IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joaaec/143658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Nonhypothetical Ranking and Auction Mechanism for Novel Products

Author

Listed:
  • McAdams, Callie P.
  • Palma, Marco A.
  • Hall, Charles R.
  • Ishdorj, Ariun

Abstract

Preferences for pomegranates, including some novel pomegranate varieties, were evaluated using an experimental auction and nonhypothetical preference ranking mechanism. Additional information on the taste and health benefits of the products was provided to mimic the information-gathering process on novel products. Product familiarity, product information, and reference prices were key factors in explaining willingness to pay for the included novel products. Results from the auction and nonhypothetical preference ranking procedures were divergent. Furthermore, interactions were detected between information treatments and product characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • McAdams, Callie P. & Palma, Marco A. & Hall, Charles R. & Ishdorj, Ariun, 2013. "A Nonhypothetical Ranking and Auction Mechanism for Novel Products," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(01), February.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:143658
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/143658
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher Kanter & Kent D. Messer & Harry M. Kaiser, 2009. "Does Production Labeling Stigmatize Conventional Milk?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1097-1109.
    2. Frode Alfnes, 2007. "Willingness to Pay versus Expected Consumption Value in Vickrey Auctions for New Experience Goods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 921-931.
    3. John C. Bernard & Daria J. Bernard, 2007. "What Is It About Organic Milk? An Experimental Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(3), pages 826-836.
    4. John Calfee & Clifford Winston & Randolph Stempski, 2001. "Econometric Issues In Estimating Consumer Preferences From Stated Preference Data: A Case Study Of The Value Of Automobile Travel Time," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(4), pages 699-707, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Bernard, John C. & He, Na, 2010. "Confounded by the Field: Bidding in Food Auctions When Field Prices Are Increasing," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 39(2), April.
    7. Bradley J. Rickard & Jura Liaukonyte & Harry M. Kaiser & Timothy J. Richards, 2011. "Consumer Response to Commodity-Specific and Broad-Based Promotion Programs for Fruits and Vegetables," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1312-1327.
    8. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Jae Bong Chang & Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2007. "How Closely Do Hypothetical Surveys and Laboratory Experiments Predict Field Behavior?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(2), pages 518-534.
    11. Deacue Fields & Walt Prevatt, 2008. "An Incentive Compatible Conjoint Ranking Mechanism," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 487-498.
    12. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Nayga Jr., Rodolfo M., 2008. "The role of reference prices in experimental auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 446-448, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chavez, Daniel & Palma, Marco, 2015. "Off the reservation: Pushing the bounds of rationality in experimental auctions," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 202164, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association;Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Collart, Alba J. & Palma, Marco A., 2014. "What Motivates Individuals to Participate in Economic Experiments? A Latent Class Analysis with Unobserved Heterogeneity," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170401, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Kassas, Bachir & Palma, Marco A. & Zhang, Yvette, 2016. "The role of incentives on preference revelations in auctions versus rankings," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 73-85.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    experimental auction; novel product; preference ranking; willingness to pay; Marketing; C91;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:joaaec:143658. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/saeaaea.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.