Nuestros investigadores

José Luis Pinto Prades

Publicaciones científicas más recientes (desde 2010)

Autores: Pinto, José Luis; Robles-Zurita, J. A. , (Autor de correspondencia); Sanchez-Martinez, F. I.; et al.
ISSN 1057-9230  Vol. 26  Nº 12  2017  págs. E304 - E318
We present data of a contingent valuation survey, testing the effect of evaluation mode on the monetary valuation of preventing road accidents. Half of the interviewees was asked to state their willingness to pay (WTP) to reduce the risk of having only 1 type of injury (separate evaluation, SE), and the other half of the sample was asked to state their WTP for 4 types of injuries evaluated simultaneously (joint evaluation, JE). In the SE group, we observed lack of sensitivity to scope while in the JE group WTP increased with the severity of the injury prevented. However, WTP values in this group were subject to context effects. Our results suggest that the traditional explanation of the disparity between SE and JE, namely, the so-called evaluability, does not apply here. The paper presents new explanations based on the role of preference imprecision.
Autores: Robinson, A. ; Spencer, A. E. ; Pinto, José Luis; et al.
ISSN 0272-989X  Vol. 37  Nº 3  2017  págs. 273 - 284
There is recent interest in using discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to derive health state utility values, and results can differ from time tradeoff (TTO). Clearly, DCE is "choice based,'' whereas TTO is generally considered a "matching'' task. We explore whether procedural adaptations to the TTO, which make the method more closely resemble a DCE, make TTO and choice converge. In particular, we test whether making the matching procedure in TTO less "transparent'' to the respondent reduces disparities between TTO and DCE. We designed an interactive survey that was hosted on the Internet, and 2022 interviews were achieved in the United Kingdom in a representative sample of the population. We found a marked divergence between TTO and DCE, but this was not related to the "transparency'' of the TTO procedure. We conclude that a difference in the error structure between TTO and choice and that factors other than differences in utility are affecting choices is driving the divergence. The latter has fundamental implications for the way choice data are analyzed and interpreted.
Autores: Brey, R; Pinto, José Luis;
ISSN 1618-7598  Vol. 18  Nº 7  2017  págs. 921 - 932
We provide more evidence on the functional relationship between willingness-to-pay for risk reductions and age (the senior discount). We overcome many of the limitations of previous literature that has dealt with this issue, namely, the influence of the assumptions used in statistical models on the final results. Given our large sample size (n = 6024) we can use models that are very demanding on data. We use parametric (linear, quadratic, dummies), semi-nonparametric, and non-parametric models. We also compare the marginal and the total approach and show that they provide similar results. We also overcome one of the limitations of the total approach, that is, we include the effects of socioeconomic characteristics that are correlated with age (education and income). Our main result is that all these different approaches produce very similar results, namely, they show an inverted-U relation between the value of a statistical life (VSL) and age. Those results can hardly be attributed to problems of collinearity, omitted variables or statistical assumptions. We find a clear senior discount effect. This effect seems concentrated on those who have lower education and income levels. We also find that the value of a statistical life year (VSLY) increases with age.
Autores: Attema, A. E., (Autor de correspondencia); Brouwer, W.B.F.; l¿Haridon, O.; et al.
Vol. 48  2016  págs. 121 - 134
This paper performs several tests of decision analysis applied to the health domain. First, we conduct a test of the normative expected utility theory. Second, we investigate the possibility to elicit the more general prospect theory. We observe risk aversion for gains and losses and violations of expected utility. These results imply that mechanisms governing decisions in the health domain are similar to those in the monetary domain. However, we also report one important deviation: utility is universally concave for the health outcomes used in this study, in contrast to the commonly found S-shaped utility for monetary outcomes, with concave utility for gains and convex utility for losses.
Autores: Ramos Goni, J. M.; Craig, B. M. ; Oppe, M. ; et al.
ISSN 1098-3015  Vol. 19  Nº 7  2016  págs. A376 - A376
Autores: Attema, A. E., (Autor de correspondencia); Brouwer, W. B. F.; l¿Haridon, O.; et al.
Vol. 43  2015  págs. 229 - 243
This paper is the first to apply prospect theory to societal health-related decision making. In particular, we allow for utility curvature, equity weighting, sign-dependence, and loss aversion in choices concerning quality of life of other people. We find substantial inequity aversion, both for gains and losses, which can be attributed to both diminishing marginal utility and differential weighting of better-off and worse-off. There are also clear framing effects, which violate expected utility. Moreover, we observe loss aversion, indicating that subjects give more weight to one group's loss than another group's gain of the same absolute magnitude. We also elicited some information on the effect of the age of the studied group. The amount of inequity aversion is to some extent influenced by the age of the considered patients. In particular, more inequity aversion is observed for gains of older people than gains of younger people.
Autores: Pinto, José Luis; Rodríguez-Míguez, E.;
Vol. 35  Nº 3  2015  págs. 305 - 315
Autores: Pinto, José Luis; Sánchez-Martínez, F. I.; Corbacho, B.; et al.
ISSN 0277-9536  Vol. 113  2014  págs. 5 - 14
Autores: Loomes, G.; Rodríguez-Puerta, I.; Pinto, José Luis;
Vol. 60  Nº 5  2014  págs. 1346 - 1350
We present examples of existing evidence that lead us to be cautious about claims made in the original paper [Blavatskyy PR (2011) A model of probabilistic choice satisfying first-order stochastic dominance. Management Sci. 57(3):542¿548] that the proposed model provides a better fit to experimental data than do existing models. We raise concerns about the accuracy of this and other assertions and about the adequacy of the comparisons made with alternative models in the existing literature.
Autores: Pinto, José Luis, (Autor de correspondencia); Abellan-Perpiñan, J.M. ;
ISSN 0176-1714  Vol. 38  Nº 4  2012  págs. 569 - 584
Revealed preferences are not consistent. Many anomalies have been found in different contexts. This finding leads to a divergence between normative and descriptive analyses. There are several ways of facing this problem. In this paper we argue in favour of debiasing observed choices in such a way that the ¿true¿ preferences are discovered. Our procedure is based on quantitative corrections derived from assuming the descriptive validity of prospect theory and the normative validity of expected utility theory. Those corrective formulas were first applied by Bleichrodt et al. (Manag Sci 47:1498¿1514, 2001). We explain here how such formulas can be used to avoid inefficient allocation of health care resources. This approach shares the philosophy of libertarian paternalism (LP). However, it reduces some of the potential problems of LP: the definition of error (and the need to nudge people) is more clear and objective. In this sense, it reduces the chances that the regulator tries to nudge people toward behaviour based on her preferences rather than those of the people she is nudging.
Autores: Corbacho, B., (Autor de correspondencia); Pinto, José Luis;
ISSN 0007-1420  Vol. 103  Nº 1  2012  págs. 5 - 20
Objective: This review examines the impact of economic evaluation in informing national or local policies within both jurisdictions. We focus on the factors that have made the economic evaluation evolves differently in both settings. Areas of agreement: Economic evaluation facilitates decision-making regarding the efficiency of interventions. The existence of national or local bodies regulating the process has contributed to increasing its use in decision-making and the development of its methods. Areas of controversy: Cost-effectiveness approach is based on the assumption of health maximization subject to a budget constraint. Decision-makers are not only interested in health maximization alone. This may result in policy-makers failing to consider economic evaluations into their allocation decisions. Areas to develop research: Methods that incorporate wider decision-makers goals (mainly local) and research to study the real impact of economic evaluation in terms of improved efficiency and equity are particularly required.
Autores: Donaldson, C., (Autor de correspondencia); Baker, R.; Mason, H.; et al.
ISSN 1472-6963  Vol. 11  2011  págs. 1 - 8
Autores: Day, B.; Pinto, José Luis;
ISSN 0095-0696  Vol. 59  Nº 3  2010  págs. 271 - 285
This paper investigates whether responses to choice experiments (CEs) are subject to ordering anomalies. While previous research has focussed on the possibility that such anomalies relate to position in the sequence of choice tasks, our research reveals that the particular order of tasks matters. Using a novel experimental design that allows us to test our hypotheses using simple nonparametric statistics, we observe ordering anomalies in CE data similar to those recorded in the dichotomous choice contingent valuation literature. Those ordering effects operate in both price and commodity dimensions and are observed to compound over a series of choice tasks. Our findings cast serious doubt on the current practice of asking each respondent to undertake several choice tasks in a CE while treating each response as an independent observation on that individual's preferences.
Autores: Baker, R.; Donaldson, C.; Lancsar, E.; et al.
ISSN 1366-5278  Vol. 14  Nº 27  2010  págs. i - 161
Autores: Abellán, J.M. ; Herrero, C.; Pinto, José Luis;
Libro:  The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy
2016  págs. 160-192
This chapter introduces the main ideas about the use of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in the evaluation of health policies. It starts by explaining the theoretical underpinnings of the QALY model understood as individual utilities. Afterward, it reviews the empirical evidence about the descriptive validity of the main assumptions supporting the model. Then, it explains the main preference elicitation techniques (visual analog scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble). It also shows the practical psychological problems faced by these techniques, such as the existence of context-dependent preferences. The chapter ends by explaining how QALYs are used in priority setting, in particular, the rules governing resources allocation decisions using QALYs, the ethical implications of these rules, and the relationship between cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Palabras clave: QALYs; Preference elicitation; Resource allocation; Health policy; Cost-effectiveness analysis