Investigating hypothetical bias: Induced-value tests of the referendum voting mechanism with uncertainty

Applied Economics Letters

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 705-709

  Mozumder, Pallab ^a   Berrens, Robert P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

REFERENDUM; VOTING BEHAVIOR;

EID: 34548336394     PISSN: 13504851     EISSN: 14664291     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13504850600592408     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Alberini, A., Boyle, K. and Welsh, M. (2003) Analysis of contingent valuation data with multiple response options allowing respondents to express uncertainty. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45, pp. 40-62.
2. Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P., Leamer, E., Radner, R. and Schuman, H. (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register, 58, pp. 4602-4614.
3. Bhatia, M. and Fox-Rushby, J. (2003) Validity of willingness to pay: hypothetical versus actual payment. Applied Economics Letters, 10, pp. 737-740.
4. Bonaccorsi, A. and Rossi, C. (2003) Why open source software can succeed?. Research Policy, 32, pp. 1243-1258.
5. Botelho, A. and Pinto, LC (2002) Hypothetical, real, and predicted real willingness to pay in open-ended surveys: Experimental results. Applied Economics Letters, 9, pp. 993-996.
6. Carson, R., Groves, T. and Machina, M. (1999) Incentive and informational properties of preference questions, Plenary address to the European Association of Resource and Environmental Economists, Oslo, Norway
7. Cummings, R. and Taylor, L. (1999) Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: A cheap-talk design for the contingent valuation method. American Economic Review, 89, pp. 649-665.
8. Cummings, R., Elliot, S., Harrison, G. and Murphy, J. (1997) Are hypothetical referenda incentive compatible?. Journal of Political Economy, 105, pp. 609-621.
9. Haab, T., Huang, J. and Whitehead, J. (1999) Are hypothetical referenda incentive compatible? A comment. Journal of Political Economy, 107, pp. 186-196.
10. Johannesson, M. (1997) Some further results on hypothetical versus real willingness to pay. Applied Economics Letters, 4, pp. 535-536.
11. Johannesson, M., Lillias, B. and O'Connor, R. (1997) Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay: Some experimental results. Applied Economics Letters, 4, pp. 149-151.
12. Ledyard, JO (1995) Public goods. The Handbook of Experimental Economics, pp. 111-194. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
13. List, J., Berrens, R., Bohara, A. and Kerkvliet, J. (2004) Examining the role of social isolation on stated preferences. American Economic Review, 94, pp. 741-752.
14. Little, J. and Berrens, R. (2004) Explaining disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values: Further investigation using meta-analysis. Economics Bulletin, 3, pp. 1-13.
15. Neill, H. (1999) Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay: Comment. Applied Economics Letters, 6, pp. 267-269.
16. Paradiso, M. and Trisorio, A. (2001) The effect of knowledge on the disparity between hypothetical and real willingness to pay. Applied Economics, 33, pp. 1359-1364.
17. Shogren, J. (2001) Experimental methods and valuation. Handbook of Environmental Economics, pp. 969-1027. North-Holland, Amsterdam
18. Smith, VK (1999) Of birds and books: More on hypothetical referenda. Journal of Political Economy, 107, pp. 196-200.
19. Taylor, L., McKee, M., Laury, S. and Cummings, R. (2001) Induced-value tests of the referendum voting mechanism. Economics Letters, 71, pp. 61-65.