IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v52y2025i2p216-239..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unravelling theory in choice analysis: do consumers fill in the blanks?

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Kristina Edenbrandt
  • Barbara Häsler

Abstract

Unravelling theory postulates that consumers assume products without quality information are of the lowest quality. In a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with 1987 respondents from the UK, we find evidence against this assumption. Affirmative disclosure, which indicates only quality above the lowest level, lowers marginal utilities compared to complete disclosure. The development in food choice DCE studies, from textual and complete towards visual and affirmative increases mean willingness to pay and error variance. This suggests that analysts should carefully consider how attributes are presented when designing DCEs to avoid biased welfare estimates, especially when aiming for accurate market predictions or policy advice.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Kristina Edenbrandt & Barbara Häsler, 2025. "Unravelling theory in choice analysis: do consumers fill in the blanks?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 52(2), pages 216-239.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:52:y:2025:i:2:p:216-239.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/jbaf009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:erevae:v:52:y:2025:i:2:p:216-239.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.