IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sej/ancoec/v651y1998p169-177.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Karen Blumenschein
  • Magnus Johannesson
  • Glenn C. Blomquist
  • Bengt Liljas
  • Richard M. O’Conor

Abstract

Use of the contingent valuation method is controversial among economists because it is based on hypothetical rather than real choices. Previous experiments have suggested that the commonly used dichotomous choice contingent valuation method leads to hypothetical bias, i.e., overestimates the real willingness to pay. We carried out an experiment to compare the dichotomous choice contingent valuation method with real purchase decisions for a consumer good. We confirm previous findings that hypothetical yes responses overestimate real purchase decisions, but we cannot reject the null hypothesis that definitely sure yes responses correspond to real purchase decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Blumenschein & Magnus Johannesson & Glenn C. Blomquist & Bengt Liljas & Richard M. O’Conor, 1998. "Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 169-177, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:65:1:y:1998:p:169-177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:sej:ancoec:v:65:1:y:1998:p:169-177. 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: (Laura Razzolini). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/seaaaea.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.

    We have no 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.

    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.