Inferred and stated attribute non-attendance in food choice experiments

American Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 95, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 165-180

  Scarpa, Riccardo ^a,b,c   Zanoli, Raffaele ^d   Bruschi, Viola ^d   Naspetti, Simona ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITÀ POLITECNICA DELLE MARCHE   (Italy)

^e LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN TRANSITION ECONOMIES IAMO   (Germany)

Author keywords

attribute non attendance; choice modeling; food choice experiments; organic beef and poultry

Indexed keywords

DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FOOD PREFERENCE; MEAT; MODELING; POULTRY;

EID: 84871728717     PISSN: 00029092     EISSN: 14678276     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ajae/aas073     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Ajzen, I. 2005. Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior. 2nd ed. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.
2. Alfnes, F., A. G. Guttormsen, G. Steine, and K. Kolstad. 2006. Consumers' Willingness to Pay for the Color of Salmon:A Choice Experiment with Real Economic Incentives. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88:1050-61. (Pubitemid 44575320)
3. Balcombe, K., M. Burton, and D. Rigby. 2011. Skew andAttribute Non-attendance within the Bayesian Mixed Logit Model. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 140:643-54.
4. Bliemer, M. C. J., and J. M. Rose. 2010. Construction of Experimental Designs for Mixed Logit Models Allowing for Correlation Across Choice Observations. Transportation Research Part B 46 (3):720-34.
5. Cameron, T. A., and J. R. DeShazo. 2007. Differential Attention to Attributes in Utility-theoretic Choice Models. Unpublished manuscript.
6. Carlsson, F., and P. Martinsson. 2001. Do Hypo-thetical and Actual Marginal WTP Differ in Choice Experiment? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 41:179-92.
7. Carlsson, F., M. Kataria, and E. Lampi. 2010. Dealing with Ignoring Attributes in Choice Experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics 47 (1):65-89.
8. Choice Metrics. 2009. Ngene v1.0. User Manual and Reference Guide. Sydney: Choice Metrics Ltd.
9. Danalet, A. 2009. An Empirical Investigation of the Determinants of Attention to Attributes in Choice Experiments. Master's thesis, Laboratoire Transport et Mobilité Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland.
10. Gilbride, T. J., G. M. Allenby, and J. D. Brazell. 2006. Models for Heterogeneous Variable Selection. Journal of Marketing Research 43 (3):420-30. (Pubitemid 44367340)
11. Hensher, D. A. 2006. How Do Respondents Handle Stated Choice Experiments? Attribute Processing Strategies under Varying Information Load. Journal of Applied Econometrics 21:861-78. (Pubitemid 44662104)
12. Hensher, D.A., and J. M. Rose. 2009. Simplifying Choice throughAttribute Preservation or Non-attendance: Implications for Willingness to Pay. Transportation Research E 45:583-90.
13. Hensher, D. A., and W. Greene. 2003. The Mixed Logit Model:The State of Practice. Transportation 30 (2):133-76. (Pubitemid 36405819)
14. Herriges, J. A., and D. J. Phaneuf. 2002. Inducing Patterns of Correlation and Substitution in Repeated Logit Models of Recreation Demand. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 84:1076-90. (Pubitemid 36022153)
15. Hess, S., and D. Hensher. 2010. Using Conditioning on Observed Choices to Retrieve Individual-specific Attribute Processing Strategies. Transportation Research Part B 46 (3):781-90.
16. Hess, S., and J. M. Rose. 2009. Should Reference Alternatives in Pivot Design SC Surveys Be Treated Differently? Environmental and Resource Economics 42:297-317.
17. Huber, J., and K. Train. 2001. On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths. Marketing Letters 12:259-69. (Pubitemid 33686501)
18. Islam, T., J. J. Louviere, and P. F. Burke. 2007. Modeling the Effects of Including/Excluding Attributes in Choice Experiments on Systematic and Random Components. International Journal of Market Research 24:289-300.
19. Kriström, B. 1997. Spike Models in Contingent Valuation. AmericanJournalofAgriculture Economics 79:1013-23.
20. Liska, A. E. 1975. Consistency Controversy: Readings on the Impact of Attitude on Behavior. New York:Wiley.
21. 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 (2):467-82. (Pubitemid 38546647)
22. Payne, J. W., J. R. Bettman, E. Coupey, and E. J. Johnson. 1992. A Constructive Process View of Decision Making: Multiple Strategies in Judgment and Choice. Acta Psychologica 80:107-41.
23. Pryor, J.B., F.X. Gibbons, R.A. Wicklund, R.H. Fazio, and R. Hood. 1977. Self-focused Attention and Self-report Validity. Journal of Personality 45:513-27.
24. Rigby, D., and M. Burton. 2006. Modelling Disinterest and Dislike:A Bounded Bayesian Mixed Logit Model of the UK Market for GM Food. Environmental and Resource Economics 33:485-509.
25. Scarpa, R., T. J. Gilbride, D. Campbell, and D. A. Hensher. 2009. Modelling Attribute Non-attendance in Choice Experiments for Rural Landscape Valuation. European Review of Agricultural Economics 36 (2):151-74.
26. Scarpa, R., D. Campbell, and W. G. Hutchin-son. 2007. Benefit Estimates for Landscape Improvements: Sequential Bayesian Design and Respondents' Rationality in a Choice Experiment Study. Land Economics 83 (4):617-34.
27. Scarpa, R., K. Willis, and M. Acutt. 2007. Valuing Externalities from Water Supply: Status-quo, Choice Complexity, and Individual Random Effects in Panel Kernel Logit Analysis of Choice Experiments. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 50 (4):449-66. (Pubitemid 47072981)
28. Simon, H. A. 1955. A Behavioral Model of RationalChoice. QuarterlyJournalofEco-nomics 69 (1):99-118.
29. Swait, J., and J. Louviere, 1993. The Role of the ScaleParameterintheEstimationand Use of Multinomial Logit Models. Journal of Marketing Research 30:305-14.
30. Train, K. 2003. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.
31. Vermeulen, B., P. Goos, R. Scarpa, and M. Van-debroek. 2011. Conjoint Choice Designs to Measure the WTP. Environmental and Resource Economics 48:129-49.