Skip to Main Content
Further tests of entreaties to avoid hypothetical bias in referendum contingent valuationAuthor(s): Thomas C. Brown; Icek Ajzen; Daniel Hrubes
Source: Journal of environmental economics and management. 46(2): 353-361
Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
PDF: View PDF (117 KB)
DescriptionOver-estimation of willingness to pay in contingent markets has been attributed largely to hypothetical bias. One promising approach for avoiding hypothetical bias is to tell respondents enough about such bias that they self-correct for it. A script designed for this purpose by Cummings and Taylor was used in hypothetical referenda that differed in payment amount. In comparisons with behavior observed in otherwise identical real payment referenda, the script worked remarkably well at higher payment levels (dropping the likelihood of a yes vote to the level obtained in separate sample real referenda), but less well at a lower payment level. The repeated success of the script at higher payment amounts is a clear sign that additional research is warrantedb11sresearch that will bring us a more complete understanding of how the entreaty works. This research may need to explore its workings at the individual respondent level.
- You may send email to firstname.lastname@example.org to request a hard copy of this publication.
- (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
CitationBrown, Thomas C.; Ajzen, Icek; Hrubes, Daniel. 2003. Further tests of entreaties to avoid hypothetical bias in referendum contingent valuation. Journal of environmental economics and management. 46(2): 353-361
Keywordshypothetical bias, contingent valuation, public goods, referenda
- Explaining the discrepancy between intentions and actions: the case of hypothetical bias in contingent valuation
- A comparison of approaches to mitigate hypothetical bias
- Using respondent uncertainty to mitigate hypothetical bias in a stated choice experiment
XML: View XML