Evaluating mitigation and calibration techniques for hypothetical bias in choice experiments

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Volumn 57, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1831-1848

  Broadbent, Craig D ^a  

^a ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

cheap talk; choice experiments; follow up certainty; hypothetical bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 84927177521     PISSN: 09640568     EISSN: 13600559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2013.839447     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Aadland, D., and A.J. Caplan. 2003. “Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 5 (2): 492–502.
2. Aadland, D., and A.J. Caplan. 2006. “Cheap Talk Reconsidered: New Evidence from CVM.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 60 (4): 562–578.
3. Alpizar, F., F. Carlsson, and P. Martinsson. 2001. “Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation.” Working Paper in Economics No. 52. Department of Economics, Goteborg University. http://eepsea.net/pub/sp/10301141930choiceexperiments.pdf
4. Alvarez-Farizo, B., J.M. Gil, and B.J. Howard. 2008. “Impacts from Restoration Strategies: Assessment through Valuation Workshops.” Ecological Economics 68 (3): 787–797.
5. Arrow, K., R. Solow, P.R. Portney, E.E. Leamer, R. Radner, and H. Schuman. 1993. “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation.” Fed. Register 58: 4602–4614.
6. Blumenschein K., M. Johannesson, G.C. Blomquist, B. Liljas, and R.M. O’Conor. 1998. “Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Continent Valuation.” Southern Economic Journal 65 (1): 169–177.
7. Blumenschein, K., G.C. Blomquist, M. Johannesson, N. Horn, and P. Freeman. 2008. “Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment.” The Economic Journal 118 (525): 114–137.
8. Broadbent, C.D. 2012. “Hypothetical Bias, Consequentiality and Choice Experiments.” Economics Bulletin 32 (3): 2491–2499.
9. Broadbent, C.D., J.B. Grandy, and R.P. Berrens. 2010. “Testing for Hypothetical Bias in a Choice Experiment Using a Local Public Good: Riparian Forest Restoration.” International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics 19 (F10): 1–19.
10. Brown, T.C., I. Ajzen, and D. Hrubes. 2003. “Further Tests of Entreaties to Avoid Hypothetical Bias in Referendum Contingent Valuation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 46 (2): 353–361.
11. Cameron, T.A., G.L. Poe, R.G. Ethier, and W.D. Schulze. 2002. “Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44 (3): 391–425.
12. Carlsson, F., P. Frykblom, and C.J. Lagerkvist. 2005. “Using Cheap Talk as a Test of Validity in Choice Experiments.” Economics Letters 89 (2): 147–152.
13. Carlsson, F., and P. Martinsson. 2001. “Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 41 (2): 179–192.
14. Carson, R.T., and T. Groves. 2007. “Incentive and Informational Properties of Preference Questions.” Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (1): 181–210.
15. Champ, P.A., and R.C. Bishop. 2001. “Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias.” Environmental and Resource Economics 19 (4): 383–402.
16. Champ, P.A., R.C. Bishop, T.C. Brown, and D.W. McCollum. 1997. “Using Donation Mechanisms to Value Non-use Benefits from Public Goods.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33 (2): 151–162.
17. Champ, P.A., R. Moore, and R.C. Bishop. 2009. “A Comparison of Approaches to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 38 (2): 166–180.
18. Cummings, R.G., and G.W. Harrison. 1994. “Was the Ohio Court Well Informed in its Assessment of the Accuracy of the Contingent Valuation Method?” Natural Resources Journal 34 (1): 1–36.
19. Cummings, R.G., G.W. Harrison, and E.E. Rutstrom. 1995. “Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?” American Economic Review 85 (1): 260–266.
20. Cummings, R.G., and L. Taylor. 1999. “Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method.” American Economic Review 89 (3): 649–665.
21. Ethier, R.G., G.L. Poe, W.D. Schulze, and J. Clark. 2000. “A Comparison of Hypothetical Phone and Mail Contingent Valuation Responses for Green-Pricing Electricity Programs.” Land Economics 76 (1): 54–67.
22. Hanley, N., S. Mourato, and R.E. Wright. 2001. “Choice Modeling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?” Journal of Economic Surveys 15 (3): 435–462.
23. Huber, J., and K. Zwerina. 1996. “The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs.” Journal of Marketing Research 33 (3): 307–317.
24. Hudson, D., K. Gallardo, and T. Hanson. 2003. “Hypothetical (Non)Bias in Choice Experiments: Evidence from Freshwater Prawns.” EconWPA in series Experimental, number 0503003. http://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpex/0503003.html
25. Johannesson, M.G., C. Blomquist, K. Blumenschein, P.O. Johansson, B. Liljas, and R.M. O’Conor. 1999. “Calibrating Hypothetical Willingness to Pay Responses.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 18 (1): 21–32.
26. Johansson-Stenman, O., and H. Svedsater. 2008. “Measuring Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments: The Importance of Cognitive Consistency. B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy 8 (1): 1–8.
27. Johnston, R.J. 2006. “Is Hypothetical Bias Universal? Validating Contingent Valuation Responses Using a Binding Public Referendum.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 52 (1): 469–481.
28. Krinsky, I., and A.L. Robb. 1986. “On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 68 (4): 715–719.
29. Kuhfeld, W.F. 2005. “Marketing Research Methods in SAS: Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques.” http://support.sas.com/techsup/technote/ts722.pdf
30. Li, C.Z., and L. Mattsson. 1995. “Discrete Choice under Preference Uncertainty: An Improved Structural Model for Contingent Valuation.” Journal of Economics and Management 28 (2): 256–269.
31. List, J.A. 2001. “Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards.” The American Economic Review 91 (5): 1498–1507.
32. List, J.A., and C. Gallet. 2001. “What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?” Environmental and Resource Economics 20 (3): 241–254.
33. 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 (2): 1–37.
34. Little, J., and R.P. Berrens. 2004. “Explaining Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values: Further Investigation Using Meta-Analysis.” Economics Bulletin 3 (6): 1–13.
35. Little, J., C.D. Broadbent, and R.P. Berrens. 2012. “Meta-Analysis of the Probability of Disparity Between Actual and Hypothetical Valuation Responses: Extension and Preliminary New Results.” Western Economics Forum 11 (1): 1–12.
36. Loomis, J., P. Bell, H. Cooney, and C. Asmus. 2009. “A Comparison of Actual and Hypothetical Willingness to Pay of Parents and No-Parents for Protecting Infant Health: The Case of Nitrates in Drinking Water.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 41 (3): 697–712.
37. Louviere, J.J., D.A. Hensher, and J.D. Swait. 2000. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
38. Lusk, J.L. 2003. “Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-pay for Golden Rice.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85 (4): 840–856.
39. 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): 467–482.
40. Murphy, J.J., T.H. Stevens, and D. Weatherhead. 2005. “Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Hypothetical Bias in a Provision Point Mechanism?” Environmental and Resource Economics 30 (3): 327–343.
41. Norwood, F.B. 2005. “Can Calibration Reconcile Stated and Observed Preferences?” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 37 (1): 237–248.
42. Olsson, B. 2005. “Accounting for Response Uncertainty in Stated Preference Methods.” Paper presented at the EAERE Congress, Bremen, Germany, June 23–26.
43. Poe, G.L., S.E.K. Severance-Lossin, and M.P. Welsh. 1994. “Measuring the Difference (X-Y) of Simulated Distributions: A Convolutions Approach.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74 (4): 904–915.
44. Ready, R.C., P.A. Champ, and J.L. Lawton. 2010. “Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment.” Land Economics 86 (2): 363–381.
45. Taylor, L.O. 1998. “Incentive Compatible Referenda and the Valuation of Environmental Goods.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 27 (2): 132–139.
46. Taylor, L.O., M.D. Morrison, and K.J. Boyle. 2010. “Exchange Rules and the Incentive Compatibility of Choice Experiments.” Environmental and Resource Economics 47 (197): 197–220.
47. Volinskiy, D., W. Adamowicz, and M. Veeman. 2011. “Predicting Versus Testing: A Conditional Cross-Forecasting Accuracy Measure for Hypothetical Bias.” The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 55 (3): 429–450.