Complexity in choice experiments: Choice of the status quo alternative and implications for welfare measurement

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

Volumn 53, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 503-519

  Boxall, Peter ^a   Adamowicz, W L ^a   Moon, Amanda ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Choice experiments; Status quo; Welfare measurement

Indexed keywords

DESIGN; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; WELFARE ECONOMICS;

EID: 70349591648     PISSN: 1364985X     EISSN: 14678489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8489.2009.00469.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adamowicz W.L, Boxall P.C, Williams M, Louviere J. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1998, 80:64-75.
2. Baron J, Ritov I. Reference points and omission bias. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1994, 59:475-498.
3. Beenstock M, Goldin E, Haitovsky Y. Response bias in a conjoint analysis of power outages. Energy Economics 1998, 20:135-156.
4. Bennett J, Blamey R. The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation 2001, Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, MA
5. Beshears J, Choi J.J, Laibson D, Madrian B.C. How are preferences revealed?. Journal of Public Economics 2008, 92:1787-1794.
6. Dellaert B.G, Brazell C.J.D, Louviere J.J. The effect of attribute variation on consumer choice consistency. Marketing Letters 1999, 10:139-147.
7. DeShazo J.R, Fermo G. Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: the effects of complexity on choice consistency. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2002, 44:123-143.
8. Dhar R. Consumer preference for a no-choice option. Journal of Consumer Research 1997a, 24:215-231.
9. Dhar R. Context and task effect on choice deferral. Marketing Letters 1997b, 8:119-130.
10. Dhar R, Sherman S.J. The effect of common and unique features in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research 1996, 23:193-203.
11. Finucane M.L, Slovic P, Hibbard J.H, Peters E, Mertz J.H, MacGregor D.G. Aging and decision making competence: an analysis of comprehension and consistency skills in older versus younger adults considering health-plan options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2002, 15:141-164.
12. Hartman R.S, Doane M.J, Woo C.K. Status quo bias in the measurement of value of service. Resources and Energy 1990, 12:197-214.
13. Hensher D.A, Greene W.H. The mixed logit model: the state of practice. Transportation 2003, 30:133-176.
14. Hensher D.A, Stopher P.R, Louviere J.J. An exploratory analysis of the effects of numbers of choice sets in designed choice experiments: an airline choice application. Journal of Air Transport Management 2001, 7:373-379.
15. Iyengar S.S, Kamenica E. Choice overload and simplicity seeking 2007, Working paper, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, Chicago, p
16. Knetsch J.L. The endowment effect and evidence of nonreversible indifference curves. American Economic Review 1989, 79:1277-1284.
17. Krinsky I, Robb A.L. On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Review of Economics and Statistics 1986, 68:715-719.
18. Louviere J.J, Islam T, Wasi N, Street D, Burgess L. Designing discrete choice experiments: do optimal designs come at a price?. Journal of Consumer Research 2008, 35:360-375.
19. Mazzotta M.J, Opaluch J.J. Decision making when choices are complex: a test of Heiner's hypothesis. Land Economics 1995, 71:500-515.
20. McFadden D, Zarembka P. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics 1974, 105-142. in, ed, Academic Press, New York, pp
21. Moon A. Assessing the impacts of complexity in stated preference methods 2004, Unpublished MSc thesis, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta Canada, p
22. Morrison G.C. The endowment effect and expected utility. Scottish Journal of Political Economy 2000, 47:183-197.
23. Ritov I, Baron J. Status quo and omission biases. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1992, 5:49-61.
24. Salked G, Ryan M, Short J. The veil of experience: do consumers prefer what they know best?. Health Economics 2000, 9:267-270.
25. Samuelson W, Zeckhauser R. Status quo in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1988, 1:7-59.
26. Schweitzer M. Disentangling status quo and omission effects: an experimental analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process 1994, 58:457-476.
27. Swait J, Adamowicz W.L. Choice environment, market complexity, and consumer behavior: a theoretical and empirical approach for incorporating decision complexity into models of consumer choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2001a, 86:141-167.
28. Swait J, Adamowicz W.L. The influence of task complexity on consumer choice: a latent class model of decision strategy switching. Journal of Consumer Research 2001b, 28:135-148.
29. Train K.E. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation 2002, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
30. Tversky A, Shafir E. Choice under conflict: the dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science 1992, 3:358-361.
31. Von Haefen R, Massey D.M, Adamowicz W.L. Serial nonparticipation in repeated discrete choice models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2005, 87:1061-1076.