Best-worst scaling vs. discrete choice experiments : an empirical comparison using social care data
Date
2011
Authors
Potoglou, D.
Burge, P.
Flynn, T.
Netten, A.
Malley, J.
Forder, J.
Brazier, J.E.
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Journal article
Citation
Social Science and Medicine, 2011; 72(10):1717-1727
Statement of Responsibility
Conference Name
Abstract
This paper presents empirical findings from the comparison between two principal preference elicitation techniques: discrete choice experiments and profile-based best–worst scaling. Best–worst scaling involves less cognitive burden for respondents and provides more information than traditional “pick-one” tasks asked in discrete choice experiments. However, there is lack of empirical evidence on how best–worst scaling compares to discrete choice experiments. This empirical comparison between discrete choice experiments and best–worst scaling was undertaken as part of the Outcomes of Social Care for Adults project, England, which aims to develop a weighted measure of social care outcomes. The findings show that preference weights from best–worst scaling and discrete choice experiments do reveal similar patterns in preferences and in the majority of cases preference weights – when normalised/rescaled – are not significantly different.
School/Discipline
Dissertation Note
Provenance
Description
Link to a related website: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/42278/1/Best-worst%20scaling%20vs.%20discrete%20choice%20experiments%20%28LSERO%29.pdf, Open Access via Unpaywall
Access Status
Rights
Crown Copyright 2011 Published by Elsevier