An alternative approach to create and deploy discrete choice experiments

ABSTRACT

Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) are widely used in behavioral sciences to examine how humans value attributes of a technology, how those values drive decisions, and how they make trade-offs. The method has increasingly been used to inform technologies and interventions for addressing critical issues (e.g. disease and hunger). Different formats and symbols are used to deliver DCEs and represent attributes, respectively (e.g. questionnaire presenting two vaccines with different photos representing risks). When these formats or symbols are unfamiliar to respondents, they are unlikely to understand DCEs, raising questions about the validity of findings and their contribution to future technology and interventions. This research note offers a pathway to develop more robust DCEs with participants. In doing so, participant understanding of the experiment is increased and more accurate depictions of their choices are captured.

KEYWORDS:

• Discrete choice experiments
• physical symbols
• decision-making
• technology implications

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the opinions farmers shared to create a robust experiment as well as the input from Chilungamo Banda, Cyprian Mwale, and the AEDOs of Malawi. Figure graphics were contributed by Jashton Gieser.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This research was made possible with support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through its programs, Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation (Africa RISING) and the Borlaug Fellows in Global Food Security. The MAXQDA Research Software Company provided additional support through its #ResearchForChange grant. Finally, additional support was provided through a research fellowship from the Michigan State University Gender, Justice and Environmental Change program. Any errors or omissions are those of the authors.

Notes on contributors

Timothy Robert Silberg

Dr Timothy R. Silberg is an ecological food and farming systems researcher with interests in socio-ecological processes that influence the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) nexus. He evaluates the effects agro-ecological practices have on the FEW nexus by employing econometrics, system dynamics, and/or crop modelling.

R. B. Richardson

Dr Robert Richardson is an ecological economist with interests in the environment and development, particularly how ecosystem services contribute to socioeconomic well-being. His research focuses primarily on sustainable development, using a variety of methods from the behavioral and social sciences to study decision-making regarding natural resource consumption and ecosystem service values.

M. C. Lopez

Dr Maria Claudia Lopez is an economist in natural resource management and collective action. She uses behavioral economics, institutional analysis, econometrics, ethnography, and participatory research to understand how rural communities can collaborate successfully in the management of commonly held natural resources.

M. Grisotti

Dr Marcia Grisotti is a sociologist with interests in health and environmental policies, epistemology and history of medical knowledge, and social representations in health. Her research analyzes emerging diseases through a human ecology and political science perspective.