Home
Resourceseparator
Staff View
How do people value life?
Descriptive Metadata
Rights Metadata
Technical Metadata

Descriptive

TitleInfo
Title
How do people value life?
SubTitle
inconsistencies and mechanisms
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Li
NamePart (type = given)
Meng
DisplayForm
Meng Li
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
author
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Chapman
NamePart (type = given)
Gretchen B
DisplayForm
Gretchen B Chapman
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Gelman
NamePart (type = given)
Rocchel
DisplayForm
Rocchel Gelman
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
McCarthy
NamePart (type = given)
Danielle
DisplayForm
Danielle McCarthy
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Russo
NamePart (type = given)
Edward J
DisplayForm
Edward J Russo
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
outside member
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
degree grantor
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Graduate School - New Brunswick
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
school
TypeOfResource
Text
Genre (authority = marcgt)
theses
OriginInfo
DateCreated (qualifier = exact)
2012
DateOther (qualifier = exact); (type = degree)
2012-05
CopyrightDate (qualifier = exact)
2012
Place
PlaceTerm (type = code)
xx
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO639-2b); (type = code)
eng
Abstract (type = abstract)
This dissertation research examines the decision processes underlying how people value lives saved in situations of resource scarcity. Three policies a person could use are examined: (1) treating all lives equally, (2) prioritizing people who will gain the most benefit (e.g. additional life years) from an intervention, and (3) prioritizing young people regardless of the additional life years they have left. These metrics imply different strategies for health resource allocation, especially when such resources are scarce. Vaccination scenarios were used to probe which metrics lay people use in different situations and how the type of question influences the metric they used. In direct questions, people were asked about their general principles (e.g., all lives are equal, prioritize the young, etc.). In indirect questions, people were given an allocation problem (e.g., there are 1000 people at risk but only 500 vaccines; who should get the vaccines?) Two hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis 1: People show systematic inconsistencies in life-evaluating metrics they endorse when they are asked to express their views directly versus indirectly. Hypothesis 2: The above stated inconsistencies are caused by different goals. A moral goal is activated when people face the direct question, leading to preference for life-evaluating metrics consistent with established moral principles, such as equality; in contrast, an efficiency goal is activated when people face the indirect question, leading to preference consistent with maximizing efficiency, such as the “years-left” metric. The broader impacts of this research derive from the fact that the public's support for health policies may be malleable: While the pro-young tendencies may drive support for specific policies for how to prioritize scarce health resources (i.e. the 2009 H1N1 vaccine was prioritized for people under age 25), such tendencies may be concealed in more direct measures, where prioritizing life explicitly seems a more apparent contradiction to the oft-cited norm that "all lives are equal". Studying these inconsistencies provides important information on how to design public health policies and how to present them to the public.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Psychology
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_3927
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
vii, 65 p. : ill.
Note (type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by Meng Li
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Bioethics
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Life and death, Power over
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Humanistic ethics
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Life
Identifier (type = hdl)
http://hdl.rutgers.edu/1782.1/rucore10001600001.ETD.000065194
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School - New Brunswick Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore19991600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T3N58K9T
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
RightsHolder (type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
Li
GivenName
Meng
Role
Copyright Holder
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2012-04-12 15:08:37
AssociatedEntity
Name
Meng Li
Role
Copyright holder
Affiliation
Rutgers University. Graduate School - New Brunswick
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
RightsEvent
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2012-05-31
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = end)
2014-05-31
Type
Embargo
Detail
Access to this PDF has been restricted at the author's request. It will be publicly available after May 31st, 2014.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Back to the top

Technical

FileSize (UNIT = bytes)
766976
OperatingSystem (VERSION = 5.1)
windows xp
ContentModel
ETD
MimeType (TYPE = file)
application/pdf
MimeType (TYPE = container)
application/x-tar
FileSize (UNIT = bytes)
768000
Checksum (METHOD = SHA1)
156262aafc448079d4866e6bcf679f8cee504c2c
Back to the top
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024