Mitigating Hypothetical Bias in Value of Time Studies: Lab-Experiment Results
AbstractWe present results from a series of willingness to-accept value-of-time choice experiments with students in Sweden and China, using both real and hypothetical purchases of the students´ time. Our results confirm negative hypothetical bias in stated choice elicitation of value-of-time. However, we find no evidence of hypothetical bias in a choice experiment where respondents to hypothetical or real offers have equal reference points (i.e., for purchase of their time “here and now”). Moreover, at least in the Chinese sample, we find that ex-post mitigation of negative hypothetical bias by certainty calibration, through recoding of uncertain “yes” responses into “no”, overshoots, while calibration by restricting estimations to confident “yes” and “no” responses possibly performs better.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Örebro University, School of Business in its series Working Papers with number 2009:14.
Length: 25 pages
Date of creation: 16 Oct 2009
Date of revision: 01 Nov 2010
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Örebro University School of Business, SE - 701 82 ÖREBRO, Sweden
Phone: 019-30 30 00
Fax: 019-33 25 46
Web page: http://www.oru.se/Institutioner/Handelshogskolan-vid-Orebro-universitet/
More information through EDIRC
Stated choice; Certainty calibration; Preference certainty;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C20 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - General
- C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
- D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-10-31 (All new papers)
- NEP-DCM-2009-10-31 (Discrete Choice Models)
- NEP-EXP-2009-10-31 (Experimental Economics)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statistics
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
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.