IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envval/v9y2000i4p481-491.html

The WTP/WTA Discrepancy: A Preliminary Qualitative Examination

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony C. Burton
  • Susan M. Chilton
  • Martin K. Jones

Abstract

This paper explores the psychological foundations of the 'Willingness to Pay/Willingness to Accept' discrepancy. Using a qualitative approach we find that the two response modes appear to invoke different strategies for completion. An examination of the heuristics used by respondents to answer questions concerning the buying and selling of the chance to play a straightforward lottery shows that only some could be taken as supporting current theories which aim to explain the discrepancy.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony C. Burton & Susan M. Chilton & Martin K. Jones, 2000. "The WTP/WTA Discrepancy: A Preliminary Qualitative Examination," Environmental Values, , vol. 9(4), pages 481-491, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envval:v:9:y:2000:i:4:p:481-491
    DOI: 10.1177/096327190000900408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/096327190000900408
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/096327190000900408?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    2. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arlen, Jennifer H. & Tontrup, Stephan, 2015. "Strategic Bias Shifting: Herding as a Behaviorally Rational Response to Regret Aversion," EconStor Preprints 335573, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Chorus, Caspar G., 2014. "Benefit of adding an alternative to one׳s choice set: A regret minimization perspective," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 49-59.
    3. George Wu, 1999. "Anxiety and Decision Making with Delayed Resolution of Uncertainty," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 159-199, April.
    4. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    5. Fershtman, Chaim, 1996. "On the value of incumbency managerial reference points and loss aversion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 245-257, April.
    6. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2013. "In search of a preferred preference elicitation method: A test of the internal consistency of choice and matching tasks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 126-140.
    7. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    8. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2016. "Expected utility theory and inner and outer measures of loss aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 10-20.
    9. Roth, Gerrit, 2006. "Predicting the Gap between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay," Munich Dissertations in Economics 4901, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    10. Andrea Isoni, 2011. "The willingness-to-accept/willingness-to-pay disparity in repeated markets: loss aversion or ‘bad-deal’ aversion?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 409-430, September.
    11. Piccolo, Salvatore & Pignataro, Aldo, 2018. "Consumer loss aversion, product experimentation and tacit collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 49-77.
    12. Davvetas, Vasileios & Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, 2017. "“Regretting your brand-self?” The moderating role of consumer-brand identification on consumer responses to purchase regret," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 218-227.
    13. Ben Irons & Cameron Hepburn, 2007. "Regret Theory and the Tyranny of Choice," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(261), pages 191-203, June.
    14. Caspar G. Chorus & Sander Cranenburgh, 2018. "Specification of regret-based models of choice behaviour: formal analyses and experimental design based evidence—commentary," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 247-256, January.
    15. Jennifer Arlen & Stephan Tontrup, 2015. "Does the Endowment Effect Justify Legal Intervention? The Debiasing Effect of Institutions," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 143-182.
    16. Marchegiani, Lucia & Reggiani, Tommaso & Rizzolli, Matteo, 2016. "Loss averse agents and lenient supervisors in performance appraisal," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 183-197.
    17. Roee Teper, 2010. "Probabilistic Dominance and Status Quo Bias," Working Paper 5864, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    18. Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly & Richard Batley, 2018. "Revisiting consistency with random utility maximisation: theory and implications for practical work," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(2), pages 181-204, March.
    19. Jacobs, Keri & Li, Ziran & Hayes, Dermot, "undated". "Price responses in forward contracting: do we limit the upside and expose the downside?," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235539, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Tontrup, Stephan, 2019. "Trading and Attentional Focus – Why we may overestimate the Impact of the Endowment Effect," EconStor Preprints 335549, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:envval:v:9:y:2000:i:4:p:481-491. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.