IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v100y2018i4p1186-1206..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jerrod M Penn
  • Wuyang Hu

Abstract

The presence of hypothetical bias (HB) associated with stated preference methods has garnered frequent attention in the broad literature trying to describe and understand human behavior, often seen in environmental valuation, marketing studies, transportation choices, medical research, and others. This study presents an updated meta-analysis to explore the source of HB and methods to mitigate it. While previous meta-analysis on this topic often involves a few dozen articles, this analysis includes 131 studies after reviewing over 500 published and unpublished articles. This enables the inclusion of several important factors that have not been investigated before. These include relatively recent willingness to pay elicitation methods such as choice experiments and the Turnbull lower bound estimator. Newly emerged HB reduction techniques such as consequentiality and certainty follow-up treatments are also included. For explanatory variables that have been examined in previous studies, this analysis does not always report consistent findings. In particular, holding everything constant and contrary to commonly-held beliefs, the method of auction does not offer much reduction to HB compared to more conventional methods such as a referendum vote. However, choice experiment, cheap talk, consequentiality and certainty follow-up all significantly contributed to explaining and mitigating the magnitude of HB. These results help practitioners to understand HB’s presence and choose appropriate methods for amelioration. The framework established through this study also enables future analyses targeted at understanding variations built upon one or multiple HB mitigation techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Jerrod M Penn & Wuyang Hu, 2018. "Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta-Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1186-1206.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:100:y:2018:i:4:p:1186-1206.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aay021
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:ajagec:v:100:y:2018:i:4:p:1186-1206.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.