Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ubel, P. A.
Right arrow Articles by Asch, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ubel, P. A.
Right arrow Articles by Asch, D. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Preference for Equity As a Framing Effect

Peter A. Ubel, MD

Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor

Jonathan Baron, PhD

Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

David A. Asch, MD, MBA

Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Background. In previous studies, the authors found that most people, given a fixed budget, would rather offer a less effective screening test to 100% of a Medicaid population than a more effective test to 50% of the population. In a subsequent study, the authors found that the number of people preferring the less effective screening test was dramatically reduced when the percentage of Medicaid enrollees receiving it was less than 100. In this article, 2 new studies are reported that explore whether people’s preferences for equity versus efficiency are susceptible to a framing effect. Methods. In 2 studies, the authors presented subjects with multiple scenarios involving screening tests that vary in the proportion of people who could receive the tests within a budget constraint and the number of people whose lives each test would save. Across scenarios, the proportion of Medicaid enrollees who could receive each test was varied, as was the question of whether scenarios involved Medicaid enrollees from the same or a different state. In addition, the authors varied the order in which subjects received the scenarios. Results. In the 1st study, people’s preferences for equity over efficiency varied significantly depending on the way situations were framed. Preference for equity was stronger when the more widely distributed choice covered the entire population than when it covered only half the population (P< 0.001). In addition, people’s preferences were susceptible to order effects, with preference for equity being significantly stronger when the 1st scenario received by subjects involved 1 screening test that could be offered to the entire population (P < 0.001). In the 2nd study, preferences for equity over efficiency diminished even when the different framings were descriptions of identical circumstances—preference for equity was significantly reduced when the population to be screened was framed broadly, in terms of the percentage of patients across 2 states who could receive testing rather than narrowly, in terms of the percentages of patients in 1 state who could receive testing (P= 0.04). Conclusion. Policy planners should be careful about accepting public preferences for equity over efficiency at face value, because such preferences can be dramatically influenced by framing effects and order effects.

Key Words: survey • public attitudes • equity • framing effect

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 21, No. 3, 180-189 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100303


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Psychon Bull RevHome page
M. Li and G. B. Chapman
'100% of anything looks good': The appeal of one hundred percent
Psychon Bull Rev, February 1, 2009; 16(1): 156 - 162.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Cleveland Clinic Journal of MedicineHome page
L. K. ALTMAN, M. A. MUSSALLEM, R. DRESSER, P. A. LOMBARDO, P. A. UBEL, and C. L. WHITE
Outside the operating room--economic, regulatory, and legal challenges: A collection of perspectives and panel discussion
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, November 1, 2008; 75(Suppl_6): S61 - S73.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
E. Nadler, B. Eckert, and P. J. Neumann
Do oncologists believe new cancer drugs offer good value?
Oncologist, February 1, 2006; 11(2): 90 - 95.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]