Determinants of the magnitude of willingness to accept relative to willingness to pay

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 87-105

  Shefrin, Hersh ^a   Caldwell, David ^a  

^a SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Change of process theory; Coase theorem; Willingness to accept; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

EID: 23044526661     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.367     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Boyce R, Brown T, McClelland G, Peterson G, Schultze W. 1992. An experimental examination of intrinsic values as a source for the WTA-WTP disparity. American Economic Review 82: 1366-1373.
2. Coursey D, Hovis J, Schulze W. 1987. The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value. Quarterly Journal of Economics CII: 679-690.
3. Goldstein WM, Einhorn HJ. 1987. Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena. Psychological Review 94: 236-254.
4. Jolis C, Sunstein C, Thaler R. 1998. A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Review 50: No. 5, May, 1471-1550.
5. Kahneman D, Tversky A. 1979. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47: 263-291.
6. Kahneman D, Tversky A. 1996. On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychological Review 103: 582-591.
7. Kahneman D, Knetsch J, Thaler R. 1990. Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coaste theorem. Journal of Political Economy 6: 1325-1348.
8. Knetsch J, Sinden JA. 1984a. Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures of value. Quarterly Journal of Economics XCIX: 507-521.
9. Knetsch J, Sinden J. 1984b. The persistence of valuation disparity. Quarterly Journal of Economics CII: 691-695.
10. Korobkin RB. 1998. The status quo bias and contract default rules. Cornell Law Review, 83: No. 3, March, 608-687.
11. Lazarus RS. 1991. Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46: August, 819-834.
12. Luce MF. 1998. Choosing to avoid: coping with negatively-laden consumer decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 24: 409-433.
13. Luce MF, Payne J, Bettman J. 1999. Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. Journal of Marketing Research, XXXVI: 143-159.
14. Magat W, Viscusi WK, Huber J. 1987. Consumer processing of hazard warning information. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2: 201-232.
15. Mellers B, Chang S, Birnbaum M, Ordonez L. 1992a. Preferences, prices, and ratings in risky decision making. Journal of Experiment Psychology, 18: 347-361.
16. Mellers B, Ordonez L, Birnbaum MA. 1992b. change-of-process theory for contextual effects and preference reversals in risky decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52: 331-369.
17. Mellers B, Schwartz A, Ho K, Ritov I. 1997. Decision affect theory: emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science, 8: No. 6, 423-429.
18. Mellers B, Schwartz A, Ritov I. 1999. Emotion-based choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 28: No. 3, 1-14.
19. Northcraft CR, Neale MA, Tenbrunsel A, Thomas M. 1996. Benefits and burdens: does it really matter what we allocate? Social Justice Review, 9: No. 1, 27-45.
20. Taylor SE. 1991. Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization-minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110: 67-85.
21. Thalor R. 1980. Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1: 39-60.
22. Tversky A, Kahneman D. 1991. Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106: 1039-1061.
23. Tversky A, Kahneman D. 1992. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5: 297-323.
24. Tversky A, Sattath S, Slovic P. 1988. Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95: 371-384.
25. Walker M, Morera O, Vining J, Orland B. 1999. WTA-WTP disparities: the influence of human vs. natural causes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12: No. 3, 219-232.