Anomalies and Stated Preference Techniques: A Framework for a Discussion of Coping Strategies
This paper introduces a symposium on the issue of how stated preference (SP) research can best cope with ‘anomalies’ (i.e. systematic deviations from the predictions of standard economic theory) in survey responses. It proposes a framework for constructive debate, recognising (i) the legitimate aspirations of SP research, (ii) the relevance of evidence from sources other than best-practice SP, and (iii) the precautionary value of investigating strategies for coping with suspected anomalies, even if questions about the robustness of anomalies have not been finally resolved. Five alternative coping strategies, discussed in more detail in the symposium, are briefly introduced. Copyright Springer 2005
Volume (Year): 32 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (09)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263|
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.:
- Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-47, June.
- John List, 2005. "Scientific Numerology, Preference Anomalies, and Environmental Policymaking," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 35-53, 09.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:32:y:2005:i:1:p:1-12. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.