Two for the price of one: If moving beyond traditional single-best discrete choice experiments, should we use best-worst, best-best or ranking for preference elicitation?

Samare P.I. Huls*, Emily Lancsar, Bas Donkers, Jemimah Ride

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
22 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This study undertook a head-to-head comparison of best-worst, best-best and ranking discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to help decide which method to use if moving beyond traditional single-best DCEs. Respondents were randomized to one of three preference elicitation methods. Rank-ordered (exploded) mixed logit models and respondent-reported data were used to compare methods and first and second choices. First choices differed from second choices and preferences differed between elicitation methods, even beyond scale and scale dynamics. First choices of best-worst had good choice consistency, scale dynamics and statistical efficiency, but this method's second choices performed worst. Ranking performed best on respondent-reported difficulty and preference; best-best's second choices on statistical efficiency. All three preference elicitation methods improve efficiency of data collection relative to using first choices only. However, differences in preferences between first and second choices challenge moving beyond single-best DCE. If nevertheless doing so, best-best and ranking are preferred over best-worst DCE.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2630-2647
Number of pages18
JournalHealth Economics
Volume31
Issue number12
Early online date14 Sep 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding information:
Australian Research Council DECRA,
Grant/Award Number: DE140101260;
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Grant/
Award Number: Smarter Choices for Better
Health

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Two for the price of one: If moving beyond traditional single-best discrete choice experiments, should we use best-worst, best-best or ranking for preference elicitation?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this