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

Bridging the gap between laboratory experiments and naturally occurring markets: An inferred valuation method

Contents:

Author Info

  • Lusk, Jayson L.
  • Norwood, F. Bailey

Abstract

Several recent studies have found important differences between behavior in the laboratory and the field. We explore two possible causes for the divergence: social concerns and unfamiliarity with the traded good. Consistent with our conceptual model, we find that people overstated their preferences for relatively familiar goods with normative attributes and understated their preferences for a relatively unfamiliar good with low normative motivations in the laboratory as compared to the field. We also find that for goods with a normative dimension, a new method we refer to as inferred valuation has the potential to narrow the lab-field gap. In some cases, willingness-to-pay obtained from a conventional valuation elicitation method is more than twice the value from the new inferred valuation approach.

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/B6WJ6-4VW550J-1/2/4d9969766e45c30b54e4f6dd66a5a3a4
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): 58 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
Pages: 236-250

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:58:y:2009:i:2:p:236-250

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

Related research

Keywords: Laboratory experiment External validity Field experiment Indirect questioning Inferred valuation Organic Willingness-to-pay;

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. Van Boven, Leaf & Loewenstein, George & Dunning, David, 2005. "The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 130-141, March.
  2. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-58, December.
  3. John A. List, 2004. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 615-625, 03.
  4. Zhao, Jinhua & Kling, Catherine L., 2004. "Willingness-To-Pay, Compensating Variation, and the Cost of Commitment," Staff General Research Papers 1875, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  5. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. " Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 303-15, September.
  6. John A. List, 2006. "The Behavioralist Meets the Market: Measuring Social Preferences and Reputation Effects in Actual Transactions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(1), pages 1-37, February.
  7. Noussair, C.N. & Plott, C. & Riezman, R., 1995. "An experimental investigation of the patterns of international trade," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-387775, Tilburg University.
  8. Brookshire, David S & Coursey, Don L & Schulze, William D, 1987. "The External Validity of Experimental Economics Techniques: Analysis of Demand Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(2), pages 239-50, April.
  9. Kling, Catherine L. & Zhao, Jinhua, 2001. "New Explanation for the Wtp/Wta Disparity (A)," Staff General Research Papers 5113, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  10. Huck, Steffen & Weizsacker, Georg, 2002. "Do players correctly estimate what others do? : Evidence of conservatism in beliefs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 71-85, January.
  11. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "A Theory of Social Interactions," NBER Working Papers 0042, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Bénabou, Roland & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," IDEI Working Papers 389, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised Jan 2006.
  13. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-19, November.
  14. Shogren, Jason F. & Fox, John A. & Hayes, Dermot J. & Roosen, Jutta, 1999. "Observed Choices For Food Safety in Retail, Survey and Auction Markets," Staff General Research Papers 5024, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  15. Jay R. Corrigan, 2005. "Is the Experimental Auction a Dynamic Market?," Working Papers 0501, Kenyon College, Department of Economics.
  16. Kjell Arne Brekke & Snorre Kverndokk & Karinen Nyborg, 2000. "An Economic Model of Moral Motivation," Discussion Papers 290, Research Department of Statistics Norway.
  17. Zhao, Jinhua & Kling, Catherine L., 2001. "A new explanation for the WTP/WTA disparity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 293-300, December.
  18. Forsythe, Robert & Forrest Nelson & George R. Neumann & Jack Wright, 1992. "Anatomy of an Experimental Political Stock Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1142-61, December.
  19. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
  20. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
  21. John A. List & Robert P. Berrens & Alok K. Bohara & Joe Kerkvliet, 2004. "Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 741-752, June.
  22. Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Martinsson, Peter, 2004. "Honestly, why are you driving a BMW?," Working Papers in Economics 141, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  23. Christopher G. Leggett & Naomi S. Kleckner & Kevin J. Boyle & John W. Dufield & Robert Cameron Mitchell, 2003. "Social Desirability Bias in Contingent Valuation Surveys Administered Through In-Person Interviews," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 561-575.
  24. John List & David Reiley, 2008. "Field experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00091, The Field Experiments Website.
  25. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 118(1), pages 41-71, February.
  26. Jayson Lusk & John Fox, 2003. "Value elicitation in laboratory and retail environments," Framed Field Experiments 00185, The Field Experiments Website.
  27. Lusk Jayson L & Schroeder Ted C., 2006. "Auction Bids and Shopping Choices," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-39, August.
  28. Hausman, Jerry A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1987. "Specifying and testing econometric models for rank-ordered data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-2), pages 83-104.
  29. Gregory L. Poe & Kelly L. Giraud & John B. Loomis, 2005. "Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 353-365.
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. Löschel, Andreas & Sturm, Bodo & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2013. "Revealed preferences for climate protection when the purely individual perspective is relaxed: Evidence from a framed field experiment," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-006, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  2. Stachtiaris, Spiros & Drichoutis, Andreas & Klonaris, Stathis, 2011. "The “more is less” phenomenon in Contingent and Inferred valuation," MPRA Paper 29456, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  3. Disdier, Anne-Célia & Marette, Stéphan & Millet, Guy, 2013. "Are consumers concerned about palm oil? Evidence from a lab experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 180-189.
  4. Grebitus, Carola & Colson, Gregory & Menapace, Luisa, 2012. "A comparison of hypothetical survey rankings with consumer shopping behavior and product knowledge," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(01), February.
  5. John A. List & Michael K. Price, 2013. "Using Field Experiments in Environmental and Resource Economics," NBER Working Papers 19289, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Bessler, David A., 2013. "On Agricultural Econometrics," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(03), August.
  7. Marette Stéphan & Roosen Jutta & Blanchemanche Sandrine, 2011. "The Combination of Lab and Field Experiments for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-36, August.
  8. Nielsen, Thea, 2012. "How do Concerns about Pesticides Impact Consumer Willingness to Buy Genetically Modified French Fries in Germany? Results from a Purchasing Experiment," 2012 International European Forum, February 13-17, 2012, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 144986, International European Forum on Innovation and System Dynamics in Food Networks.
  9. Jayson Lusk & F. Norwood, 2010. "Direct Versus Indirect Questioning: An Application to the Well-Being of Farm Animals," Social Indicators Research, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 551-565, May.
  10. Kaczan, David & Swallow, Brent M. & Adamowicz, W.L. (Vic), 2013. "Designing a payments for ecosystem services (PES) program to reduce deforestation in Tanzania: An assessment of payment approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 20-30.

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:58:y:2009:i:2:p:236-250. 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.