Quality pp 453-483 | Cite as

Summary and Future Directions



In this chapter I review my working hypothesis and the available data that provide support. Central to this hypothesis is process of valuation. I discuss a number of aspects of the ­valuation process, first comparing statistical vs. cognitive approaches by examining the weighting task, then I discuss the cognitive basis of valuation methods, and finally discuss the literature demonstrating that values are stable parts of a person’s qualitative assessments. I also address what I consider to be the central issue in qualitative research: Can a quality be a quantity? This gave me the opportunity to consider the nature of measurement in the behavioral and social sciences, in general, and qualitative research, in particular. I briefly reviewed the history of development of subjective measurement and concluded that a greater role has to be found for axiomatic fundamental measurement in qualitative research. For this to happen, however, requires that investigators acknowledge the limitations of their current research strategy.


Life Satisfaction Qualitative Assessment Satisfaction Score Satisfaction Rating Loss Aversion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Australian quality-of-life assessment (Hawthorne et al. 1999)


Axiomatic theory of measurement


Cancer behavior inventory (Merluzzi et al. 2001)

Com-QOL Scale

Comprehensive Quality-of-life Scale(Cummins 1997)


European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (Aaronson et al. 1991)


EuroQoL -5D (Kind 1996)


Functional assessment of cancer therapy – general version (Cella et al. 1993)


Functional assessment of cancer therapy – prostate (Esper et al. 1997)


Functional Independence Measure (Hamilton et al. 1987)


Functional Living Index: Cancer (Shipper et al. 1984)


Health and Activities Limitation Index (Erickson 1998)


Health assessment questionnaire (Fries et al. 1980)


Health Utilities Index (Torrance et al. 1995)


Injection Drug User Quality-of-life Scale (Russell et al. 2006)


Life Satisfaction Index A (Neugarten et al. 1961)


Multiattribute utility approach (Torrance et al. 1995)


Marlow-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Strahan and Gerbasi 1972)


National Health Interview Survey


Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale (Derogatis and Derogatis 1990)


Personal impact health assessment questionnaire (Hewlett et al. 2002)


Quality-adjusted life year(s)


Quality-of-life Index (Ferrans and Powers 1985)


Quality-of-life assessment


Quality of Well-being Scale (Kaplan and Anderson 1990)


Quality of Well-being Scale-Self-Administered (Kaplan et al. 1997)


Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg 1979)


Self-assessed health status


Schedule for individual quality-of-life-direct weighting (O’Boyle et al. 1995)


SF-12 Health survey (Ware et al. 1995)


SF-36 Health survey (Ware et al. 1994)


SF-6D Health survey (Brazier et al. 2002)


Standard Gamble


Satisfaction With Life Scale (Diener et al. 1985)


Time Trade-off (Torrance et al. 1995)


University of Washington Quality-of-life Assessment (Deleyiannis et al. 1997)


Visual Analog Scale


World Health Organization Quality-of-life-100 (The WHOQOL Group 1998)


  1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bullinger M, Crabeels D, et al. (1991). The EORTC core quality of life questionnaire: Interim results of an international field study. In, (Ed.) D. Osoba, The Effect of Cancer on Quality of life. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press. (p. 185–203).Google Scholar
  2. Abellan-Periñ JM, Bleichrodt H, Pinto-Prades JL. (2009). The predictive validity of prospect theory versus expected utility in health utility measurement. J Health Econ. 28, 1039–1047.Google Scholar
  3. Allport GW. (1961). Patterns and Growth in Personality. New York NY: Holt Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson J. (1962). Studies in Empirical Philosophy. Sydney Australia: Angus and Robertson.Google Scholar
  5. Balaban DJ, Sagi PC, Goldfarb NI, Nettler S. (1986). Weights for scoring Quality of Well-being instrument among rheumatoid arthritics. Med Care. 24, 973–980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bardi A, Schwartz SH. (2003). Values and behavior: Strength and structure of relations. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 29, 1207–1220.Google Scholar
  7. Barofsky I. (1996). Cognitive aspects of quality of life assessment. In, (Ed.) B. Spilker. Quality of life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials, 2nd edition. New York NY: Raven Press. (pp. 107–115).Google Scholar
  8. Barofsky I. (2000). The role of cognitive equivalence in studies of health-related quality of life assessments. Med Care. 38 (Supp II), 125–129.Google Scholar
  9. Barsalou LW. (2008) Grounded cognition. Annu Rev of Psychol. 59, 617–645.Google Scholar
  10. Bell DE, Raiffa H, Tversky A. (1988). Descriptive, normative and prescriptive interactions in decision making. In, (Eds.) DE Bell, H Raiffa, A Tversky. Decision Making: Normative and Prescriptive Interactions. New York NY: Cambridge University Press. (pp. 9–30).Google Scholar
  11. Benyamini Y, Leventhal EA, Leventhal H. (2000). Gender differences in processing information for making self-assessments of health. Psychosom Med. 62, 354–364.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bleichrodt H. (2002). A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off and standard gamble utilities. Health Educ. 11, 447–456.Google Scholar
  13. Bleichrodt H, Abellan-Periñ JM, Pinto-Prades JL, et al. (2007). Revolving inconsistencies in utility measurement under risk: Tests of generalizations of expected utility. Manag Sci. 53, 469–482.Google Scholar
  14. Bleichrodt H, Pinto L. (2005). The validity of QALYs under non-expected utility. Econ J. 115, 533–550.Google Scholar
  15. Borg I, Lingoes JC. (1987). Multidimensional Similarity Structure Analysis. New York NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Borsboom D. (2005). Measuring the Mind: Conceptual Issues in Contemporary Psychometrics. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Bowling A, Windsor J. (2001). Towards the good life: A population survey of dimensions of quality of life. J Happiness Stud. 2, 55–81.Google Scholar
  18. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 21, 271–292.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Brazier J, Roberts J, Tsuchiya A, Busschbach J. (2004). A comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 13, 873–884.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Bridgman PW. (1927). The Logic of Modern Physics. New York NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Bridgman PW. (1959). The Way Things Are. New York NY: Viking.Google Scholar
  22. Byran S, Longworth L. (2005). Measuring health-related utility: Why the disparity between EQ-5D and SF-6D? Eur J Health Econ. 50, 253–260.Google Scholar
  23. Calman KC. (1987). Definitions and dimensions of quality of life. In, (Eds.)NK Aaronson, JH Berkman. The Quality of life of Cancer Patients. New York NY: Raven Press. (pp. 1–9).Google Scholar
  24. Campbell A, Converse PE, Rodgers WL. (1976). The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations and Satisfaction. New York NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  25. Campbell NR. (1920). Physics the Elements. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, et al. (1993).The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale: Development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol. 11, 570–579.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Cliff N. (1992). Abstract measurement of adult intelligence. Psychol Bull. 40, 153–193.Google Scholar
  28. Connor-Spady B, Suarez-Alazor ME. (2003). Variation in estimation of quality-adjusted life years by different performance-based instruments. Med Care. 41, 791–801.Google Scholar
  29. Cummins RA. (1997). Comprehensive Quality of life Scale : Adult. Manuel. Melbourne Australia: Deakin University.Google Scholar
  30. Deleyiannis F W-B, Weymuller EA, Coltrera MD. (1997). Quality of life of disease-free survivors of advanced (Stage III or IV) Oropharyngeal cancer. Head Neck. 21, 466–473.Google Scholar
  31. Derogatis LR, Derogatis MF. (1990). The Psychological Adjustment to Illness Scale: Administration Scoring and Procedure Manuel. Towson MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.Google Scholar
  32. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larson RJ, Griffin S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. J Personal Assess. 49, 71–75.Google Scholar
  33. Dingle H. (1950). A theory of measurement. Brit J Philos Sci. 1, 5–26.Google Scholar
  34. Dolan P. (2000). The effect of age on health state valuations. J Health Serv Res Policy. 5, 17–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Draycott SG, Kline P. (1994a). Further investigations into the nature of the BIP: a factor analysis of the BIP with primary abilities. Personal Individ Individ. 17, 201–209.Google Scholar
  36. Draycott SG, Kline P. (1994b). Speed and ability: A research note. Personal Individ Individ. 17, 763–768.Google Scholar
  37. Earles JLK, Connor LT, Smith AD, Park D. (1997).Interrelations of age, self-reported health, speed and memory. Psychol Aging. 12, 675–683.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Erickson P. (1998). Evaluation of a population-based measure of quality of life: the Health and Activity Limitation Index (HALex). Qual Life Res. 7,101-114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Erickson P, Wilson R, Shannon I. (1995). Years of Healthy Life. Statistical Note #7. National Center for Health Statistics. Washington DC: Public Health Service.Google Scholar
  40. Esper P, Mo F, Chodak G, Sinner M, et al. (1997). Measuring Quality of life in men with prostate cancer using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) instrument. Urology. 50, 920–928.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Fanshel S, Bush, JW. (1970). A Health Status Index and its application to the health services outcomes. Oper. Res. 18, 1021–106.Google Scholar
  42. Fechner GT. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hartel.Google Scholar
  43. Ferguson A, Myers CS, Bartlett RJ, Banister H, et al.(1940). Final report of the committee appointed to consider and report upon the possibility of quantitative estimates of sensory events. Rep Brit Assoc Adv Sci . 2, 331–349. Google Scholar
  44. Ferrans CE, Frisch MB. (2005). Measuring quality of life: Is weighting with importance justified? Annual Meeting, International Society for Quality of life Research. San Francisco, CA. Qual Life Res. 14, A2012.Google Scholar
  45. Ferrans CE, Powers MJ. (1985). Quality of life index: development and psychometric properties. Adv Nurs Sci. 8, 15–24.Google Scholar
  46. Franks P, Hanner J, Fryback DG. (2006). Relative disutilities of 47 risk factors and conditions assessed with seven preference-based health status measures in a National U.S. sample: Toward consistency in cost-effectiveness analyses. Med Care. 44, 478–485.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Fraser CO. (1980). Measurement in psychology. Br J Psychol. 71. 23–34.Google Scholar
  48. Freitas AL, Gollwitzer PM, Trope Y. (2004). The influence of abstract and concrete mindsets on anticipating and guiding other’s self-regulatory efforts. J Exp Soc Psychol. 40, 739–752.Google Scholar
  49. Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR. (1980). Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 23,137–145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Frisch MB. (1992). The quality of life inventory: A cognitive-behavioral tool for complete problem assessment, treatment planning, and outcome evaluation. Behav Ther. 16, 42–44.Google Scholar
  51. Fryback DG, Dunham NC, Paita M, Hanner J, et al (2007). U.S. norms for six generic health-related quality of life indexes from the National Health Measurement study. Med Care 45, 1162–1170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Fryback DG, Kim J-S, Palta M, Revicki DA. (2007). New perspectives on how preference-based indexes (EQ-5D, HUI2,HUI3, QWB-SA, and SF-6D) scale summary health-related quality of life. International Society for Quality of life Research Annual Meeting Abstracts Qual of Life Res A-5.Google Scholar
  53. Fryback DG, Palta M, Cherepanov D, Bolt D, et al. (2009). Comparison of 5 health-related quality of life indexes using item response theory analysis. Med Decis Mak. First published online October 20, 2009 as doi: 10.1177/0272989X09347016.
  54. Fujita K, Trope Y, Liberman N, Levin-Sagi M. (2006). Construal levels and self-control. J Personal Soc Psychol. 90, 351–367.Google Scholar
  55. Fulford KWM. (2000).Teleology without tears: Naturalism, neo-naturalism, and evaluationism in the analysis of function statements in biology (and a bet on the Twenty-first Century). Philos Psychiatr Psychol, 7,77–94.Google Scholar
  56. Garster NC, Palta M, Sweitzer NK, Kaplan RM, et al (2009). Measuring health-related quality of life in population-based studies of coronary heart disease: Comparing six generic indexes and a disease-specific proxy score. Qual Life Res. 18,1239–1247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Gollwitzer PM. (1996). The volitional benefits of planning. In, (Eds.) PM Gollwitzer, JA Bargh. The Psychology of Action: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behavior. New York NY: Gilford Press. (p. 287–312).Google Scholar
  58. Gorbatenko-Roth K, Levin I, Altmaier E, Doebbeling B. (2001). Accuracy of health-related quality of life assessment: What is the benefit of incorporating patients’ preferences for domain functioning? Health Psychol. 20, 136–140.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Grice P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Grieve R, Grishchenko MK, Cairns J. (2009). SF-6D versus EQ-5D: Reasons for differences in utility scores and impact on reported cost-utility. Eur J Health Econ. 10, 15–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Guyatt GH, Nogradi S, Halcrow S, Singer J, et al. (1989). Development and testing of a new measure of health status for clinical trials in heart failure. J Gen Intern Med. 4, 101–107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Guttman L. (1968). A general nonmetric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points. Psychom. 33, 469–506.Google Scholar
  63. Hagell P, Westergren A. (2006). The significance of importance: An evaluation of Ferrans and Powers’ quality of life index. Qual Life Res. 15, 867–876.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Hamilton BB, Granger CV, Sheerwin FS, et al. (1987). A Uniform National Data System for Medical Rehabilitation. Baltimore MD: PH Brookes.Google Scholar
  65. Hand DJ. (1996). Statistics and the theory of measurement. J R Stat Soc A. 159 (Part 3), 445–492.Google Scholar
  66. Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. (1999). The assessment of quality of life (AQoL) instrument: A psychometric measure of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 8, 209–224.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day NA. (2001). A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of life (AqoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med. 33, 358–370.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Hershey JC, Shoemaker PJH. (1985). Probability versus certainty equivalence methods in utility measurement: Are they equivalent? Manag Sci. 31, 1213–1231.Google Scholar
  69. Hewlett S, Smith AP, Kirwan JR. (2001). Values for function in rheumatoid arthritis: patients, professionals, and public. Ann Rheum Dis. 60: 928–933.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Hewlett S, Smith AP, Kirwan JR. (2002). Measuring the meaning of disability in rheumatoid arthritis: Personal Impact Health Assessment Questionnaire (PI HAQ). Ann Rheum Dis. 61: 986–993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Hickey A, O’Boyle CA, McGee HM, Joyce CRB. (1999). The Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of life. In, (Eds.) CRB Joyce, HM McGee, CA O’Boyle. Individual Quality of life: Approaches to Conceptualization and Assessment. Amsterdam The Netherlands: Harwood. (pp. 119–133).Google Scholar
  72. Hsieh C-H. (2003). Counting importance: The case of life satisfaction and relative domain importance. Soc Indic Res. 61, 227–240.Google Scholar
  73. Jostmann NB, D Lakens, TW Schubert. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance. Psychol Sci. 20, 1160–1174.Google Scholar
  74. Kahneman D, Tversky A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica. 47, 263–291.Google Scholar
  75. Kant I. (1786). Metaphysical Foundation of Natural Science. (J. Ellington [Translator] 1970). Indianapolis IN: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  76. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. (1990). The General Health Policy Model: An integrated approach. In, (Ed.) B. Spilker. Quality of life Assessments in Clinical Trials. New York NY: Ravens.Google Scholar
  77. Kaplan R, Anderson JP. (1996). The General Health Policy Model: An integrated approach. In, (Ed.) B Spilker. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. New York NY: Ravens. (p. 309–322).Google Scholar
  78. Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. (1976). Health status: Types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Serv Res. 4, 478–507.Google Scholar
  79. Kaplan RM, Groess EJ, Sengupta N, Sieder W, et al. (2005). Comparison of measured utilities scores and imputed scores from the SF-36, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Med Care. 43, 79–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Kaplan RM, Sieber WJ, Ganiats TG. (1997).The Quality of Well-being Scale: Comparison of the interviewer-administered version with a self-administered questionnaire. Psychol Health. 12, 783–791.Google Scholar
  81. Keeney RL. (1988). Building models of values. Eur J Oper Res. 37, 149–157.Google Scholar
  82. Kind P. (1996). The EuroQoL instrument: An index of health-related quality of life. In, (Ed.) B Spilker. Quality of life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia PA: Lippincott-Raven. (p. 191–201).Google Scholar
  83. Kind P, Macran S. (2005). Eliciting social preference weights for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung health states. Pharmecon. 23, 1143–1153.Google Scholar
  84. Kline P. (1998). The New Psychometrics: Science, Psychology and Measurement. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  85. Knäuper B,Turner PA. (2003). Measuring health: Improving the validity of health assessments. Qual Life Res. 12(Suppl 1) 81–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Konerding U, Moock J, Kohlmann T. (2009). The classification of systems of the EQ-5D, the HUI II and the SF-6D: What do they have in common? Qual Life Res. 18,1249-1261.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Krantz DH, Luce RD, Suppes P, Tversky A. (1971). Foundations of Measurement. Vol 1. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  88. Kristiansen CH, Hotte AM. (1996). Mortality and the self: Implications for when and how of value-attitude-behavior relations. In, C Seligman, JM Olsen, MP Zanna (Eds.). The Ontario Symposium. Vol 8. The Psychology of Values. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. (p. 77–106).Google Scholar
  89. Lakoff G, Johnson M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago Il: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  90. Laman H, Lankhorst GJ. (1994). Subjective weighting of disability: An approach to quality of life assessment in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 16, 198–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Levine MN, Guyatt GH, Gent M, De Pauw S, et al. (1988). Quality of life in Stage II breast cancer: An instrument for clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 6, 1798–1810.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Locke EA. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organ Behav Hum Perform. 4. 309–336.Google Scholar
  93. Locke EA. (1970). Job satisfaction and job performance: A theoretical analysis. Organ Behav Hum Perform. 5, 484–500.Google Scholar
  94. Luce RD, Krantz DH, Suppes P, Tversky A. (1990). Foundations of Measurement. Vol. 3. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  95. Luce RD, Tukey JW. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol. 1, 1–27.Google Scholar
  96. Marra CA, Woolcott JC, Kopec JA, Shojania K, et al (2005). A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3,SF-6D and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments in rheumatoid arthritis. Soc Sci Med, 60. 1571–1582.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Mastekaasa A. (1984). Multiplicative and additive models of job and life satisfaction. Soc Indic Res. 14, 141–163.Google Scholar
  98. McCelland DC. (1985). Human Motivation. Glenview Il: Scott, Foreman.Google Scholar
  99. McFarlin DB, Coster EA, Rice RW, Cooper AT. (1995). Facet importance and job satisfaction: Another look at the range-of-affect hypothesis. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 16, 489–502.Google Scholar
  100. McGee HM, O’Boyle CA, Hickey A, O’Malley K, et al. (1991). Assessing the quality of life of the individual: The SEIQoL with a healthy and a gastroenterology unit population. Psychol Med. 21, 749–759.Google Scholar
  101. Merluzzi TV, Nairm RC, Hedge K, Martinez Sanchez MA, et al. (2001). Self-efficacy for coping with cancer: Revision of the Cancer Behavior Inventory (Version 2.0). Psycho-Oncol. 10, 206–217.Google Scholar
  102. Michell J. (1997). Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. Brit J Psychol. 88, 355–383.Google Scholar
  103. Michell J. (1999). Measurement in Psychology: Critical history of a methodological concept. Cambridge UK: Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
  104. Michell J. (1986). Measurement scales and statistics: A class of paradigms. Psychol Bull. 100, 398–407.Google Scholar
  105. Mobley WH, Locke EA. (1970). The relationship of value importance to satisfaction. Organ Behav Hum Perform. 5, 463–483.Google Scholar
  106. Morita S, Ohashi Y, Kobayashi K, Matsumot T, et al. (2003). Individual different “weights” of quality of life assessment in patients with advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer. J Clin Epidemiol. 56, 744–751.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. Mozley CG, Huxley P, Sutcliffe C, Bagley H, et al (1999). “Not knowing where I am doesn’t mean I don’t know what I like”: Cognitive impairment and quality of life responses in elderly people. Int J Geriat Psychiatr. 14, 776–783.Google Scholar
  108. Neugarten BL, Havinghurst RJ, Tobin SS. (1961). Measurement of life satisfaction. J Gerontol. 16, 134–143.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. O’Boyle, Brown J, Hickey A, McGee H, et al. (1995). Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of life(SEIQoL): A direct weighting procedure for quality of life domains (SEIQoL-DW). Dublin UK: Administration Manuel; Department of Psychology, Royal College of Surgeons.Google Scholar
  110. Osoba D. (1994). Lessons learned from measuring health-related quality of life in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 12, 508–516.Google Scholar
  111. Osoba D, Hsu M, Copley-Merriman, Cooms J, et al. (2006). Stated preferences with cancer for health-related quality of life (HRQL) domains during treatment. Qual Life Res. 15, 273–283.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. Park DC. (2000). The basic mechanisms accounting for age-related decline in cognitive function. In, (Eds.) DC Park, N Schwarz. Cognitive Aging: A Primer. Philadelphia PA: Taylor and Francis. (p. 3–21).Google Scholar
  113. Patrick DL, Bush JW, Chen MM. (1973). Towards an operational definitional of health. J Health Soc Behav. 14, 6–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. Phillip EJ, Merluzzi TV, Peterman A, Cronk LB. (2009). Measurement accuracy in assessing patient’s quality of life: To weight or not to weight domains of quality of life. Qual Life Res. 18, 775–782.Google Scholar
  115. Pickard AS, Shaw JW, Lin H-W, Trasj PC, et al. (2009). A Patient-based utility measure of health for clinical trials of cancer therapy based on the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire. Values Health 12, 977–988.Google Scholar
  116. Rand A. (1964). The objectivist ethics. In, (Ed.) A. Rand. The Virtue of Selfishness. New York NY: Signet. (pp. 13–35).Google Scholar
  117. Reed Johnson F, Hauber AB, Osoba D, Hsu M-A, et al. (2006). Are chemotherapy patients’ HRQOL importance weights consistent with linear scoring rule? A stated-choice approach. Qual Life Res. 15: 285–298.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Rice RW, Markus K, Moyer RP, McFarlin DB. (1991). Facet importance and job satisfaction: Two experimental tests of Locke’s Range of Affect hypothesis. J Appl Soc Psychol. 24: 1977–1987.Google Scholar
  119. Rogers SN, Laher SH, Overend L, Lowe D. (2002). Importance-rating using the University of Washington Quality of life questionnaire in patients treated by primary surgery for oral and oro-pharyngeal cancer. J Cranio-Maxilofac Surg. 30, 125–132.Google Scholar
  120. Rokeach M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  121. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  122. Ross M. (1989). Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal histories. Psychol Rev. 96, 341–347.Google Scholar
  123. Rosser R, Kind P. (1978). A scale of valuations of states of illness: Is there a social consensus? Int J Epidemiol. 7, 347–358.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. Russell LB, Hubley AM. (2005). Importance ratings and weighting: Old concerns and new perspectives. Int J Test. 5, 105–130.Google Scholar
  125. Russell LB, Hubley AM, Palepu A, Zumbo BD. (2006). Does weighting capture what’s important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Soc Indic Res. 75, 141–167.Google Scholar
  126. Ruta DA, Garratt AM, Leng M, Russell IT, et al. (1994). A new approach to the measurement of quality of life: The Patient Generated Inventory (PGI). Med Care. 32, 1109–1126.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. Schwartz CE, Sprangers MAG. (2000). Adaptation to Changing Health: Response Shift in Quality of life Research. Washington DC, American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  128. Schwartz SH. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In, (Ed.)MP Zunna. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. (Vol. 25). New York NY: Academic Press. (pp. 1–65).Google Scholar
  129. Schwarz N, Strack F. (1999). Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. In, (Eds.) D Kahneman, E Diener, N Schwarz. Well-being : The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. New York, Russell Sage Foundation. (p. 61–84).Google Scholar
  130. Sen A. (2001). Objectivity and position: Assessment of health and well-being. In, (Eds.) J Drèze, A Sen. India: Development and Participation. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press. (p. 115–128).Google Scholar
  131. Shipper H, Clinch J, McMurray A, Levitt M. (1984). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Development and validation. J Clin Oncol. 2, 472–483.Google Scholar
  132. Søgaard R, Christensen FB, Videba/ek TS, Bünger C, et al. (2009). Interchangeability of the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in long-lasting low back pain. Value Health. 12, 606–612.Google Scholar
  133. Spates JL. (1983). The sociology of values. Annu Rev Sociol. 9, 27–49.Google Scholar
  134. Stavem K, Frøland SS, Hellum KB. (2005). Comparison of preference-based utilities of the 15D, EQ-5D, and SF-6D in patients with HIV/AIDS. Qual Life Res. 14, 971–980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. Stevens SS. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Psychol Bull 36, 221–263.Google Scholar
  136. Strahan R, Gerbasi KC. (1972). Short homogenous versions of the Marlow-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. J Clin Psychol. 28: 191–193.Google Scholar
  137. Stineman MG, Maislin G, Nosek M, Fiedler R, et al. (1998). Functional status; Application of a new feature trade-off consensus building tool. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 79,1522–1529.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. Stineman MG, Wechsler B, Ross R, Maislin G. (2003). A method for measuring quality of life through subjective weighting of functional status. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 84 Suppl 2, S15-S22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. Stone PC, Murphy RF, Matar HE, Almerie MQ. (2009). Quality of life in patients with prostate cancer: Development and application of a hybrid assessment method. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 12, 72–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. Stroop JR. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions, J Exp Psychol. 18, 643–662.Google Scholar
  141. Suppes P, Krantz DH, Luce RD, Tversky A. (1989). Foundations of Measurement. (Vol. 2). New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  142. Todman J, Teunisse S, Phillips L. (2003). An “Innocuous Theoretical Indulgence”?: The use of weighting by importance. Qual Life Res 12: 825.Google Scholar
  143. Torelli CJ, Kaikati AN. (2009). Values as predictors of judgments and behaviors: The role of abstract and concrete mindsets. J Personal Soc Psychol. 96, 231–247.Google Scholar
  144. Torrance GW. (1976). Health status index models: A unified mathematical view. Manag Sci. 22, 990–1001.Google Scholar
  145. Torrance GW. (1986). Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: A review. J Health Econ. 5, 1–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. Torrance GW, Furlong W, Feeny D, Boyle M. (1995).Multi-attribute preference functions: Health Utilities Index. PharmEcon. 7, 503–520.Google Scholar
  147. Trauer T, Mackinnon A. (2001). Why are we weighting? The role of importance ratings in quality of life measurement. Qual Life Res 10, 579–585.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. Tversky A, Kahneman D. (1992). Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative representation under uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain. 5, 297–323.Google Scholar
  149. Tyas S, Snowdon DA, Desrosiers MF, Riley KP. (2007). Healthy aging in the Nun Study: Definition and neuropathologic correlates. Age Aging. 36, 650–655.Google Scholar
  150. von Kries J. (1882). Über die Messung intensiver Grössen und über das sogenannte psychophysische Gesetz. Vierteljahrsschr wiss Philos. 6, 257–294.Google Scholar
  151. von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  152. von Osch SMC, Stiggelbout AE. (2008). The construction of the standard gamble utilities. Health Econ. 17, 31–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. von Osch SMC, Wakker PP, van den Hout WB, Stiggelbout AE. (2004). Correcting biases in standard gamble and time tradeoff utilities. Med Decis Mak. 24, 511–517.Google Scholar
  154. Wakefield JC. (1999). Evolutionary versus prototype analyses of the concept of disorder. J Abnorm Psychol. 108, 374–399.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. Ware JE, Kosinski MA, Keller SD. (1994). SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A Users Manual. Boston MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.Google Scholar
  156. Ware JE, Kosinski MA, Keller SD. (1995). SF-12: How to Score the SF-12 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales. Boston MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.Google Scholar
  157. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski MA, Gandek B. (1993). SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.Google Scholar
  158. Wee H-L, Machin D, Loke W-C, Li S-C, et al. (2007). Assessing differences in utility scores: A comparison of four widely used preference-based instruments. Value Health. 10, 256–265.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  159. Welham J, Haire M, Mercer D, Stedman T. (2001). A gap approach to exploring quality of life in mental health. Qual Life Res. 10: 421–429.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  160. Wettergren L, Björkholm M, Langius-Eklöf. (2005). Validation of an extended version of the SEIQoL-DW in a cohort of Hodgkin lymphoma’ survivors. Qual Life Res. 14: 2329–2333.Google Scholar
  161. The WHOQOL Group. (1998). The World Health Organization Quality of life Assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Soc Sci Med. 46, 1569–1585.Google Scholar
  162. Williams B, Coyle J, Healy D. (1998). The meaning of patient satisfaction: An explanation of high reported levels. Soc Sci Med. 47, 1351–1359.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  163. Williams PG, Wasserman MS, Lotto AJ. (2003). Individual differences in self-assessed health: An information-processing investigation of health and illness cognition. Health Psychol 22, 3–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. Willis GB. (2005) Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  165. Wu C-H. (2008). Can we weight satisfaction score with importance ranks across life domains? Soc Indic Res. 86: 469–480.Google Scholar
  166. Wu C-H, Chen LH, Tsai Y-M. (2009). Investigating importance weights of satisfaction scores from a formative model with Partial Least Squares analysis. Soc Indic Res. 90, 351–363.Google Scholar
  167. Wu C-H, Yeo G. (2006a). Do we need to weight satisfaction scores with importance ratings in measuring quality of life? Soc Indic Res 78: 305–326.Google Scholar
  168. Wu C-H, Yeo G. (2006b). Do we need to weight item satisfaction scores by item importance? A perspective from Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Soc Indic Res 79, 485–502.Google Scholar
  169. Wu C-H, Yeo G. (2007). Examining the relationship between global and domain measures of quality of life by three factor structure models. Soc Indic Res 84, 189–202.Google Scholar
  170. Wundt W. (1874). Grundzüge der physiologischen Psychologie. Leipzig Germany: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Quality of Life InstituteEast SandwichUSA

Personalised recommendations