This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Stålhammar, N.-O. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Stålhammar, N.-O. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

An Empirical Note on Willingness to Pay and Starting-point Bias

One of the most serious sources of potential bias when using the contingent valuation (CV) method to assess willingness to pay (WTP) is implied-value cues, i.e., different types of starting-point bias. The possible existence of starting-point bias is serious, since it may be interpreted to mean that the responders' preferences are very unstable. While the empirical evidence from environmental economics on starting-point bias is mixed, an earlier study in health economics did not find any clear evidence of starting- point bias. However, in the study presented here, a clear presence of starting-point bias was found. In a Swedish survey of how and when patients take antisecretory drugs, the patients were asked about their willingness to pay for a medication that can be taken in relation to meals compared with one that must be taken at least one hour before meals and has the additional disadvantage that it interacts with contraceptive pills. Among the 105 respondents, 82 were willing to pay a sum in addition to the normal patient fee in order to obtain the drug that could be taken during meals. The 82 patients thereafter participated in a bidding game that could start at a low bid (SEK 20) or a high bid (SEK 1,000). On average, the patients were willing to pay an addi tional SEK 138 (1 SEK = 0.13 U.S. dollar, April 1995) to obtain the superior drug. However, the average WTP among the 42 patients who started at the low bid was 70 SEK, which should be compared to an average of 289 SEK among the 40 patients who initially were offered the high bid. Key words: contingent valuation; willingness to pay; starting-point bias. (Med Decis Making 1996;16:242-247)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 16, No. 3, 242-247 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9601600308


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Kartman, G. Gatz, and M. Johannesson Health State Utilities in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Patients with Heartburn: A Study in Germany and Sweden Med Decis Making, January 1, 2004; 24(1): 40 - 52. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Werner, M. Schnaider-Beeri, J. Aharon, and M. Davidson Family Caregivers' Willingness to Pay for Drugs Indicated for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: An economic or psychological model? Dementia, February 1, 2002; 1(1): 59 - 74. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. C. Sorum Measuring Patient Preferences by Willingness to Pay to Avoid: The Case of Acute Otitis Media Med Decis Making, January 1, 1999; 19(1): 27 - 37. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Tambour and N. Zethraeus Nonparametric Willingness-to-pay Measures and Confidence Statements Med Decis Making, August 1, 1998; 18(3): 330 - 336. [Abstract] [PDF]