Gil-Moltó Maria José, Hole Arne Risa, Andersson Henrik, Godager Geir
Universitat Jaume I, Castellón de la Plana, Spain.
VTI, Lund, Sweden.
Health Econ. 2025 Oct;34(10):1907-1920. doi: 10.1002/hec.70011. Epub 2025 Jul 12.
Recent research has found that health risk values elicited using Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) may be inadequately sensitive to the magnitude of the risk reduction, a phenomenon referred to as insensitivity to scope. This paper investigates the use of DCEs to estimate the value of a statistical life (VSL) under different experimental conditions. In particular, we use an experimental design where in one experimental arm we carry out a standard unincentivised DCE as in the existing literature, while in the other experimental arm we carry out an incentivized version of the DCE with real payments. Our findings suggest that the incentive has an impact on the results, in the sense that the VSL estimates are higher in the unincentivised arm of the experiment. However, we find evidence of external insensitivity to scope in both experimental arms and only weak evidence of stronger internal sensitivity to scope in the incentivized arm. Hence, our results suggest that a lack of scope sensitivity is unrelated to the hypothetical nature of the payments in stated-preference valuations of health risks.
近期研究发现,使用离散选择实验(DCE)得出的健康风险值可能对风险降低幅度的敏感度不足,这一现象被称为范围不敏感。本文研究了在不同实验条件下使用DCE来估计统计生命价值(VSL)的情况。具体而言,我们采用了一种实验设计,在一个实验分支中,我们如现有文献那样进行标准的无激励DCE,而在另一个实验分支中,我们进行有实际支付的激励版DCE。我们的研究结果表明,激励对结果有影响,即实验中无激励分支的VSL估计值更高。然而,我们在两个实验分支中都发现了外部范围不敏感的证据,而在激励分支中仅有微弱的更强内部范围敏感的证据。因此,我们的结果表明,范围敏感性的缺乏与健康风险陈述偏好估值中支付的假设性质无关。