Evaluating mitigation and calibration techniques for hypothetical bias in choice experiments

No abstract is available for this paper.

• Publication year

  2014

• Venue

  Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

• Publication date

  2014-10-02

• Fields of study

  Economics

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1080/09640568.2013.839447
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Hypothetical Bias, Consequentiality and Choice Experiments

  2012cited by this paper
• Meta-Analysis of the Probability of Disparity between Actual and Hypothetical Valuation Responses: Extension and Preliminary New Results

  2012cited by this paper
• Predicting Versus Testing: A Conditional Cross‐Forecasting Accuracy Measure for Hypothetical Bias

  2011influential reference
• Testing for Hypothetical Bias in a Choice Experiment Using a Local Public Good: Riparian Forest Restoration

  2010cited by this paper
• Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment

  2010influential reference
• Exchange Rules and the Incentive Compatibility of Choice Experiments

  2010cited by this paper
• Impacts from restoration strategies: Assessment through valuation workshops

  2009cited by this paper
• A Comparison of Approaches to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias

  2009cited by this paper
• A Comparison of Actual and Hypothetical Willingness to Pay of Parents and Non-Parents for Protecting Infant Health: The Case of Nitrates in Drinking Water

  2009cited by this paper
• Measuring Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments: The Importance of Cognitive Consistency

  2008influential reference
• Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment

  2008cited by this paper
• Incentive and informational properties of preference questions

  2007influential reference
• Is hypothetical bias universal? Validating contingent valuation responses using a binding public referendum

  2006cited by this paper
• Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments

  2006influential reference
• An Economic Response to Unsolicited Communication

  2006cited by this paper
• Cheap Talk Reconsidered: New Evidence From CVM

  2006cited by this paper
• Can Calibration Reconcile Stated and Observed Preferences?

  2005cited by this paper
• Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments

  2005influential reference
• Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Hypothetical Bias in a Provision Point Mechanism?

  2005cited by this paper
• HYPOTHETICAL (NON)BIAS IN CHOICE EXPERIMENTS: EVIDENCE FROM FRESHWATER PRAWNS

  2005cited by this paper
• Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks

  2004cited by this paper
• Explaining Disparities between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values: Further Investigation Using Meta-Analysis

  2004cited by this paper
• Further tests of entreaties to avoid hypothetical bias in referendum contingent valuation

  2003cited by this paper
• Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice

  2003cited by this paper
• Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?

  2002cited by this paper
• Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation?

  2002cited by this paper
• Estimating Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias

  2002influential reference
• Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias

  2001influential reference
• Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment

  2001influential reference
• Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation

  2001cited by this paper
• Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportscards

  2001cited by this paper
• What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?

  2001influential reference
• Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications

  2000influential reference
• Calibrating Hypothetical Willingness to Pay Responses

  1999cited by this paper
• Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method

  1999influential reference
• Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation

  1998cited by this paper
• Incentive Compatible Referenda and the Valuation of Environmental Goods

  1998cited by this paper
• Using Donation Mechanisms to Value Nonuse Benefits from Public Goods

  1997influential reference
• A Comparison of Hypothetical Phone and Mail Contingent Valuation Responses for Green-Pricing Electricity Programs

  1997cited by this paper
• The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs

  1996influential reference
• A Jobs-Based Analysis of Labor Markets

  1995cited by this paper
• Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?

  1995cited by this paper
• Discrete choice under preference uncertainty: an improved structural model for contingent valuation.

  1995cited by this paper
• Implementing the Convolutions Approach: A Companion to "Measuring the Difference (X-Y) of Simulated Distributions: A Convolutions Approach"

  1994cited by this paper
• Report of the NOOA Panel on Contingent Valuation

  1993influential reference
• On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities

  1986cited by this paper

• Non-use values for protecting coral reefs: a review

  2026cites this paper
• Mitigating hypothetical bias in choice Experiments: An in-depth review on the use of cheap talk

  2025cites this paper
• Household's willingness to pay for renewable electricity: A meta-analysis

  2024cites this paper
• An attempt to decrease social desirability bias: the effect of cheap talk mitigation on internal and external validity of discrete choice experiments

  2023cites this paper
• A New Approach to Improve Destination Choice by Ranking Personal Preferences

  2022cites this paper
• Adjusting and Calibrating Elicited Values Based on Follow-up Certainty Questions: A Meta-analysis

  2022cites this paper
• Developing ecological endpoints for valuation of semi-arid riparian ecosystem services

  2022cites this paper
• Scotland ' s Rural College The relative performance of ex-ante and ex-post measures to mitigate hypothetical and strategic bias in a stated preference

  2022cites this paper
• The relative performance of ex‐ante and ex‐post measures to mitigate hypothetical and strategic bias in a stated preference study

  2022cites this paper
• Analysis of the Internal Relationship between Ecological Value and Economic Value Based on the Forest Resources in China

  2021cites this paper
• Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods

  2021cites this paper
• To pay or not to pay? Cost information processing in the valuation of publicly funded healthcare.

  2021cites this paper
• Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods

  2021cites this paper
• Valuing elite sport success using the contingent valuation method: A transnational study

  2020cites this paper
• Individual versus group responses for non-market public goods

  2019cites this paper
• Hypothetical bias: a new meta-analysis

  2017cites this paper
• Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach

  2017cites this paper
• Re-examining empirical evidence on stated preferences: importance of incentive compatibility

  2017cites this paper
• Consumer preferences for fixed versus variable quantities of electricity: joint estimation of contingent quantity and valuation methods

  2016cites this paper
• How real is ‘ hypothetical bias ’ in the context of risk and time preference elicitation ?

  2016cites this paper
• Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles

  2016cites this paper
• Re-examining empirical evidence on contingent valuation – Importance of incentive compatibility

  2015cites this paper