OBJECTIVES: It is unclear how well health preference elicitation techniques are understood by younger populations.  We sought to conduct a pilot that: (1) assesses the feasibility and validity of conducting a discrete choice experiment (DCE) in children by comparing illogical choices and choice blindness (CB) rates between adults and children; (2) explores the relationship between personality trait and health-state choices among children and adults. METHODS: A convenience sample of adults and children (8-17 years old) were recruited in Chicagoland, USA.  A simplistic 3-level (none, some and extreme problems) health classifier (mobility/pain/depression) was employed.   Respondents answered a personality test then selected a preferred health-state for 6 sets of health-state scenarios. Two of the 6 scenarios involved the interviewer switching the respondent’s choice to the other response; if they did not notice the switch they were considered “choice blind”. Logistic regression models evaluated the association of personality, gender, and being a child with CB and health-state choice.  RESULTS: A total of 101 respondents were recruited (44% adults). Comparing children to adults, there was no difference in the rate of illogical preferences, i.e. selecting a dominated state, (9% vs. 12%) or preferring dead to the worst health-state (54% vs. 64%) (p-values>0.05).  CB was revealed in 35% of children and 9% of adults (p<0.01).  After adjusting for gender and personality traits, children had 6.6 times higher odds of CB compared to adults (OR 95% CI: 1.8-23.8, p=0.004). Three out of the 6 regression models indicated that conscientiousness was significantly associated with choice of health-state (p <0.1). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this exploratory study suggest it is feasible to conduct DCE studies in children; however, children are significantly more likely to demonstrate CB. Conscientiousness appears to be an independent predictor of health-state preferences.