The impact of perceived justice on contingent value judgments

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 135-158

  Schröder, Tobias ^a   Mieg, Harald A ^a  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 37549033903     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00299.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 267 299). New York : Academic Press.
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179 211.
3. Ajzen, I. Driver, B. L. (1992). Contingent value measurement: On the nature and meaning of willingness to pay. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1, 297 316.
4. Ajzen, I., Rosenthal, L. H. Brown, T. C. (2000). Effects of perceived fairness on willingness to pay. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2439 2450.
5. Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P. R., Leamer, E. E., Radner, R. Schuman, H. (1993). Report of the NOAA Panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register, 58, 4602 4614.
6. Austin, W. Hatfield, E. (1980). Equity theory, power, and social justice. In G. Mikula (Ed Justice and social interaction (pp. 25 62). New York : Springer.
7. Bamberg, S. Köhnel, S. M. (1998). Umweltbewusstsein, situative Restriktionen und Verkehrsmittelwahl - ein zweistufiges Entscheidungsmodell [Ecological awareness, situational restrictions, and choosing means of transportation: A two-stage decision model]. Umweltpsychologie, 2, 6 19.
8. Bateman, I. J. Willis, K. G. (Eds 2002). Valuing environmental preferences: Theory and practice of the contingent valuation method in the US, EU, and developing countries. Cambridge, UK : Oxford University Press.
9. Bjornstad, D. J. Kahn, J. R. (Eds 1996). The contingent valuation of environmental resources: Methodological issues and research needs. Cheltenham, UK : Edward Elgar.
10. Eek, D., Biel, A. Gärling, T. (1998). The effect of distributive justice on willingness to pay for municipality child care: An extension of the GEF hypothesis. Social Justice Research, 11, 121 142.
11. Foster, J. (1997). Valuing nature? Economics, ethics, and environment. London : Routledge.
12. Fujii, S., Kitamura, R. Suda, H. (2004). Contingent valuation method can increase procedural justice. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25, 877 889.
13. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L. Thaler, R. (1991). The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 193 206.
14. Kahneman, D., Ritov, I., Jacowitz, K. E. Grant, P. (1993). Stated willingness to pay for public goods: A psychological perspective. Psychological Science, 4, 310 315.
15. Kahneman, D., Ritov, I. Schkade, D. (1999). Economic preferences or attitude expressions? An analysis of dollar responses to public issues. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19, 203 235.
16. Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York : Plenum.
17. Meyerhoff, J. (2004 Der Einfluss von Einstellungen auf die Zahlungsbereitschaft für Veränderungen in Natur und Landschaft. Ergebnisse aus zwei Kontingenten Bewertungen zum Wattenmeer und zur Elbe [The effect of attitudes on willingness to pay for changes in nature and landscapes: Results from two contingent value studies on the Wadden Sea and the Elbe River]. Frankfurt, Germany : Peter Lang.
18. Miller, D. T. (1977). Personal deserving versus justice for others: An exploration of the justice motive. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13, 1 13.
19. Pouta, E. (2004). Attitude and belief questions as a source of context effect in a contingent valuation survey. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25, 229 242.
20. Pouta, E. Rekola, M. (2001). Theory of planned behavior in predicting willingness to pay for abatement of forest regeneration. Society and Natural Resources, 14, 93 106.
21. Roschewitz, A. (2001). Startpunktverzerrungen: Theoretischer Hintergrund und empirische Evidenz [Starting point bias: Theoretical background and empirical evidence In P. Elsasser J. Meyerhoff (Eds Ökonomische Bewertung von Umweltgütern (pp. 101 118). Marburg, Germany : Metropolis.
22. Tourangeau, R. (1999). Context effects on answers to attitude questions. In M. G. Sirken, D. J. Hermann, S. Schechter, N. Schwarz, J. M. Tanur R. Tourangeau (Eds Cognition and survey research (pp. 111 131). New York : Wiley.
23. Wagner, R. (2000). Monetäre Umweltbewertung mit der Contingent Valuation Methode [Monetary valuation of the environment using the contingent valuation method]. Frankfurt, Germany : Peter Lang.
24. Weinberger, M. (1992). Gesamtwirtschaftliche Kosten des Lärms in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [The macroeconomic costs of noise in the Federal Republic of Germany]. Zeitschrift für Lärmbekämpfung, 39, 91 99.