Cheap talk scripts and online choice experiments: "Looking beyond the mean"

American Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 93, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 1015-1031

  Tonsor, Glynn T ^a   Shupp, Robert S ^b  

^a KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

apples; cheap talk; choice experiment; familiarity; hypothetical bias; niche market; online survey; sub sample

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FRUIT; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 80052597386     PISSN: 00029092     EISSN: 14678276     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ajae/aar036     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aadland, D., and A. J. Caplan. 2006. Cheap Talk Reconsidered: New Evidence from CVM.Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 60: 562-578.
2. Aadland, D. M., A. J. Caplan, and O. R. Phillips. 2007. A Bayesian Examination of Information and Uncertainty in Contingent Valuation. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 35: 149-178.
3. Alfnes, F.,C.Yue, and H. H. Jensen. 2010. Cognitive Dissonance as a Means of Reducing Hypothetical Bias. European Review of Agricultural Economics 37: 147-163.
4. Blumenschein, K., G. C. Blomquist, M. Johannesson, N. Horn, and P. Freeman. 2008. Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment. Economic Journal 118: 114-137.
5. Brown, T. C., I. Ajzen, and D. Hrubes. 2003. Further Test of Entreaties to Avoid Hypothetical Bias in Referendum Contingent Valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 462:353-361.
6. Carlsson, F., P. Frykblom, and C. J. Lagerkvist. 2005. Using CheapTalk as aTest ofValidity in Choice Experiments. Economics Letters 89: 147-152.
7. Carlsson, F., and M. Kataria. 2008. Assessing Management Options for Weed Control with Demanders and Non-Demanders in a Choice Experiment. 84: 517-528.
8. Champ, P. A., R. C. Bishop, T. C. Brown, and D. W. McCollum. 1997. Using Donation Mechanisms toValue Nonuse Benefits from Public Goods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33: 151-162.
9. Champ, P. A., R. Moore, and R. C. Bishop. 2009. A Comparison of Approaches to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias. Agricultrual and Resource Economics Review 38: 166-180.
10. Cummings,R.G., and L.O.Taylor. 1999. Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method. American Economic Review 89: 649-665.
11. Dillman, D. A., J. D. Smyth, and L. M. Christian. 2009. Internet, Mail,and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: JohnWiley & Sons.
12. Duersch, P., J. Oechssler, and B. C. Schipper. 2009. Incentives for Subjects in Internet Experiments. Economics Letters 105: 120-122.
13. Fisher,R.A. 1935. The Design of Experiments. Oliver and Boyd: Edinburgh.
14. Fleming, C. M., and M. Bowden. 2009. Web-Based Surveys as an Alternative to Traditional Mail Methods. Journal of Environmental Management 90: 284-292.
15. Gao, Z., and T. Schroeder. 2009. Effects of Additional Quality Attributes on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Food Labels. American Journal of Agricultural Economic 3: 795-809.
16. Greene,W. 2008. NLOGIT Version 4.0 Reference Guide. Econometric Software
17. Hanemman,W. M. 1984. Welfare Evaluations in ContingentValuation Experiments with Discrete Responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66: 332-341.
18. Hensher,D. A., J. M. Rose, andW. H. Greene. 2006.Applied ChoiceAnalysis. Cambridge, UK: University Press.
19. Hu,W.,W. L. Adamowicz, and M. M.Veeman. 2006. Labeling Context and Reference Point Effects in Models of Food Attribute Demand.American Journal ofAgricultural Economics 88: 1034-1049.
20. Hudson, D., L. Seah, D. Hite, and T. Haab. 2004. Telephone Presurveys, Self- Selection, and Non-Response Bias to Mail and Internet Surveys in Economic Research. Applied Economics Letters 11: 237-240.
21. Johannesson, M.,G. C. Blomquist, K. Blumenschein, P.-O. Johansson, B. Liljas, and R. M. O'Conor. 1999. Calibrating HypotheticalWillingness to Pay Responses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 18: 21-32.
22. Johnston, R. J., and J. M. Duke. 2007.Willingness to Pay for Agricultural Land Preservation and Policy Process Attributes:Does the Method Matter? American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89: 1098-1115.
23. Kataria, M. 2009.Willingness to Pay for Environmental Improvements in Hydropower Regulated Rivers. Energy Economics 31: 69-76.
24. Krinsky, I., and A. Robb. 1986. On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities. Review of Economics and Statistics 64: 715-719.
25. Kuhfeld, W. F., R. D. Tobias, and M. Garratt. 1994. Efficient Experimental Design with Marketing Research Applications. Journal of Marketing Research 31: 545-557.
26. Levitt, S. D., and J. A. List. 2009. Field Experiments in Economics: The Past, The Present, and the Future, European Economic Review 53: 1-18.
27. List, J. A. 2001. Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards. American Economic Review 91: 1498-1507.
28. List, J. A., R. Berrens, A. Bohara, and J. Kerkvliet. 2004. Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences. American Economic Review 94: 741-752.
29. List, J. A., and C. A. Gallet. 2001.What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values? Evidence from a Meta-Analysis. Environmental and Resource Economics 20: 241-254.
30. List, J. A., P. Sinha, and M. H. Taylor. 2006. Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments. Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy 6, Issue 2, Article 2.
31. Little, J., and R. Berrens. 2004. Explaining Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values: Further Investigation Using Meta-Analysis. Economics Bulletin 3: 1-13.
32. Loureiro, M. L., and W. J. Umberger. 2007. A Choice Experiment Model for Beef:What US Consumer Responses Tell us about Relative Preferences for Food Safety, Country-of-Origin Labeling, and Traceability. Food Policy 32: 496-514.
33. Louviere, J. J. 1991. Experimental Choice Analysis: Introduction and Overview. Journal of Business Research 23: 291-297.
34. Louviere, J. J., D. A. Hensher, and J. D. Swait. 2000. Stated Choice Methods:Analysis and Application. Cambridge: University Press.
35. Lusk, J. L. 2003. Effects of Cheap talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85: 840-856.
36. Lusk, J. L., and D. Hudson. 2004.Willingnessto- Pay Estimates and Agribusiness Decision Making. Review of Agricultural Economics 26: 152-169.
37. Lusk, J. L., and B. Norwood. 2005. Effect of Experimental Design on Choice-Based Conjoint Valuation Estimates. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87: 771-785.
38. Lusk, J. L., F. B. Norwood, and J. R. Pruitt. 2006. Consumer Demand for a Ban on Antibiotic Drug Use in Pork Production. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88: 1015-1033.
39. Lusk, J., J. Roosen, and J. Fox. 2003. Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85: 16-29.
40. Lusk, J. L., and T. C. Schroeder. 2004. Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86: 467-482.