rev. 92, 1644–1655 (2002)CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., Lau, M.I., et al.: Elicitation using multiple price list formats. Exp. Econ. 9, 383–405 (2006)CrossRef Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., Lau, M.I., et al.: Elicitation using multiple price list formats. Exp. Econ. 9, 383–405 (2006)CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., Lau, M.I., et al.: Eliciting risk and time preferences. Econometrica 76, 583–618 (2008)CrossRef Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., Lau, M.I., et al.: Eliciting risk and time preferences. Econometrica 76, 583–618 (2008)CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Arrieta, A., García-Prado, A., González, P., et al.: Risk attitudes in medical decisions for others: an experimental approach. Health Econ. 26, 97–113 (2017)PubMedCrossRef Arrieta, A., García-Prado, A., González, P., et al.: Risk attitudes in medical decisions for others: an experimental approach. Health Econ. 26, 97–113 (2017)PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Attema, A., Lipman, S.: Decreasing impatience for health outcomes and its relation with healthy behavior. Front. Appl. Math. Stat. 1, 4 (2018) Attema, A., Lipman, S.: Decreasing impatience for health outcomes and its relation with healthy behavior. Front. Appl. Math. Stat. 1, 4 (2018)
43.
go back to reference Oppe, M., Devlin, N.J., van Hout, B., et al.: A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 17, 445–453 (2014)PubMedCrossRef Oppe, M., Devlin, N.J., van Hout, B., et al.: A program of methodological research to arrive at the new international EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol. Value Health. 17, 445–453 (2014)PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference van Nooten, F., Brouwer, W.: The influence of subjective expectations about length and quality of life on time trade-off answers. Health Econ. 13, 819–823 (2004)PubMedCrossRef van Nooten, F., Brouwer, W.: The influence of subjective expectations about length and quality of life on time trade-off answers. Health Econ. 13, 819–823 (2004)PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference Van Nooten, F., Koolman, X., Brouwer, W.: The influence of subjective life expectancy on health state valuations using a 10 year TTO. Health Econ. 18, 549–558 (2009)PubMedCrossRef Van Nooten, F., Koolman, X., Brouwer, W.: The influence of subjective life expectancy on health state valuations using a 10 year TTO. Health Econ. 18, 549–558 (2009)PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., et al.: Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual. Life Res. 20, 1727–1736 (2011)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., et al.: Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual. Life Res. 20, 1727–1736 (2011)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Bruner, D.M.: Multiple switching behaviour in multiple price lists. Appl. Econ. Lett. 18, 417–420 (2011)CrossRef Bruner, D.M.: Multiple switching behaviour in multiple price lists. Appl. Econ. Lett. 18, 417–420 (2011)CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Versteegh, M.M., Vermeulen, K.M., Evers, S.M., et al.: Dutch tariff for the five-level version of EQ-5D. Value Health 19, 343–352 (2016)CrossRef Versteegh, M.M., Vermeulen, K.M., Evers, S.M., et al.: Dutch tariff for the five-level version of EQ-5D. Value Health 19, 343–352 (2016)CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Attema, A.E., Brouwer, W.B.: The correction of TTO-scores for utility curvature using a risk-free utility elicitation method. J. Health Econ. 28, 234–243 (2009)PubMedCrossRef Attema, A.E., Brouwer, W.B.: The correction of TTO-scores for utility curvature using a risk-free utility elicitation method. J. Health Econ. 28, 234–243 (2009)PubMedCrossRef
50.
51.
go back to reference Jacquemet, N., L’Haridon, O.: Experimental Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2018)CrossRef Jacquemet, N., L’Haridon, O.: Experimental Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2018)CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A comparison of individual and collective decision making for standard gamble and time trade-off
Authors
Arthur E. Attema
Han Bleichrodt
Olivier l’Haridon
Stefan A. Lipman
Publication date
01-04-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-019-01155-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

The European Journal of Health Economics 3/2020 Go to the issue