Mutual Altruism: Evidence from Alzheimer Patients and Their Spouse Caregivers

König, Markus and Pfarr, Christian and Zweifel, Peter (2013): Mutual Altruism: Evidence from Alzheimer Patients and Their Spouse Caregivers.

Abstract

Background: Preferences of both Alzheimer patients and their spouse caregivers are related to a willingness-to-pay (WTP) measure which is used to test for the presence of mutual (rather than conventional unilateral) altruism. Methods: Contingent valuation experiments were conducted in 2000 – 2002, involving 126 Alzheimer patients and their caregiving spouses living in the Zurich metropolitan area (Switzerland). WTP values for three hypothetical treatments of the demented patient were elicited. The treatment Stabilization prevents the worsening of the disease, bringing dementia to a standstill. Cure restores patient health to its original level. In No burden, dementia takes its normal course while caregiver’s burden is reduced to its level before the disease. Results: The three different types of therapies are reflected in different WTP values of both caregivers and patients, suggesting that moderate levels of Alzheimer’s disease still permit clear expression of preference. According to the WTP values found, patients do not rank Cure higher than No burden, implying that their preferences are entirely altruistic. Caregiving spouses rank Cure before Burden, reflecting less than perfect altruism which accounts for some 40 percent of their to-tal WTP. Still, this constitutes evidence of mutual altruism. Conclusions: The evidence suggests that WTP values reflect individuals’ preferences even in Alzheimer patients. The values found suggest that an economically successful treatment should provide relief to caregivers, with its curative benefits being of secondary importance.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: willingness-to-pay; dementia; altruism
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C93 - Field Experiments; D - Microeconomics > D0 - General > D03 - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I10 - General

References

Agee DM, Crocker TD. Parental altruism and child lead exposure: inferences from the de-mand for chelation therapy.” J Human Res 1996; 31: 677-91. Alzheimer Disease International. World Alzheimer Report 2012. London.

Andreoni J. Warm-glow vs. cold-prickle: the effects of positive and negative framing on co-operation in experiments. Quart J Econ, 1995; 110 (1): 1-21.

Arana JE, Leon CJ. Willingness to pay for health risk reduction in the context of altruism. Hlth Econ, 2002; 11 (7): 623-35.

Becker GS. Altruism, egoism and genetic fitness: economics and sociobiology. J Econ Lit. 1976; 14(3): 817-826.

Bédard M et al. Burden in caregivers of cognitively impaired older adults living in the com-munity: methodological issues and determinants. Int’l Psychoger 2000; 12 (3) : 307-32.

Blamey RK et al. Yea-saying in contingent valuation surveys. Land Econ 1999; 75: 126-41.

Brookmeyer R et al. Forecasting the global burden of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2007; 3: 186-191.

Brower, WB, Culyer, AJ, van Exel, NJ, Rutten, FF. Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism, J Hlth Econ 2008; 27(2), 325-38.

Byrne D et al. Formal home health care, informal care, and family decision making. Int Econ Rev 2009; 50(4): 1205-1242. Carson RT. Contingent Valuation: a user’s guide. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000; 34(8): 1412-1418.

Chiu L et al. Willingness of families caring for victims of dementia to pay for nursing home care: results of a pilot study in Taiwan. J Mgt in Med 1998; 12 (6): 349-60.

Diener AB, O'Brien J, and Gafni A. Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature. Hlth Econ 1998; 7: 313-26.

Dolan P. The measurement of health-related quality of life for use in resource allocation deci-sions in health care In: Culyer AJ and Newhouse JP, eds. Handbook of Health Eco-nomics, Vol. 1A, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2000, 1723-60.

Fehr E, Schmidt, KM. The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism – Experimental Evidence and New Theories. In: Kolm SC and Ythier JM, eds. Handbook of the Eco-nomics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, Vol. 1, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006, 615-691.

Goldberg I et al. Parental Response to Health Risk Information: Experimental Results on Willingness-to-Pay for Safer Infant Milk Formula. Hlth Econ 2009; 18(5): 503-518.

Gustafsson-Wright E, Asfaw A, and van der Gaag J. Willingness to pay for health insurance: An analysis of th potential market for new low-cost health insurance products in Na-mibia. Soc Sci Med 2009; 69 (9): 1351-1359.

Hughes C, Berg L, Danzinger W. A new clinical scale for the staging of dementia. Brit J Psy-chiat 1982; 140: 566-72.

Jones-Lee MW, Hammerton M, Phillips PR. The value of safety: results of a national sample survey.” Econ J 1985; 95: 49-72.

Klose T. The contingent valuation method in health care. Health Policy 1999; 47: 97-123.

König M, Wettstein A. Caring for relatives with dementia: willingness-to-pay for a reduction in caregiver's burden. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon & Outcomes Res 2002; 2 (6): 535-47.

Liu J-T, Hammitt, JD, Wang V, Liu J-L. Mother's willingness to pay for her own and her child's health: a contingent valuation study in Taiwan. Hlth Econ 2000; 9 (4): 319-26.

Loomis J et al. A Comparison of actual and hypothetical willingness to pay of parents and non-parents for protecting infant health: the case of nitrates in drinking water. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 2009; 41(3): 697-712.

Louviere, JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated Choice Methods – Analysis and Application, Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Mitchell RC, Carson RT. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington: Resources for the Future, 1989.

Nocera S, Bonato D, Telser H. The contingency of contingent valuation: how much are people willing to pay against Alzheimer's disease? Int’l J Hlth Care Fin Econ 2002; 2: 219-40.

Olsen JA, Smith RD. Theory versus practice: a review of 'willingness-to-pay' in health and health care. Hlth Econ 2001; 10 (1): 39-52.

Prince M et al. The global prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Alzeimers Dement 2013; 9: 63-75.

Rose-Ackerman S. Altruism, nonprofits, and economic theory. J of Econ Lit 1996; XXXIV (June): 701-28.

Schwarze J. Living conditions of children and parental well-being – evidence from German panel data on life satisfaction. IZA Discussion Paper No. 1200, 2004.

Sen A. Behavior and the concept of preferences. Economica 1973; 40(159): 241-259.

Shiell A, Rush B. Can willingness to pay capture the value of altruism? An exploration of Sen’s notion of commitment. J. Socio-Econ. 2003; 32(6): 647-660.

Simon HA. Altruism and economics. Am Econ Rev Papers and Proc 1993; 83(2): 157-61.

Simpson C, Carter P. Dementia behavioral and psychiatric symptoms: effect on caregiver’s sleep. J Clin Nurs 2013; online first doi: 10.1111/jocn.12127.

Thaler R, Rosen S. The value of saving a life: evidence from the labor market. In: Terleckyji NE ed. Household Production and Consumption. New York: Columbia University Press, 1975, 265-302.

Trepel D. Informal cost of dementia care – a proxy-good valuation in Ireland. Econ Soc Rev 2011; 42 (4): 479-503.

Van der Ploeg F. The welfare state redistribution and the economy: reciprocal altruism, con-sumer rivalry and cecond cest. CESifo Working Paper No. 1234, 2004.

Viscusi WK, Magat WA, Huber J. An investigation of the rationality of consumer valuations of multiple health risks. RAND J Econ 1987; 18: 465-79.

Whitlatch CJ. Distress and burden for family caregivers. In: Anders W et al. eds., Health Economics of Dementia. Chichester: John Wiley, 1998: 123-37.

Zweifel P. On the use of willingness-to-pay studies in health. Swiss J Econ Stat 2001; 137 (March): 10-25.