A new explanation for the difference between time trade‐off utilities and standard gamble utilities
- 4 March 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Health Economics
- Vol. 11 (5) , 447-456
- https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.688
Abstract
This paper gives a new explanation for the systematic disparity between standard gamble (SG) utilities and time trade-off (TTO) utilities. The common explanation, which is based on expected utility, is that the disparity is caused by curvature of the utility function for duration. This explanation is, however, incomplete. People violate expected utility and these violations lead to biases in SG and TTO utilities. The paper analyzes the impact on SG and TTO utilities of three main reasons why people violate expected utility: probability weighting, loss aversion, and scale compatibility. In the SG, the combined effect of utility curvature, probability weighting, loss aversion, and scale compatibility is an upward bias. In the TTO these factors lead both to upward and to downward biases. This analysis can also explain the tentative empirical finding that the TTO better describes people's preferences for health than the SG. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 55 references indexed in Scilit:
- Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: Experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYsJournal of Health Economics, 1997
- Valuing health states: A comparison of methodsJournal of Health Economics, 1996
- Weighing risk and uncertainty.Psychological Review, 1995
- Cost utility analysis: What should be measured?Social Science & Medicine, 1994
- Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probabilityJournal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1994
- Separating marginal utility and probabilistic risk aversionTheory and Decision, 1994
- Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent ModelThe Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1991
- Contingent weighting in judgment and choice.Psychological Review, 1988
- On the Elicitation of Preferences for Alternative TherapiesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1982
- Fallacy of the Five-Year Survival in Lung CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 1978