50% 200 50% 160 50% 385 50% 10 A B 5 60% 200 40% 160 60% 385 40% 10 A B 6 70% 200 30% 160 70% 385 30% 10 A B 7 80% 200 20% 160 80% 385 20% 10 A B 8 90% 200 10% 160 90% 385 10% 10 A B 9 The MPL was adapted by presenting the lotteries as different healthcare treatments with payoffs defined as days of full health (Table 1). A risk-neutral individual should switch from the option (treatment A) to the option (treatment B) only when the ‘safe’ ‘risky’ expected utility is greater in treatment B than in A. An individual who is risk neutral chooses treatment A in rows 1-4, before switching to B in row 5. A risk averse individual switches to treatment B after row 5, while a risk lover switches before row 5. Thus, the switching point is a measure of an individual’s risk preferences. We define (SwitchRiskHD) a SwitchRiskHP variable denoting the point at which a given patient (doctor) switched from lottery A to lottery B. This ranges from 1 (switching to treatment B in the first row) to 10 (never switching to treatment B) and the higher the value, the more risk averse the patient (doctor) is. Time preferences Time preferences were measured using an adaptation of the Tanaka et al. (2010) MPL to the healthcare context. Subjects were presented with a series of six blocks of choices, each of which had five choices between two different healthcare treatments. Subjects were asked to consider their current health status and to choose between two possible hypothetical treatments, A and B, with different days of full health at different points in time (Table 2). In each block, treatment A gave a larger number of days in full health than treatment B. Treatment A, however, was offered with some delay (so-called option, LL) Larger-Later while treatment B was always available immediately (so-called option, SS). Smaller-Sooner
5 50% 200 50% 160 50% 385 50% 10 A B 6 60% 200 40% 160 60% 385 40% 10 A B 7 70% 200 30% 160 70% 385 30% 10 A B 8 80% 200 20% 160 80% 385 20% 10 A B 9 90% 200 10% 160 90% 385 10% 10 A B The MPL was adapted by presenting the lotteries as different healthcare treatments with payoffs defined as days of full health (Table 1). A risk-neutral individual should switch from the ‘safe’ option (treatment A) to the ‘risky’ option (treatment B) only when the expected utility is greater in treatment B than in A. An individual who is risk neutral chooses treatment A in rows 1-4, before switching to B in row 5. A risk averse individual switches to treatment B after row 5, while a risk lover switches before row 5. Thus, the switching point is a measure of an individual’s risk preferences. We define SwitchRiskHP (SwitchRiskHD) a variable denoting the point at which a given patient (doctor) switched from lottery A to lottery B. This ranges from 1 (switching to treatment B in the first row) to 10 (never switching to treatment B) and the higher the value, the more risk averse the patient (doctor) is. Time preferences Time preferences were measured using an adaptation of the Tanaka et al. (2010) MPL to the healthcare context. Subjects were presented with a series of six blocks of choices, each of which had five choices between two different healthcare treatments. Subjects were asked to consider their current health status and to choose between two possible hypothetical treatments, A and B, with different days of full health at different points in time (Table 2). In each block, treatment A gave a larger number of days in full health than treatment B. Treatment A, however, was offered with some delay (so-called Larger-Later option, LL) while treatment B was always available immediately (so-called Smaller-Sooner option, SS).
D-P%20RP%20TP%20JHE%20RR2%204%20October%202016.docx