Marginal willingness to pay from a discrete choice experiment

Divides the utility coefficient of an attribute, or the difference in coefficients between two of its levels, by the negative of the coefficient on the cost attribute. The cost coefficient measures the marginal utility of money, so the ratio is the payment that leaves utility unchanged when the attribute improves by one unit or moves between the two levels.

Signature

MWTP_k = -beta_k / beta_c
Inputs
InputsDefinitionUnit
beta_kEstimated coefficient on attribute k, or the difference between the coefficients of the two levels comparedutility per unit of attribute k
beta_cEstimated coefficient on the cost attribute, negative when a higher cost lowers the utility of an alternativeutility per unit of currency as coded
Output
MWTP_kMoney a respondent would give up for a one-unit improvement in attribute k, or for a move between two of its levelscurrency in which the cost attribute is coded

Function

Willingness-to-pay estimation function

Maps stated or modelled preferences for a change in health or health care to a sum of money: the marginal value of an attribute from the coefficients of a discrete choice model, or the mean of individual valuations from a contingent valuation survey, scaled to the affected population. Aggregate WTP is the monetary benefit that cost-benefit analysis sets against the present value of costs.

Try this function

Implementations

  • Excel

    Marginal WTP from model coefficients

    With the attribute coefficient in AttributeCoef and the cost coefficient in CostCoef, Excel returns marginal WTP, or #N/A when the cost coefficient is not negative.

    =IF(CostCoef<0,-AttributeCoef/CostCoef,NA())

Assumptions

  • Utility linear in cost

    The cost attribute enters the utility function linearly, so the marginal utility of money is constant across the cost range. Estimates outside the range of costs shown to respondents are extrapolations.

  • Coefficients on the same scale and model

    beta_k and beta_c come from the same estimated model. Scale differences between respondents cancel in the ratio, so WTP is comparable across groups when the coefficients are not.

Worked examples

  • Individual rather than group consultation for type 2 diabetes

    In a discrete choice experiment on lifestyle programmes, individual consultation had a coefficient of 0.50 and groups of 10 patients minus 0.46, a difference of 0.96, and the cost coefficient was minus 0.75 per 100 euros, or minus 0.0075 per euro. Marginal WTP for individual consultation is 128 euros a year, as reported by Veldwijk and colleagues.

    beta_k = 0.96; beta_c = -0.0075; MWTP_k = 128
  • Ten kilograms of anticipated weight loss

    The same study estimated a coefficient of 0.72 for an expected outcome of 10 kg weight loss. From the rounded coefficients, marginal WTP is 96 euros a year; the authors report 97 euros from unrounded estimates.

    beta_k = 0.72; beta_c = -0.0075; MWTP_k = 96

Common errors

  • Dropping the minus sign

    Dividing 0.96 by minus 0.0075 without the leading minus gives minus 128 euros, which reads as a payment needed to accept the preferred level. The negative cost coefficient is divided into the negative of the attribute coefficient.

  • Ignoring the unit of the cost attribute

    When cost is coded in hundreds of euros, minus 0.96 divided by minus 0.75 gives 1.28, meaning 128 euros, not 1.28 euros. The coding of the cost attribute sets the unit of the result.

Sources

  • DCE willingness to pay as a ratio to the cost coefficient

    Veldwijk J, Lambooij MS, van Gils PF, Struijs JN, Smit HA, de Wit GA. Type 2 diabetes patients' preferences and willingness to pay for lifestyle programs: a discrete choice experiment. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1099. Methods (negative of the out-of-pocket cost coefficient used as the marginal utility of money; ratio of an attribute estimate to it gives WTP), table 4 panel mixed logit estimates (individual consultation 0.50, groups of 10 minus 0.46, expected outcome 0.72, out-of-pocket costs per 100 euros minus 0.75) and reported WTP of 128 euros and 97 euros a year.

    View source →

  • Textbook on discrete choice experiments in health

    Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M, editors. Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. Estimation of marginal rates of substitution and willingness to pay from the coefficients of a random utility model with a cost attribute.

    View source →

Canonical Identity

Stable URI · Machine-readable · Resolvable · CC BY 4.0