Reliability of individual valuations of public and private goods: Choice consistency, response time, and preference refinement

Journal of Public Economics

Volumn 92, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1595-1606

  Brown, Thomas C ^a   Kingsley, David ^b   Peterson, George L ^a   Flores, Nicholas E ^b   Clarke, Andrea ^c   Birjulin, Andrej ^d  

^a ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^c USDA NRCS   (United States)

^d OMNI Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

Preference learning; Public goods; Reliability; Response time; Valuation

Indexed keywords

EID: 42649093782     PISSN: 00472727     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.01.004     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Ben-Akiva M., and Lerman S.R. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand (1985), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
2. Birjulin, A.A., 1997. Valuation of public goods using the method of paired comparison: the effects of psychological distance between goods on consistency of preferences. Unpublished dissertation, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
3. Bock R.D., and Jones L.V. The Measurement and Prediction of Judgment and Choice (1968), Holden-Day, Inc., San Francisco, CA
4. Bockstael N.E., and Strand Jr. I.E. The effect of common sources of regression error on benefit estimates. Land Economics 63 1 (1987) 11-20
5. Braga J., and Starmer C. Preference anomalies, preference elicitation and the discovered preference hypothesis. Environmental and Resource Economics 32 1 (2005) 55-89
6. Brown T.C., and Peterson G.L. Multiple good valuation. In: Champ P.A., Boyle K., and Brown T.C. (Eds). A primer on non-market valuation (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA 221-258
7. Carson R.T., Wright J., Carson N., Alberini A., and Flores N. A bibliography of contingent valuation studies and papers (1994), Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Inc., La Jolla, CA
8. Clarke A., Bell P.A., and Peterson G.L. The influence of attitude priming and social responsibility on the valuation of environmental public goods using paired comparisons. Environment and Behavior 31 6 (1999) 838-857
9. In: Cummings R.G., Brookshire D.S., and Schulze W.D. (Eds). Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method (1986), Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ
10. David H.A. The Method of Paired Comparisons (Second ed. Vol. 41) (1988), Oxford University Press, New York, NY
11. DeShazo J.R., and Fermo G. Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: the effects of complexity on choice consistency. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44 1 (2002) 123-143
12. Fechner G.T. Elemente der psychophysik (1860), Breitkopf and Hartel, Leipzip
13. Gregory R., Lichtenstein S., and Slovic P. Valuing environmental resources: a constructive approach. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 7 (1993) 177-197
14. Hausman J.A., and Wise D.A. A conditional probit model for qualitative choice: discrete decisions recognizing interdependence and heterogeneous preferences. Econometrica 46 2 (1978) 403-426
15. Hicks J.R. A Revision of Demand Theory (1956), Oxford University Press, London
16. Holmes T.P., and Boyle K.J. Dynamic learning and context-dependence in sequential, attribute-based, stated-preference valuation questions. Land Economics 81 1 (2005) 114-126
17. Jorgensen B.S., Syme G.J., Smith L.M., and Bishop B.J. Random error in willingness to pay measurement: a multiple indicators, latent variable approach to the reliability of contingent values. Journal of Economic Psychology 25 1 (2004) 41-59
18. Kealy M.J., Montogmery M., and Dovidio J.F. Reliability and predictive validity of contingent values: does the nature of the good matter?. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 19 (1990) 244-263
19. Kendall M.G., and Smith B.B. On the method of paired comparisons. Biometrika 31 (1940) 324-345
20. Li C.-Z., and Mattsson L. Discrete choice under preference uncertainty: An improved structural model for contingent valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28 (1995) 256-269
21. Marschak J. Binary-choice constraints and random utility indicators. Paper presented at the Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences (1959), Stanford University Press
22. McConnell K.E., Strand I.E., and Valdes S. Testing temporal reliability and carry-over effect: the role of correlated responses in test-retest reliability studies. Environmental and Resource Economics 12 3 (1998) 357-374
23. McFadden D. Economic choices. American Economic Review 91 3 (2001) 351-378
24. Peterson G.L., and Brown T.C. Economic valuation by the method of paired comparison, with emphasis on evaluation of the transitivity axiom. Land Economics 74 2 (1998) 240-261
25. Plott, C.R. 1996. Rational individual behavior in markets and social choice processes: The discovered preference hypothesis. In K. Arrow, E. Colombatto, M. Perleman, C. Schmidt (Eds.), Rational foundations of economic behavior, pp. 225-250. London: Macmillan and St. Martin's.
26. Rieskamp J., Busemeyer J.R., and Mellers B.A. Extending the bounds of rationality: evidence and theories of preferential choice. Journal of Economic Literature 44 3 (2006) 631-661
27. Rubinstein A. Instinctive and cognitive reasoning: a study of response times. Economic Journal 117 (2007) 1243-1259
28. Swait, J., Adamowicz, W., 1996. The effect of choice complexity on random utility models: an application to combined stated and revealed preference models. Working Paper, Department of Marketing, University of Florida, Gainsville, FL.
29. Swait J., and Adamowicz W. The influence of task complexity on consumer choice: a latent class model of decision strategy switching. Journal of Consumer Research 28 1 (2001) 135-148
30. Thurstone L.L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychology Review 34 (1927) 273-286
31. Thurstone L.L., and Chave E.J. The Measurement of Attitude (1929), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
32. Torgerson W.S. Theory and Methods of Scaling (1958), John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY
33. Tversky A. Intransitivity of preferences. Psychology Review 76 1 (1969) 31-48
34. Wilcox N.T. Lottery chance: incentives, complexity and decision time. Economic Journal 103 (1993) 1397-1417