Position bias in best-worst scaling surveys: A case study on trust in institutions

American Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 97, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 526-545

  Campbell, Danny ^a   Erdem, Seda ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Best worst scaling; consumer trust; latent class logit model; multinomial logit model; nanotechnology; position bias

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; FOOD PROCESSING; HEURISTICS; NANOTECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

EID: 84925443837     PISSN: 00029092     EISSN: 14678276     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ajae/aau112     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Attali, Y., and M. Bar-Hillel. 2003. Guess Where: The Position of Correct Answers in Multiple-choice Test Items as a Psychometric Variable. Journal of Educational Measurement 40 (2): 109-28.
2. Auger, P., T. Devinney, and J. Louviere. 2007. Using Best-worst Scaling Methodology to Investigate Consumer Ethical Beliefs across Countries. Journal of Business Ethics 70 (3): 299-326.
3. Baumgartner, H., and J.B.E. Steenkamp. 2001. Response Styles in Marketing Research: A Cross-National Investigation. Journal of Marketing Research 38 (2): 143-56.
4. Campbell, D., D.A. Hensher, and R. Scarpa. 2014. Bounding WTP distributions to Reflect the Actual Consideration Set. Journal of Choice Modelling 11 (1): 4-15.
5. -. 2012. Cost Thresholds, Cut-offs and Sensitivities in Stated Choice Analysis: Identification and Implications. Resource and Energy Economics 34 (3): 396-411.
6. Campbell, D., W.G. Hutchinson, and R. Scarpa. 2008. Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics 41 (3): 401-17.
7. Carlsson, F., M. Mørkbak, and S. Olsen. 2012. The First Time is the Hardest: A Test of Ordering Effects in Choice Experiments. Journal of Choice Modelling 5 (2): 19-37.
8. Chandon, P., J.W. Hutchinson, E.T. Bradlow, and S.H. Young. 2009. Does In-store Marketing Work? Effects of the Number and Position of Shelf Facings on Brand Attention and Evaluation at the Point of Purchase. Journal of Marketing 73 (6): 1-17.
9. Cohen, E. 2009. Applying Best-worst Scaling to Wine Marketing. International Journal of Wine Business Research 21 (1): 8-23.
10. Cohen, S., and B. Orme. 2004. What's your Preference? Asking Survey Respondents about Their Preferences Creates New Scaling Decisions. Marketing Research 16 (2): 32-7.
11. Day, B., I.J. Bateman, R.T. Carson, D. Dupont, J.J. Louviere, S. Morimoto, R. Scarpa, and P. Wang. 2012. Ordering Effects and Choice Set Awareness in Repeat-response Stated Preference Studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 63 (1): 73-91.
12. Dayan, E., and M. Bar-Hillel. 2011. Nudge to Nobesity II: Menu Positions Influence Food Orders. Discussion paper series, The Center for the Study of Rationality, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
13. Doornik, J.A. 2009. An Object-oriented Matrix Programming Language Ox 6. London: Timberlake Consultants Ltd.
14. Erdem, S., D. Campbell, and A.R. Hole. 2014. Accounting for Attribute-level Non-attendance in a Health Choice Experiment: Does it Matter? Health Economics. doi: 10.1002/hec.3059.
15. Erdem, S., D. Campbell, and C. Thompson. 2014. Elimination and Selection by Aspects in Health Choice Experiments: Prioritisation Health Service Innovations. Journal of Health Economics 38 (1): 10-22.
16. Erdem, S., and D. Rigby. 2013. Investigating Heterogeneity in the Characterization of Risks Using Best-Worst Scaling. Risk Analysis 33 (9): 1728-48.
17. Erdem, S., D. Rigby, and A. Wossink. 2012. Using Best-worst Scaling to Explore Perceptions of Relative Responsibility for Ensuring Food Safety. Food Policy 37 (6): 661-70.
18. Finn, A., and J. Louviere. 1992. Determining the Appropriate Response to Evidence of Public Concern: The Case of Food Safety. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 11 (1): 12-25.
19. Flynn, T.N., J.J. Louviere, T.J. Peters, and J. Coast. 2007. Best-Worst Scaling: What it Can do for Health Care Research and How to do it. Journal of Health Economics 26 (1): 171-89.
20. Guney, B. 2014. A Theory of Iterative Choice in Lists. Journal of Mathematical Economics 53 (1): 26-32.
21. Hensher, D.A., A.T. Collins, and W.H. Greene. 2012. Accounting for Attribute Non-Attendance and Common-Metric Aggregation in a Probabilistic Decision Process Mixed Multinomial Logit Model: a Warning on Potential Confounding. Transportation 40 (5): 1003-20.
22. Hensher, D.A., J.M. Rose, and W.H. Greene. 2005. The Implications on Willingness to Pay of Respondents Ignoring Specific Attributes. Transportation 32 (3): 203-22.
23. Hess, S., A. Stathopoulos, D. Campbell, V. O'Neill, and S. Caussade. 2012. It's Not That I Don't Care, I Just Don't Care Very Much: Confounding Between Attribute Non-attendance and Taste Heterogeneity. Transportation 40 (3): 583-607.
24. Inman, J.J., L. McAlister, and W.D. Hoyer. 1990. Promotion Signal: Proxy for a Price Cut? Journal of Consumer Research 17 (1): 74-81.
25. Innes, B.G., and J.E. Hobbs. 2011. Does It Matter Who Verifies Production-Derived Quality? Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 (1): 87-107.
26. Koppell, J.G., and J.A. Steen. 2004. The Effects of Ballot Position on Election Outcomes. The Journal of Politics 66 (1): 267-81.
27. Krinsky, I., and A.L. Robb. 1986. On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities. The Review of Economics and Statistics 68 (4): 715-19.
28. Louviere, J.J. 1993. The Best-worst or Maximum Difference Measurement Model: Applications to Behavioral Research in Marketing. Paper presented at the American Marketing Association's Behavioral Research Conference, Phoenix, AZ.
29. Louviere, J.J., and T.N. Flynn. 2011. Using Best-worst Scaling Choice Experiments to Measure Public Perceptions and Preferences for Healthcare Reform in Australia. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3 (4): 275-83.
30. Lusk, J.L., and B.C. Briggeman. 2009. Food Values. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91 (1): 184-96.
31. Manski, C.F. 1977. The Structure of Random Utility Models. Theory and Decision 8 (3): 229-54.
32. Marley, A.A.J., and J.J. Louviere. 2005. Some Probabilistic Models of Best, Worst, and Best-Worst Choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 49 (6): 464-80.
33. McArthur, L., and D. Post. 1977. Figural Emphasis and Person Perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 13 (6): 520-35.
34. Meier, B., D. Hauser, M. Robinson, C. Friesen, and K. Schjeldahl. 2007. What's Up With God? Vertical Space as a Representation of the Divine. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93 (5): 699-710.
35. Meier, B.P., and M.D. Robinson. 2004. Why the Sunny Side Is Up: Associations Between Affect and Vertical Position. Psychological Science 15 (4): 243-47.
36. Mørkbak, M., S. Olsen, and D. Campbell. 2014. Behavioral Implications of Providing Real Incentives in Stated Choice Experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology 45 (1): 102-16.
37. Nilsson, T., K. Foster, and J.L. Lusk. 2006. Marketing Opportunities for Certified Pork Chops. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 54 (4): 567-83.
38. Nisbett, R.E., and T.D. Wilson. 1977. Telling MoreThanWeCan Know:Verbal Reports onMentalProcesses.PsychologicalReview 84 (3): 231-59.
39. Raghubir, P., and A. Valenzuela. 2006. Center-of-Inattention: Position Biases in Decision-Making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 99 (1): 66-80.
40. Rodway, P., A. Schepman, and J. Lambert. 2013. The Influence of Position and Context on Facial Attractiveness. Acta Psychologica 144 (3): 522-29.
41. Rozin, P., S. Scott, M. Dingley, J.K. Urbanek, H. Jiang, and M. Kaltenbach. 2011. Nudge to Nobesity I: Minor Changes in Accessibility Decrease Food Intake.Judgment and Decision Making 6 (4): 323-32.
42. Rubinstein, A., A.Tversky, and D. Heller. 1997. Naive Strategies in Competitive Games. In Understanding Strategic Interaction: Essays in Honor of Reinhard Selten. eds. W. Albers, W. Güth, P. Hammer-stein, B. Moldovanu and E. van Damme, 394-402. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
43. 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.
44. Scarpa, R., S. Notaro, J. Louviere, and R. Raf-faelli. 2011. Exploring Scale Effects of Best/Worst Rank Ordered Choice Data to Estimate Benefits of Tourism in Alpine Grazing Commons. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 93 (3): 813-28.
45. Scarpa, R., R. Zanoli, V. Bruschi, and S. Naspetti. 2013. Inferred and Stated Attribute Non-Attendance in Food Choice Experiments. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 95 (1): 165-80.
46. Schubert, T. 2005. Your Highness: Vertical Positions as Perceptual Symbols of Power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89 (1): 1-21.
47. Shaw, J.I., J.E. Bergen, C.A. Brown, and M.E. Gallagher. 2000. Centrality Preferences in ChoicesAmong Similar Options.The Journal of General Psychology 127 (2): 157-64.
48. Swait, J. 2001. A Non-Compensatory Choice Model Incorporating Attribute Cut-Offs. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 35 (10): 903-28.
49. Swait, J., and M. Ben-Akiva. 1987. Incorporating Random Constraints in Discrete Models of Choice set Generation. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 21 (2): 91-102.
50. Thurstone, L.L. 1927. A Law of Comparative Judgment. Psychological Review 34 (4): 273-86.
51. Valenzuela, A., and P. Raghubir. 2010. Are Consumers Aware of Top-Bottom but Not of Left-Right Inferences? Implications for Shelf Space Positions. Working Paper, Baruch College, City University of New York.
52. -. 2009. Position-Based Beliefs: The Center-Stage Effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology 19 (2): 185-96.
53. Valenzuela, A., P. Raghubir, and C. Mitakakis. 2013. Shelf Space Schemas: Myth or Reality? Journal of Business Research 66 (7): 881-8.
54. van Kleef, E., K. Otten, and H.C. van Trijp. 2012. Healthy Snacks at the checkout counter: A Lab and Field Study on the Impact of Shelf Arrangement and Assortment Structure on Consumer Choices. BMC Public Health 12 (1):1072.
55. Wright, P. 2002. Marketplace Metacogni-tion and Social Intelligence. Journal of Consumer Research 28 (4): 677-82.