Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

A general model of starting point bias in double-bounded dichotomous contingent valuation surveys

Contents:

Author Info

  • Chien, Yu-Lan
  • Huang, Cliff J.
  • Shaw, Daigee

Abstract

This paper develops a general model that addresses the starting point bias in the dichotomous choice evaluation data by incorporating both the anchoring effect and yea-saying bias. The model is applied to a contingent valuation study that evaluated the health benefits of air quality improvement in three major metropolitan areas in Taiwan. The empirical evidence shows a strong anchoring effect but a weak yea-saying bias. The results show a serious understated willingness to pay if the biases in anchoring and yea-saying are not controlled.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6WJ6-4G0494J-1/2/cf6850a143fabb9c28d0669cf960c39a
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.

Volume (Year): 50 (2005)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
Pages: 362-377

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:50:y:2005:i:2:p:362-377

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622870

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Alberini Anna, 1995. "Optimal Designs for Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys: Single-Bound, Double-Bound, and Bivariate Models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 287-306, May.
  2. Hadker, Nandini & Sharma, Sudhir & David, Ashish & Muraleedharan, T. R., 1997. "Willingness-to-pay for Borivli National Park: evidence from a Contingent Valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 105-122, May.
  3. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
  4. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-58, December.
  5. Richard O‘Conor & Magnus Johannesson & Per-Olov Johansson, 1999. "Stated Preferences, Real Behaviour and Anchoring: Some Empirical Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 235-248, March.
  6. Edna T. Loehman & Sehoon Park & David Boldt, 1994. "Willingness to Pay for Gains and Losses in Visibility and Health," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(4), pages 478-498.
  7. Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre & Boxall, Peter & Louviere, Jordan & Williams, Michael, 1997. "Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 65-84, January.
  8. Lee, Lung-Fei & Tyler, William G., 1978. "The stochastic frontier production function and average efficiency : An empirical analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 385-389, April.
  9. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "A Theory of Social Interactions," NBER Working Papers 0042, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Herriges, Joseph A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1996. "Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning," Staff General Research Papers, Iowa State University, Department of Economics 1501, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  11. John C. Whitehead, 2002. "Incentive Incompatibility and Starting-Point Bias in Iterative Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 285-297.
  12. R. K. Blamey & J. W. Bennett & M. D. Morrison, 1999. "Yea-Saying in Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(1), pages 126-141.
  13. Silverman, Jonathan & Klock, Mark, 1989. "The behavior of respondents in contingent valuation: Evidence on starting bids," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 51-60.
  14. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
  15. Holmes Thomas P. & Kramer Randall A., 1995. "An Independent Sample Test of Yea-Saying and Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous-Choice Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 121-132, July.
  16. Craig Bullock & Jim Kay, 1997. "Preservation and Change in the Upland Landscape: The Public Benefits of Grazing Management," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 315-334.
  17. Kevin J. Boyle & Richard C. Bishop & Michael P. Welsh, 1985. "Starting Point Bias in Contingent Valuation Bidding Games," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(2), pages 188-194.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Saengsupavanich, Cherdvong & Seenprachawong, Udomsak & Gallardo, Wenresti G. & Shivakoti, Ganesh P., 2008. "Port-induced erosion prediction and valuation of a local recreational beach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 93-103, August.
  2. Marcella Veronesi & Anna Alberini & Joseph C. Cooper, 2005. "Detecting Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous-Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys," Working Papers, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei 2005.119, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  3. Romstad, Eirik, 2012. "Truthful revelation in nonmarket valuation," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil, International Association of Agricultural Economists 126724, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  4. Liao, Shu-Yi & Tseng, Wei-Chun & Chen, Chi-Chung, 2010. "Eliciting public preference for nuclear energy against the backdrop of global warming," Energy Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7054-7069, November.
  5. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Coggins, Jay S., 2008. "Environmental risk and welfare valuation under imperfect information," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 150-169, May.
  6. Aprahamian, Frederic & Chanel, Olivier & Luchini, Stephane, 2008. "Heterogeneous anchoring and the shift effect in iterative valuation questions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 12-20, January.
  7. Kang, Heechan & Haab, Timothy C. & Interis, Matthew G., 2013. "Identifying inconsistent responses in dichotomous choice contingent valuation with follow-up questions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 396-411.
  8. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  9. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2008. "Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 275-285, November.
  10. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Adachi, Kenji, 2011. "A framework for estimating willingness-to-pay to avoid endogenous environmental risks," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 130-154, January.
  11. Morten Mørkbak & Tove Christensen & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2010. "Choke Price Bias in Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(4), pages 537-551, April.
  12. Bechtold, Kai-Brit & Abdulai, Awudu, 2012. "Willingness-To-Pay for Functional Dairy Products and the Influence of Starting Point Bias: Empirical Evidence for Germany," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association 124776, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  13. Dambala Gelo & Steven F Koch, 2012. "Contingent Valuation of Community Forestry Programs in Ethiopia: Observing Preference Anomalies in Double-Bounded CVM," Working Papers, Economic Research Southern Africa 272, Economic Research Southern Africa.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:50:y:2005:i:2:p:362-377. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.