Exploring Social Preferences for Health and Well-Being Across the Digital Divide: A Qualitative Investigation Based on Tasks Taken From an Online Discrete Choice Experiment
Becky Field PhD , Katherine E. Smith PhD , Clementine Hill O’Connor PhD , Nyantara Wickramasekera MSc , Aki Tsuchiya PhD
{"title":"Exploring Social Preferences for Health and Well-Being Across the Digital Divide: A Qualitative Investigation Based on Tasks Taken From an Online Discrete Choice Experiment","authors":"Becky Field PhD , Katherine E. Smith PhD , Clementine Hill O’Connor PhD , Nyantara Wickramasekera MSc , Aki Tsuchiya PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.11.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Increasingly, discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are conducted online, with little consideration of the digitally excluded, who are unable to participate. Policy makers or others considering online research data need clarity about how views might differ across this “digital divide.” We took tasks from an existing online DCE designed to elicit social preferences for health and well-being outcomes. We aimed to explore (1) how telephone interview participants answered a series of choice tasks taken from an online DCE and (2) whether and how decision making for these tasks differed between digitally excluded and nonexcluded participants.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with members of the public (n = 27), recruited via an existing social research panel. Data were analyzed thematically to identify key approaches to decision making.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twelve participants were classed as “digitally excluded,” and 15 as “digitally nonexcluded.” Responses were similar between the 2 samples for most choice tasks. We identified 3 approaches used to reach decisions: (1) simplifying, (2) creating explanatory narratives, and (3) personalizing. Although these approaches were common across both samples, understanding the exercise seemed more challenging for the digitally excluded sample.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This novel study provides some assurance that the participants’ views over the choice tasks used are similar across the digital divide. The challenges we identified with understanding highlight the need to carefully examine the views held by the digitally excluded. If online data are to inform policy making, it is essential to explore the views of those who cannot participate in online DCEs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":"28 2","pages":"Pages 285-293"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524067615","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
Increasingly, discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are conducted online, with little consideration of the digitally excluded, who are unable to participate. Policy makers or others considering online research data need clarity about how views might differ across this “digital divide.” We took tasks from an existing online DCE designed to elicit social preferences for health and well-being outcomes. We aimed to explore (1) how telephone interview participants answered a series of choice tasks taken from an online DCE and (2) whether and how decision making for these tasks differed between digitally excluded and nonexcluded participants.
Methods
We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with members of the public (n = 27), recruited via an existing social research panel. Data were analyzed thematically to identify key approaches to decision making.
Results
Twelve participants were classed as “digitally excluded,” and 15 as “digitally nonexcluded.” Responses were similar between the 2 samples for most choice tasks. We identified 3 approaches used to reach decisions: (1) simplifying, (2) creating explanatory narratives, and (3) personalizing. Although these approaches were common across both samples, understanding the exercise seemed more challenging for the digitally excluded sample.
Conclusions
This novel study provides some assurance that the participants’ views over the choice tasks used are similar across the digital divide. The challenges we identified with understanding highlight the need to carefully examine the views held by the digitally excluded. If online data are to inform policy making, it is essential to explore the views of those who cannot participate in online DCEs.
期刊介绍:
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.