IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A model of the anchoring effect in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up

  • Sandra Lechner
  • Anne Rozan
  • François Laisney

This paper focuses on modelling and estimating the starting point bias in closed-ended follow-up questions, where several bids are presented successively, depending on previous answers. Although the contingent valuation literature took off in the last decade, there is only one study modelling the starting point bias. We propose a new modelling of this anchoring effect based on the assumption the first proposed bid has a direct influence on the individual's willingness-to-pay, i.e respondents modify their willingness-to-pay when presented with the first bid just before they answer the first question. Monte Carlo results support the specification of our model. An application is provided based on data from a contingent valuation study conducted concerning air quality in Strasbourg.

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: http://www.beta-umr7522.fr/productions/publications/2003/2003-07.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg in its series Working Papers of BETA with number 2003-07.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2003-07
Contact details of provider: Postal: PEGE. 61, Aven. de la Forêt-Noire 67000 Strasbourg
Phone: +33 3 68 85 20 69
Fax: +33 3 68 85 20 70
Web page: http://www.beta-umr7522.fr/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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. Richard O‘Conor & Magnus Johannesson & Per-Olov Johansson, 1999. "Stated Preferences, Real Behaviour and Anchoring: Some Empirical Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 235-248, March.
  2. Trudy Ann Cameron & John Quiggin, 1992. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data From a "Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up" Questionnaire," UCLA Economics Working Papers 653, UCLA Department of Economics.
  3. Trudy Ann Cameron & Michelle D. James, 1986. "Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-Ended" Contingent Valuation Surveys," UCLA Economics Working Papers 404, UCLA Department of Economics.
  4. Herriges, Joseph A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1996. "Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning," Staff General Research Papers 1501, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  5. Kanninen Barbara J., 1995. "Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 114-125, January.
  6. Green, Donald & Jacowitz, Karen E. & Kahneman, Daniel & McFadden, Daniel, 1998. "Referendum contingent valuation, anchoring, and willingness to pay for public goods," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 85-116, June.
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:ulp:sbbeta:2003-07. 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: ()

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.