IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v44y2017i2p309-336..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Will the alphabet soup of design criteria affect discrete choice experiment results?

Author

Listed:
  • Søren Bøye Olsen
  • Jürgen Meyerhoff

Abstract

Every discrete choice experiment needs one, but the impacts of a statistical design on the results are still not well understood. Comparative studies have found that efficient designs outperform especially orthogonal designs. What has been little studied is whether efficient designs come at a cost. Thus, we compare four designs with respect to their effect on outcomes, especially willingness to pay (WTP) estimates and predicted market shares. Regarding statistical efficiency all designs perform rather well but the WTP estimates differ significantly on several occasions. This indicates that results are not neutral to the design, even when a high number of observations are available.

Suggested Citation

  • Søren Bøye Olsen & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2017. "Will the alphabet soup of design criteria affect discrete choice experiment results?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(2), pages 309-336.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:44:y:2017:i:2:p:309-336.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/jbw014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mariel, Petr & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2018. "A More Flexible Model or Simply More Effort? On the Use of Correlated Random Parameters in Applied Choice Studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 419-429.
    2. Giovanna Piracci & Emilia Lamonaca & Fabio Gaetano Santeramo & Fabio Boncinelli & Leonardo Casini, 2024. "On the willingness to pay for food sustainability labelling: A meta‐analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 55(2), pages 329-345, March.
    3. Agúndez, Dolores & Lawali, Sitou & Mahamane, Ali & Alía, Ricardo & Soliño, Mario, 2022. "Development of agroforestry food resources in Niger: Are farmers’ preferences context specific?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    4. Jasper Grashuis & Alexandre Magnier, 2018. "Product differentiation by marketing and processing cooperatives: A choice experiment with cheese and cereal products," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 813-830, October.
    5. Thiermann, Insa & Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2021. "Verringerung von Ammoniakemissionen durch Gülleansäuerung auf dem Feld: Teilnahmebereitschaft von Landwirten an Förderprogrammen," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 70(03), January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    discrete choice experiment; efficient experimental design; ground beef attributes; willingness to pay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q21 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    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:oup:erevae:v:44:y:2017:i:2:p:309-336.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.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.