On the Use of Valuation Mechanisms to Measure Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Novel Products: A Comparison of Hypothetical and Non-Hypothetical Values
Willingness to pay (WTP) estimates for novel products are needed to assess consumers' valuation of these products as well as for product adoption and optimal pricing strategies. Using experiments in a retail setting, we compare hypothetical and non-hypothetical WTP values between a Becker-DeGroot-Marshak (BDM) auction mechanism and conjoint analysis. Our results suggest that the auction WTP values are higher than conjoint analysis WTP values. Moreover, the hypothetical WTP values are higher than the non-hypothetical WTP values in both elicitation mechanisms.
Volume (Year): 10 (2007)
Issue (Month): 02 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 1010 Vermont Avenue, Suite 201, Washington, DC 20005, USA|
Phone: 1 (202) 429-1610
Web page: http://www.ifama.org
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- 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.
- W. Douglass Shaw & Andres Silva & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2006.
"Health benefits and uncertainty: an experimental analysis of the effects of risk presentation on auction bids for a healthful product,"
AccessEcon, vol. 4(20), pages 1-8.
- Shaw, W. Douglass & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Silva, Andres, 2005. "Health Benefits and Uncertainty: An Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Risk Presentation on Auction Bids for a Healthful Product," Discussion Papers 23961, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
- Jay R. Corrigan & Matthew C. Rousu, 2006.
"Posted Prices and Bid Affiliation: Evidence from Experimental Auctions,"
0602, Kenyon College, Department of Economics.
- Jay R. Corrigan & Matthew C. Rousu, 2006. "Posted Prices and Bid Affiliation: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1078-1090.
- Jayson L. Lusk & Darren Hudson, 2004. "Willingness-to-Pay Estimates and Their Relevance to Agribusiness Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 152-169.
- Ty Feldkamp & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004.
"Experimental Auction Procedure: Impact on Valuation of Quality Differentiated Goods,"
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 389-405.
- Ty Feldkamp & Jayson Lusk & Ted Schroeder, 2004. "Experimental auction procedure: Impact on valuation of quality differentiated goods," Artefactual Field Experiments 00097, The Field Experiments Website.
- Jayson L. Lusk & W. Bruce Traill & Lisa O. House & Carlotta Valli & Sara R. Jaeger & Melissa Moore & Bert Morrow, 2006. "Comparative Advantage in Demand: Experimental Evidence of Preferences for Genetically Modified Food in the United States and European Union," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 1-21, 03.
- Jason F. Shogren & Dermot J. Hayes & James B. Kliebenstein & John A. Fox, 1994.
"Bid Sensitivity and the Structure of the Vickrey Auction,"
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1089-1095.
- Shogren, Jason F. & Fox, John A. & Hayes, Dermot J. & Kliebenstein, James, 1994. "Bid Sensitivity in the Structure of the Vickrey Auction," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10616, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:8186. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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.