Estimating willingness to pay with exaggeration bias-corrected contingent valuation method

Marketing Science

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 691-698

  Park, Joo Heon ^a   MacLachlan, Douglas L ^b  

^a Dongduk Women's University   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation method; Exaggeration bias; New product pricing; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

EID: 60849138841     PISSN: 07322399     EISSN: 1526548X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1070.0321     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Blackburn, M., G. W. Harrison, E. E. Rutström. 1994. Statistical bias function and informative hypothetical surveys. Amer. J. Agricultural Econom. 76 1084-1088.
2. Blumenschein, K., M. Johannesson, K. Yokoyama, P. R. Freeman. 2001. Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay in the health care sector: Results from a field experiment. J. Health Econom. 20 441-457.
3. Box, G. E. P., D. R. Cox. 1964. An analysis of transformations. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 24 187-220.
4. Cameron, T. A., M. D. James. 1987. Estimating willingness to pay from survey data: An alternative pretest-market evaluation procedure. J. Marketing Res. 24 389-395.
5. Carson, R. T., R. C. Mitchell. 1994. A bibliography of contingent valuation studies and papers. Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Inc., La Jolla, CA.
6. Champ, P. A., R. C. Bishop, T. C. Brown, D. W. McCollum. 1997. Using donation mechanisms to value nonuse benefits from public goods. J. Environ. Econom. Management 33 151-162.
7. Churchill, G. A., D. Iacobucci. 2005. Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations, 9th ed. South-Western College Publications, Cincinnati, OH.
8. Cummings, R. G., D. S. Brookshire, W. D. Schulze, eds. 1986. Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method. Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ.
9. Cummings, R. G., G. W. Harrison, E. E. Rutström. 1995. Homegrown values and hypothetical surveys: Is the dichotomous choice approach incentive-compatible? Amer. Econom. Rev. 85 260-266.
10. Hanemann, M. W. 1994. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J. Econom. Perspect. 8 19-43.
11. Horowitz, J. L. 1996. Semiparametric estimation of a regression model with an unknown transformation of the dependent variable. Econometrica 64 103-137.
12. Hsiao, C., B.-H. Sun. 1998. Modeling survey response bias-with an analysis of the demand for an advanced electronic device. J. Econometrics 89 15-39.
13. Johannesson, M., B. Liljas, P. O. Johansson. 1998. An experimental comparison of dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions and real purchase decisions. Appl. Econom. 30 643-647.
14. Johannesson, M., G. C. Blomquist, K. Blumenschen, P. O. Johansson, B. Liljas, R. M. O'Connor. 1999. Calibrating hypothetical willingness to pay responses. J. Risk Uncertainty 18 21-32.
15. Klein, R., R. Sherman. 1997. Estimating new product demand from biased survey data. J. Econometrics 76 53-76.
16. Mitchell, R. C., R. T. Carson. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.
17. Voelckner, F. 2006. An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers' willingness to pay. Marketing Lett. 17 137-149.
18. Wertenbroch, K., B. Skiera. 2002. Measuring consumers' willingness to pay at the point of purchase. J. Marketing Res. 39 228-241.