This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Controlling starting-point bias in double-bounded contingent valuation surveys

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Emmanuel Flachaire () (EUREQua)
Guillaume Hollard () (OEP - Université de Marne-la-Vallée)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper, we study starting point bias in double-bounded contingent valuation surveys. This phenomenon arises in applications that use multiple valuation questions. Indeed, response to follow-up valuation questions may be influenced by the bid proposed in the initial valuation question. Previous researches have been conducted in order to control for such an effect. However, they find that efficiency gains are lost when we control for undesirable response effects, relative to a single dichotomous choice question. Contrary to these results, we propose a way to control for starting point bias in double-bounded questions with gains in efficiency.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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: ftp://mse.univ-paris1.fr/pub/mse/cahiers2005/V05076.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1) in its series Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques with number v05076.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 13 pages
Date of creation: May 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:mse:wpsorb:v05076

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 106 - 112 boulevard de l'H�pital, 75647 Paris cedex 13
Phone: 01 44 07 81 00
Fax: 01 44 07 81 09
Email:
Web page: http://mse.univ-paris1.fr/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Jacqueline Pradel).

Related research
Keywords: Starting-point bias; contingent valuation.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Microeconomic Data
C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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.:
  1. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1985. "Some Issues In Continuous - And Discrete - Response Contingent Valuation Studies," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 14(1), April. [Downloadable!]
  2. DeShazo, J. R., 2002. "Designing Transactions without Framing Effects in Iterative Question Formats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 360-385, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. John C. Whitehead, 2002. "Incentive Incompatibility and Starting-Point Bias in Iterative Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 285-297. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Trudy Ann Cameron & John Quiggin, 1992. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data From a "Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up" Questionnaire," UCLA Economics Working Papers 653, UCLA Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Herriges, Joseph A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1996. "Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 112-131, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Reference points, anchors, norms, and mixed feelings," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 296-312, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Anna Alberini & Barbara Kanninen & Richard T. Carson, 1997. "Modeling Response Incentive Effects in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Data," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series 97-07, Department of Economics, UC San Diego. [Downloadable!]
  9. John Crooker & Joseph Herriges, 2004. "Parametric and Semi-Nonparametric Estimation of Willingness-to-Pay in the Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Framework," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 451-480, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Hu, Wuyang & Zhong, Funing & Ding, Yulian, 2006. "Actual Media Reports on GM Foods and Chinese Consumers' Willingness to Pay for GM Soybean Oil," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(02), August. [Downloadable!]
  2. Stephane Luchini & Frédéric Aprahamian & Olivier Chanel, 2006. "Heterogeneous anchoring and the shift effect in iterative valuation questions," Working Papers halshs-00409676_v1, HAL. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Alok Anand & Ron Mittelhammer & Jill McCluskey, 2007. "Consumer Response to Information and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Food in India," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, Berkeley Electronic Press, vol. 5(1), pages 1138-1138. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard, 2007. "Starting-point bias and respondent uncertainty in dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00175925_v1, HAL. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard, 2007. "Model selection in iterative valuation questions," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00176033_v1, HAL. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A few items listed on IDEAS are over 2000 years old!

This page was last updated on 2009-11-16.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.