Skip to main content
. 2018 May 9;56(2):117–140. doi: 10.1007/s11166-018-9279-1

Table 6.

The effect of socio-demographic variables on discounting

Area under the normalized utility function
Health Money Pooled
Estimates (SE) p-values Estimates (SE) p-values Estimates (SE) p-values
Monetary outcomes (ref = health outcomes) 0.051
(0.023)
0.028
Men (ref = no) −0.029
(0.041)
0.482 −0.042
(0.03)
0.164 −0.036
(0.025)
0.149
Age −0.086
(0.045)
0.059 −0.092
(0.033)
0.006 −0.089
(0.028)
0.001
Age2 0.001
(0.001)
0.048 0.001
(0)
0.005 0.001
(0)
0.001
Couple (ref = no) −0.036
(0.053)
0.501 −0.003
(0.039)
0.93 −0.017
(0.033)
0.596
Children (ref = no) −0.017
(0.054)
0.752 −0.005
(0.039)
0.899 −0.012
(0.033)
0.722
Relative educational position 0.145
(0.084)
0.084 −0.039
(0.061)
0.529 0.046
(0.051)
0.371
Currently employed (ref = no) −0.006
(0.054)
0.905 0.063
(0.04)
0.113 0.032
(0.033)
0.338
Public sector (ref = no) −0.049
(0.048)
0.303 −0.071
(0.035)
0.039 −0.062
(0.029)
0.032
At least one manual or service employee in the household 1 (ref = no) −0.157
(0.048)
0.001 0.038
(0.035)
0.278 −0.053
(0.029)
0.068
Low-income household 0.01
(0.058)
0.865 0.043
(0.043)
0.313 0.029
(0.036)
0.424
Suffering from back pain (ref = no) 0.057
(0.04)
0.16 −0.023
(0.03)
0.44 0.015
(0.025)
0.54
Back pain related scenario first 0.02
(0.039)
0.606 0.032
(0.028)
0.261 0.026
(0.024)
0.279
Constant 2.184
(0.887)
0.014 2.363
(0.654)
<0.001 2.255
(0.546)
<0.001
McFadden adjusted R2 0.031 0.039 0.024

Tobit regression, with left-censored values at 0.0625 and right-censored values at 0.9