IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v58y2026ics1755534526000023.html

Dispersion-induced status quo bias in pivot-designed choice experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Cevenini, Fabio
  • Notaro, Sandra
  • Ferrini, Silvia
  • Grati, Fabio

Abstract

Two drivers of the status quo bias are explored via a split sample survey with a pivot-designed Discrete Choice Experiment interviewing recreational fishers in Italy. The propensity to favor the status quo over the hypothetical alternatives given an individual reference point, which we call “dispersion” is examined and modelled accordingly. The framing of the status quo alternative, as a driver of bias, is explored as reference point or opt-out option. Our findings demonstrate that when the status quo is characterized as an individual-specific reference, the status quo bias increases with the magnitude of the dispersion, leading to potentially biased willingness-to-pay estimates. Conversely, when the status quo is characterized as an opt-out option, the effect of the dispersion diminishes, improving the robustness of the estimates. Our results underscore the importance of carefully designing choice scenarios to manage status quo bias. In order to improve the accuracy of welfare estimates, a novel random utility model that tests and accounts for the effects of dispersion is proposed. The performance of this model is numerically tested in a series of Monte Carlo experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Cevenini, Fabio & Notaro, Sandra & Ferrini, Silvia & Grati, Fabio, 2026. "Dispersion-induced status quo bias in pivot-designed choice experiment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:58:y:2026:i:c:s1755534526000023
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2026.100596
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534526000023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2026.100596?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:eee:eejocm:v:58:y:2026:i:c:s1755534526000023. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    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.