IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

A Test Of Cheap Talk In Different Hypothetical Contexts: The Case Of Air Pollution

Listed author(s):
  • Dominique Ami

    ()

    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - ECM - Ecole Centrale de Marseille - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille 3 - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille 2 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Frédéric Aprahamian

    ()

    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - ECM - Ecole Centrale de Marseille - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille 3 - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille 2 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Olivier Chanel

    ()

    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - ECM - Ecole Centrale de Marseille - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille 3 - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille 2 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Stephane Luchini

    ()

    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - ECM - Ecole Centrale de Marseille - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille 3 - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille 2 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

We explore the influence of a neutral cheap talk script in three typical scenarios used in the CV literature devoted to the valuation of air pollution effects. We show that cheap talk has a differentiated effect depending on the scenario implemented. It decreases protest responses with no effect on WTP values in the scenario based on a new drug. When a move to a less polluted city is involved, it has no effect on protest responses but decreases WTP values. Surprisingly, cheap talk increases protest responses but decreases WTP values when new regional air pollution regulations are at stake.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00382511/document
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by HAL in its series Working Papers with number halshs-00382511.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 07 May 2009
Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00382511
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00382511
Contact details of provider: Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

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.:

as in new window
  1. Hanley, Nicholas & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2008. "Are there income effects on global willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation?," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2008-03, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
  2. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
  3. David Aadland & Arthur J. Caplan, 2003. "Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 492-502.
  4. James J. Murphy & Thomas H. Stevens & Lava Yadav, 2010. "A Comparison of Induced Value and Home-Grown Value Experiments to Test for Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation," Working Papers 2010-06, University of Alaska Anchorage, Department of Economics.
  5. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
  6. Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, K. E., 2003. "Willingness to accept, willingness to pay and the income effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 537-545, August.
  7. N. Künzli & R. Kaiser & S. Medina & M. Studnicka & O. Chanel & P. Filliger & M. Herry & F. Horak & V. Puybonnieux-Texier & Philippe Quénel & Jodi Schneider & R. Seethaler & J.C Vergnaud & H. Sommer, 2000. "Public health Impact of Outdoor and Traffic related Air Pollution," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00150955, HAL.
  8. John List & Paramita Sinha & Michael Taylor, 2006. "Using choice experiments to value non-market goods and services: Evidence from field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00278, The Field Experiments Website.
  9. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
  10. Whitehead, John C. & Cherry, Todd L., 2007. "Willingness to pay for a Green Energy program: A comparison of ex-ante and ex-post hypothetical bias mitigation approaches," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 247-261, November.
  11. Herriges, Joseph & Kling, Catherine & Liu, Chih-Chen & Tobias, Justin, 2010. "What are the consequences of consequentiality?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 67-81, January.
  12. David Aadland & Arthur J. Caplan, 2006. "Curbside recycling: Waste resource or waste of resources?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 855-874.
  13. Ronald G. Cummings & Laura Osborne Taylor, 1998. "Does Realism Matter in Contingent Valuation Surveys?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 203-215.
  14. Lusk, Jayson L., 2002. "Effects Of Cheap Talk On Consumer Willingness-To-Pay For Golden Rice," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19597, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  15. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
  16. James Murphy & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Hypothetical Bias in a Provision Point Mechanism?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 327-343, 03.
  17. Olivier Chanel & Stéphane Luchini, 2007. "Modeling Starting Point Bias as Unobserved Heterogeneity in Contingent Valuation Surveys: An Application to Air Pollution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 533-547.
  18. Mariah Ehmke & John List & Jayson Lusk, 2008. "Is hypothetical bias a universal phenomenon? A multinational investigation," Artefactual Field Experiments 00041, The Field Experiments Website.
  19. Yohei Mitani & Nicholas E. Flores, 2009. "Demand Revelation, Hypothetical Bias, and Threshold Public Goods Provision," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(2), pages 231-243, October.
  20. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan, 2004. "Using Cheap-Talk as a Test of Validity in Choice Experiments," Working Papers in Economics 128, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  21. Jacob Ladenburg & Søren Bøye Olsen, 2010. "Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys," IFRO Working Paper 2010/9, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
  22. Krupnick, Alan & Cropper, Maureen & Alberini, Anna & Heintzelman, Martin & Simon, Nathalie & O'Brien, Bernie & Goeree, Ron, 2000. "Age, Health, and the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions: A Contingent Valuation Survey of Ontario Residents," Discussion Papers dp-00-37, Resources For the Future.
  23. Nicolas Jacquemet & Alexander James & Stephane Luchini & Jason Shogren, 2011. "Social psychology and environmental economics: a new look at ex ante corrections of biased preference evaluation," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00584247, HAL.
  24. Samnaliev, Mihail & Stevens, Thomas H. & More, Thomas, 2006. "A comparison of alternative certainty calibration techniques in contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 507-519, May.
  25. Caplan, Arthur J. & Aadland, David & Macharia, Anthony, 2010. "Estimating Hypothetical Bias in Economically Emergent Africa: A Generic Public Good Experiment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 39(2), April.
  26. repec:cpm:opuscl:09 is not listed on IDEAS
  27. Craig E. Landry & John A. List, 2007. "Using Ex Ante Approaches to Obtain Credible Signals for Value in Contingent Markets: Evidence from the Field," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 420-429.
  28. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard & Stephane Luchini, 2007. "Heterogeneous anchoring in dichotomous choice valuation framework," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00176056, HAL.
  29. Gregory Poe & Jeremy Clark & Daniel Rondeau & William Schulze, 2002. "Provision Point Mechanisms and Field Validity Tests of Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(1), pages 105-131, September.
  30. Karen Blumenschein & GlennC. Blomquist & Magnus Johannesson & Nancy Horn & Patricia Freeman, 2008. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 114-137, 01.
  31. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, 03.
  32. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:2:y:2007:i:1:p:1-9 is not listed on IDEAS
  33. David Aadland & Arthur Caplan, 2002. "Cheap Talk Reconsidered: New Evidence from CVM," Working Papers 2002-20, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
  34. Mark Morrison & Thomas Brown, 2009. "Testing the Effectiveness of Certainty Scales, Cheap Talk, and Dissonance-Minimization in Reducing Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(3), pages 307-326, November.
  35. Thomas Broberg, 2010. "Income Treatment Effects in Contingent Valuation: The Case of the Swedish Predator Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 1-17, May.
  36. Eve J. Froehlich & Jared G. Carlberg & Clement E. Ward, 2009. "Willingness-to-Pay for Fresh Brand Name Beef," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(1), pages 119-137, 03.
  37. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2008. "Anonymity, Reciprocity, and Conformity: Evidence from Voluntary Contributions to a National Park in Costa Rica," Discussion Papers dp-08-03-efd, Resources For the Future.
  38. Alberini, Anna & Cropper, Maureen & Krupnick, Alan & Simon, N.B.Nathalie B., 2004. "Does the value of a statistical life vary with age and health status? Evidence from the US and Canada," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 769-792, July.
  39. David Aadland & Arthur Caplan & Owen Phillips, 2007. "A Bayesian examination of information and uncertainty in contingent valuation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-178, October.
  40. Bulte, E.H. & Gerking, S.D. & List, J.A. & de Zeeuw, A.J., 2005. "The effect of varying the causes of environmental problems on stated WTP values : Evidence from a field study," Other publications TiSEM f7559812-40bb-4595-b410-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  41. Brown, Thomas C. & Ajzen, Icek & Hrubes, Daniel, 2003. "Further tests of entreaties to avoid hypothetical bias in referendum contingent valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 353-361, September.
  42. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2006. "Do Experience and Cheap Talk influence Willingness to Pay in an Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Survey?," Working Papers in Economics 190, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  43. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
  44. John A. List & Robert P. Berrens & Alok K. Bohara & Joe Kerkvliet, 2004. "Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 741-752, June.
  45. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter & Akay, Alpaslan, 2009. "The Effect of Power Outages and Cheap Talk on Willingness to Pay to Reduce Outages," IZA Discussion Papers 4307, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  46. Cameron,A. Colin & Trivedi,Pravin K., 2005. "Microeconometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521848053, December.
  47. Kennedy, Peter E, 1981. "Estimation with Correctly Interpreted Dummy Variables in Semilogarithmic Equations [The Interpretation of Dummy Variables in Semilogarithmic Equations]," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 801-801, September.
  48. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Ulf Liebe, 2008. "Do protest responses to a contingent valuation question and a choice experiment differ?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(4), pages 433-446, April.
  49. Jacquemet, Nicolas & Joule, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane & Shogren, Jason F., 2009. "Earned wealth, engaged bidders? Evidence from a second-price auction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 36-38, October.
  50. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Englin, Jeffrey, 1997. "Respondent Experience and Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 296-313, July.
  51. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:6:p:1-13 is not listed on IDEAS
  52. Sinden, Jack A., 1988. "Empirical Tests Of Hypothetical Bias In Consumers' Surplus Surveys," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 32(02-03).
  53. Schkade David A. & Payne John W., 1994. "How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions: A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Willingness to Pay for an Environmental Regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 88-109, January.
  54. Elisabetta Strazzera & Margarita Genius & Riccardo Scarpa & George Hutchinson, 2003. "The Effect of Protest Votes on the Estimates of WTP for Use Values of Recreational Sites," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(4), pages 461-476, August.
  55. Olivier Chanel & Susan Cleary & Stephane Luchini, 2006. "Does public opinion influence willingness-to-pay? Evidence from the field," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(13), pages 821-824.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00382511. 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: (CCSD)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.