Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
The European Journal of Health Economics
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics 1/2017

Open Access 01-01-2017 | Original Paper

A short note on measuring subjective life expectancy: survival probabilities versus point estimates

Authors: David R. Rappange, Job van Exel, Werner B. F. Brouwer

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Understanding subjective longevity expectations is important, but measurement is not straightforward. Two common elicitation formats are the direct measurement of a subjective point estimate of life expectancy and the assessment of survival probabilities to a range of target ages. This study presents one of the few direct comparisons of these two methods. Results from a representative sample of the Dutch population indicate that respondents on average gave higher estimates of longevity using survival probabilities (83.6 years) compared to point estimates (80.2 years). Individual differences between elicitation methods were smaller for younger respondents and for respondents with a higher socioeconomic status. The correlation between the subjective longevity estimations was moderate, but their associations with respondents’ characteristics were similar. Our results are in line with existing literature and suggest that findings from both elicitation methods may not be directly comparable, especially in certain subgroups of the population. Implications of inconsistent and focal point answers, rounding and anchoring require further attention. More research on the measurement of subjective expectations is required.
Footnotes
1
Verbal expectations questions (e.g. “How likely do you think it is that you will live up to 80 years old?”— very likely, fairly likely, not too likely, or not at all likely) are not within the scope of this short note.
 
2
First warm-up question: “Later on we will ask you what you think your chances are of reaching a certain age. Let us start with an example question about the weather. What are the chances that it will be a sunny day tomorrow? If you answer 90, this means that the chance that tomorrow will be a sunny day is 90 %. You can answer the following questions using a number between 0 and 100” (mean = 43.4; SD = 26.0; range 0–100). Second warm-up question: “Now an example about health. What are the chances that you will have a severe illness in the next 10 years?” (mean = 34.2; SD = 22.9; range 0–100).
 
3
If a respondent reported a probability of 50 % at one of the target ages, then that target age equalled the computed life expectancy based on SSPs (hereafter SSP point estimate). If a respondent answered 50 % at subsequent target ages, then the mean of those target ages was the SSP point estimate. If the probability of 50 % fell between the SSPs at two subsequent target ages, we employed linear interpolation to obtain the SSP point estimate.
 
4
If a respondent gave 90 years as point estimate of SLE, then the SSP the respondent gave for target age 90 (e.g. 70 %) was used as certainty score for the point estimate. If a respondent gave 85 years as point estimate for SLE, we employed linear interpolation of the SSPs for target ages 80 and 90 to obtain the certainty score for this point estimate.
 
5
A small group of respondents aged 18 and 19 years (n = 43) were excluded to form four equal age groups (20–29, 30–39 years, etc).
 
6
Note that the methodological approach applied by Wu et al. [14] differs from the current study as well. For example, Wu et al. [14] used a sample from a different country including respondents aged higher than in our study sample. Furthermore, they used a different approach to elicit SSPs. Respondents chose probabilities from a discrete list with ten categories representing a range of probabilities.
 
Literature
1.
2.
Smith, V., Taylor Jr, D., Sloan, F.: Longevity expectations and death: can people predict their own demise? Am. Econ. Rev. 91, 1126–1134 (2001)CrossRef
3.
4.
5.
Engelberg, J., Manski, C., Williams, J.: Comparing the point predictions and subjective probability distributions of professional forecasters. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 27, 30–41 (2009)CrossRef
6.
7.
8.
Post, T., Hanewald, K.: Longevity risk, subjective survival expectations, and individual saving behaviour. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 86, 200–220 (2013)CrossRef
9.
Steffen B. 2009. Formation and updating of subjective life expectancy: evidence from Germany. MEA Studies 08
10.
Kutlu-Koc V, Kalwij A. 2013. Individuals’ survival expectations and actual mortality. Netspar Discussion Papers, DP 05/2013-013
11.
12.
Kleinjans, K., van Soest, A.: Rounding, focal point answers and nonresponse to subjective survival probability questions. J. Appl. Econ. 29, 567–585 (2013)CrossRef
13.
Hamermesh, D.: Expectations, life expectancy, and economic behavior. Q. J. Econ. 100, 389–408 (1985)CrossRef
14.
Wu, S., Stevens, R., Thorp, S.: Die young or live long: modelling subjective survival probabilities. ARC centre of excellence in population ageing research working paper 19 (2013)
15.
16.
Wouters, S., van Exel, J., Rohde, K., Brouwer, W.: Are all health gains equally important? An exploration of acceptable health as reference point in health care priority setting. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13, 79 (2015)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Van Nooten, F., van Exel, J., Koolman, A., Brouwer, W.: “Married with children”: the influence of significant others in TTO exercises. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13, 94 (2015)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Brouwer, W., van Exel, J.: Expectations regarding length and health related quality of life: some empirical findings. Soc. Sci. Med. 61, 1083–1094 (2005)CrossRefPubMed
19.
Péntek, M., Brodszky, V., Gulácsi, Á., Hajdú, O., van Exel, J., Brouwer, W., Gulácsi, L.: Subjective expectations regarding length and health-related quality of life in Hungary: results from an empirical investigation. Health Expect. 17, 696–709 (2014)CrossRefPubMed
20.
Bruine de Bruin, W., Fischbeck, P., Stiber, N., Fischhoff, B.: What number is fifty-fifty? Redistributing excessive 50 % responses in elicited probabilities. Risk Anal. 22, 713–723 (2000)CrossRef
21.
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47, 263–292 (1979)CrossRef
22.
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185, 1124–1131 (1974)CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
A short note on measuring subjective life expectancy: survival probabilities versus point estimates
Authors
David R. Rappange
Job van Exel
Werner B. F. Brouwer
Publication date
01-01-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-015-0754-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

The European Journal of Health Economics 1/2017 Go to the issue

Original Paper

An empirical comparison of Markov cohort modeling and discrete event simulation in a capacity-constrained health care setting

Original Paper

Competition and quality in a physiotherapy market with fixed prices

Original Paper

Why trash don’t pass? pharmaceutical licensing and safety performance of drugs

Original Paper

Medical ethics: enhanced or undermined by modes of payment?

Original Paper

Crisis, suicide and labour productivity losses in Spain

Original Paper

The impact of a sick pay waiting period on sick leave patterns