IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v79y2019icp155-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Goggles in the lab: Economic experiments in immersive virtual environments

Author

Listed:
  • Mol, Jantsje M.

Abstract

This review outlines the potential of virtual reality for creating naturalistic and interactive high-immersive environments in experimental economics. After explanation of essential terminology and technical equipment, the advantages are discussed by describing the available high-immersive VR experiments concerning economic topics to give an idea of the possibilities of VR for economic experiments. Furthermore, possible drawbacks are examined, including simulator sickness, the costs of VR equipment and specialist skills. By carefully controlling a naturalistic experimental context, virtual reality brings some field into the lab. Besides, it allows for testing contexts that would otherwise be unethical or impossible. It is a promising new tool in the experimental economics toolkit.

Suggested Citation

  • Mol, Jantsje M., 2019. "Goggles in the lab: Economic experiments in immersive virtual environments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 155-164.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:79:y:2019:i:c:p:155-164
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2019.02.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804319300801
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2019.02.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    2. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Using virtual environments to improve the realism of choice experiments: A case study about coastal erosion management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 193-208.
    3. Andreas Ortmann & Ralph Hertwig, 2002. "The Costs of Deception: Evidence from Psychology," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 111-131, October.
    4. Innocenti, Alessandro, 2017. "Virtual reality experiments in economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 71-77.
    5. Gürerk, Özgür & Bönsch, Andrea & Kittsteiner, Thomas & Staffeldt, Andreas, 2019. "Virtual humans as co-workers: A novel methodology to study peer effects," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 17-29.
    6. Felipe A. Araujo & Erin Carbone & Lynn Conell-Price & Marli W. Dunietz & Ania Jaroszewicz & Rachel Landsman & Diego Lamé & Lise Vesterlund & Stephanie W. Wang & Alistair J. Wilson, 2016. "The slider task: an example of restricted inference on incentive effects," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Lenka Fiala & Charles N. Noussair, 2017. "Charitable Giving, Emotions, And The Default Effect," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1792-1812, October.
    8. Haruvy, Ernan & Li, Sherry Xin & McCabe, Kevin & Twieg, Peter, 2017. "Communication and visibility in public goods provision," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 276-296.
    9. Meißner, Martin & Pfeiffer, Jella & Pfeiffer, Thies & Oppewal, Harmen, 2019. "Combining virtual reality and mobile eye tracking to provide a naturalistic experimental environment for shopper research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 445-458.
    10. Glenn W. Harrison & Ernan Haruvy & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2011. "Symposium: Remarks on Virtual World and Virtual Reality Experiments," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 87-94, July.
    11. Fiore, Stephen M. & Harrison, Glenn W. & Hughes, Charles E. & Rutstrm, E. Elisabet, 2009. "Virtual experiments and environmental policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 65-86, January.
    12. Cade McCall & Tania Singer, 2015. "Facing Off with Unfair Others: Introducing Proxemic Imaging as an Implicit Measure of Approach and Avoidance during Social Interaction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, February.
    13. Lin, Chien-Huang & Chuang, Shih-Chieh & Kao, Danny T. & Kung, Chaang-Yung, 2006. "The role of emotions in the endowment effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 589-597, August.
    14. Andreas Pedroni & Renato Frey & Adrian Bruhin & Gilles Dutilh & Ralph Hertwig & Jörg Rieskamp, 2017. "The risk elicitation puzzle," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(11), pages 803-809, November.
    15. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Jude, Simon, 2009. "Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 106-118, July.
    16. Arthur Schram, 2005. "Artificiality: The tension between internal and external validity in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 225-237.
    17. Ruud Zaalberg & Cees J. H. Midden, 2013. "Living Behind Dikes: Mimicking Flooding Experiences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 866-876, May.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:1:p:189-214 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Tiziana de‐Magistris & Belinda López‐Galán & Petjon Ballco, 2022. "Do virtual reality experiments replicate projection bias phenomena? Examining the external validity of a virtual supermarket," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 20-34, February.
    3. Giuseppe Attanasi & Barbara Buljat Raymond & Agnès Festré & Andrea Guido, 2023. "Augmented Reality Technology as a Tool for Promoting Pro-environmental Behavior and Attitudes," GREDEG Working Papers 2023-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    4. Jantsje M. Mol & Eline C. M. Heijden & Jan J. M. Potters, 2020. "(Not) alone in the world: Cheating in the presence of a virtual observer," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 961-978, December.
    5. Geva, Sharon & Fulman, Nir & Ben-Elia, Eran, 2022. "Getting the prices right: Drivers' cruising choices in a serious parking game," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 54-75.
    6. Jantsje M. Mol & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Julia E. Blasch, 2022. "After the virtual flood: Risk perceptions and flood preparedness after virtual reality risk communication," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(1), pages 189-214, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Gürerk, Özgür & Bönsch, Andrea & Kittsteiner, Thomas & Staffeldt, Andreas, 2019. "Virtual humans as co-workers: A novel methodology to study peer effects," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 17-29.
    3. Barbara Buljat, 2022. "Environmental policy and immersive technologies," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(S1), pages 41-47, July.
    4. Di Fang & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Grant H. West & Claudia Bazzani & Wei Yang & Benjamin C. Lok & Charles E. Levy & Heather A. Snell, 2021. "On the Use of Virtual Reality in Mitigating Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 142-161, January.
    5. Giuseppe Attanasi & Barbara Buljat Raymond & Agnès Festré & Andrea Guido, 2023. "Augmented Reality Technology as a Tool for Promoting Pro-environmental Behavior and Attitudes," GREDEG Working Papers 2023-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    6. Barbara Buljat, 2022. "Immersive Technologies Affecting Psychological Factors that Lead to Voluntary Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Transdisciplinary Survey," GREDEG Working Papers 2022-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    7. Eppink, Florian V. & Hanley, Nick & Tucker, Steven, 2019. "How Best to Present Complex Ecosystem Information in Stated Preference Studies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 20-25.
    8. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Using virtual environments to improve the realism of choice experiments: A case study about coastal erosion management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 193-208.
    9. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    10. Innocenti, Alessandro, 2017. "Virtual reality experiments in economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 71-77.
    11. Ferré, Marie & Engel, Stefanie & Gsottbauer, Elisabeth, 2022. "Incentivizing coordination in the adoption of sustainable land use when costs are heterogeneous: An economic experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    12. Han-Shen Chen, 2020. "The Construction and Validation of a Sustainable Tourism Development Evaluation Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, October.
    13. Graff, Frederik & Grund, Christian & Harbring, Christine, 2021. "Competing on the Holodeck - The effect of virtual peers and heterogeneity in dynamic tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:3:p:234-279 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Jantsje M. Mol & Eline C. M. Heijden & Jan J. M. Potters, 2020. "(Not) alone in the world: Cheating in the presence of a virtual observer," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 961-978, December.
    16. Sousa, Yannick Ferreira De & Munro, Alistair, 2012. "Truck, barter and exchange versus the endowment effect: Virtual field experiments in an online game environment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 482-493.
    17. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    18. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    19. Fabien Perez & Guillaume Hollard & Radu Vranceanu, 2021. "How serious is the measurement-error problem in risk-aversion tasks?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 319-342, December.
    20. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    21. Wei Zhu & Shaoyu Guo & Jinhua Zhao, 2021. "Planning participants’ preferential differences under immersive virtual reality and conventional representations: An experiment of street renewal," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(7), pages 1755-1769, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Virtual reality; Experimental economics; High-immersive virtual environments; Laboratory methods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:79:y:2019:i:c:p:155-164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.