Experienced Utility as a Standard of Policy Evaluation
Abstract
This paper explores the possibility of basing economic appraisal on the measurement of experienced utility (utility as hedonic experience) rather than decision utility (utility as a representation of preference). Because of underestimation of the extent of hedonic adaptation to changed circumstances and because of the “focusing illusion” (exaggerating the importance of the current focus of one’s attention), individuals’ forecasts of experienced utility are subject to systematic error. Such errors induce preference anomalies which the experienced utility approach might circumvent. The “day reconstruction method” of measuring experienced utility is considered as a possible alternative to stated preference methods. Copyright Springer 2005Download 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.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 European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental and Resource Economics.
Volume (Year): 32 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (09)
Pages: 161-181
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263
Related research
Keywords: contingent valuation; day reconstruction method; experienced utility; focusing illusion;References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:32:y:2005:i:1:p:161-181For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
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.

