IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/120880.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To be(tween) or not to be(tween)? Combining between- and within-subjects design characteristics in preference elicitation for organic and local apples

Author

Listed:
  • Drichoutis, Andreas C.
  • Cerjak, Marija
  • Kovačić, Damir
  • Juračak, Josip

Abstract

This study examines consumer preferences for organic and local apples by combining between- and within-subject design characteristics in a second price auction. We first ask subjects to bid for 1 Kg of apples without any information. In subsequent rounds we reveal information about the organic or local attributes of apples and then allow subjects to taste the apples. Results show a significant price premium for the organic attribute (but not for the local attribute) once information is provided while tasting does not further increase elicited willingness-to-pay. We also find that the mixed-subject design results in more accurate willingness-to-pay estimates than when we use information from the between-subjects or within-subjects treatments alone. These results highlight the interplay between different quality attributes in consumer decision making and emphasize the gains that can be achieved by combining between- and within-subjects characteristics in experimental auctions.

Suggested Citation

  • Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Cerjak, Marija & Kovačić, Damir & Juračak, Josip, 2024. "To be(tween) or not to be(tween)? Combining between- and within-subjects design characteristics in preference elicitation for organic and local apples," MPRA Paper 120880, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:120880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/120880/1/MPRA_paper_120880.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Lorenz Goette & David Huffman, 2011. "Reference Points and Effort Provision," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 470-492, April.
    2. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2012. "Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 1-8.
    3. Thøgersen, John, 2023. "How does origin labelling on food packaging influence consumer product evaluation and choices? A systematic literature review," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Sackett, Hillary & Shupp, Robert & Tonsor, Glynn, 2016. "Differentiating “Sustainable” From “Organic” And “Local” Food Choices: Does Information About Certification Criteria Help Consumers?," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 4(3), pages 1-15, July.
    5. 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.
    6. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    7. Li, Shanshan & Kallas, Zein, 2021. "Meta-Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Food Products," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314970, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Mutz, Diana C. & Pemantle, Robin, 2015. "Standards for Experimental Research: Encouraging a Better Understanding of Experimental Methods," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 192-215, January.
    9. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    10. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    11. Nicholas T. Bailey & Abhijit Ramalingam & Brock V. Stoddard, 2023. "Experimental (re-)analysis of the house-money effect in a public goods game," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, June.
    12. Ho, Daniel E. & Imai, Kosuke & King, Gary & Stuart, Elizabeth A., 2007. "Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 199-236, July.
    13. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    14. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Klonaris, Stathis & Papoutsi, Georgia S., 2017. "Do Good Things Come in Small Packages? Bottle Size Effects on Willingness to Pay for Pomegranate Wine and Grape Wine," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 84-104, February.
    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. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Klonaris, Stathis & Papoutsi, Georgia, 2016. "Do good things come in small packages? Willingness to pay for pomegranate wine and bottle size effects," MPRA Paper 72748, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    3. Vassilopoulos, Achilleas & Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo, 2018. "Loss Aversion, Expectations and Anchoring in the BDM Mechanism," MPRA Paper 85635, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Georgia S. Papoutsi & Stathis Klonaris & Andreas C. Drichoutis, 2018. "The health-taste trade-off in consumer decision making: An experimental approach," Working Papers 2018-2, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    5. Andreas C Drichoutis & Rodolfo M Nayga, 2020. "Economic Rationality under Cognitive Load," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(632), pages 2382-2409.
    6. Gill, David & Prowse, Victoria, 2019. "Measuring costly effort using the slider task," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 1-9.
    7. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Palma, Marco & Feldman, Paul, 2024. "Incentives and Payment Mechanisms in Preference Elicitation," MPRA Paper 120898, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Aleksandr Alekseev, 2022. "Give me a challenge or give me a raise," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 170-202, February.
    9. Rosato, Antonio & Tymula, Agnieszka A., 2019. "Loss aversion and competition in Vickrey auctions: Money ain't no good," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 188-208.
    10. Lucia Marchegiani & Tommaso Reggiani & Matteo Rizzolli, 2013. "Severity vs. Leniency Bias in Performance Appraisal: Experimental evidence," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS01, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    11. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Game form recognition in preference elicitation, cognitive abilities, and cognitive load," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 49-65.
    12. Leibbrandt, Andreas, 2020. "Behavioral constraints on price discrimination: Experimental evidence on pricing and customer antagonism," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    13. Marc N. Conte & Robert Griffin, 2019. "Private Benefits of Conservation and Procurement Auction Performance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(3), pages 759-790, July.
    14. Avram, Silvia, 2015. "Benefit losses loom larger than taxes: the effects of framing and loss aversion on behavioural responses to taxes and benefits," ISER Working Paper Series 2015-17, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    15. Andreas Leibbrandt, 2016. "Behavioral Constraints on Pricing: Experimental Evidence on Price Discrimination and Customer Antagonism," CESifo Working Paper Series 6214, CESifo.
    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. Ispano, Alessandro & Schwardmann, Peter, 2017. "Cooperating over losses and competing over gains: A social dilemma experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 329-348.
    18. Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2023. "Relative risk taking and social curiosity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 243-264.
    19. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    20. Bouma, J.A. & Nguyen, Binh & van der Heijden, Eline & Dijk, J.J., 2018. "Analysing Group Contract Design Using a Lab and a Lab-in-the-Field Threshold Public Good Experiment," Discussion Paper 2018-049, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    experimental auctions; second (2nd) price auction; SPA; between-subjects random incentive scheme; BRIS;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:120880. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.