Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study

Ladenburg, Jacob; Olsen, Søren Bøye

doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2008.01.004

Cited by 96 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Women are thus the ones who react to the information about the behaviors of others given in the experiment. This is similar to the finding by Ladenburg and Olsen (2007) that women are more prone to starting point bias in CE than men. As discussed earlier, this is consistent with some previous studies showing that females are more sensitive to cues than men (Croson and Gneezy, 2004) and that women are more concerned with their relative position in society than men (Alpizar et al, 2005).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…There is also experimental evidence that women's social preferences are more sensitive to cues than are men's (Croson and Gneezy, 2004). In addition, some studies in the literature on relative standing suggest that women are more concerned with their relative positions in society than are men (Alpizar et al, 2005), and Ladenburg and Olsen (2007) found that women are more prone to starting point bias in a CE than men. These findings led us to test for gender differences both with respect to preferences for the attributes and the treatment effects.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We allow for a difference in preference between the first four and the last five choice sets, both because there could be learning and/or fatigue effects and because the effect of the information in the scenario could be limited for the last choice sets. For example, Ladenburg and Olsen (2007) find that an instructional choice set will only have an influence on the first choice sets, but not on the last. Although the experiment is generic, there might be other reasons why respondents opt for one of the alternatives, and we control for this with two alternative specific constants.…”

Section: Econometric Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods

Carlsson

García

Löfgren

2010

Environ Resource Econ

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We test the hypothesis that people conform to certain social norms, i.e. that some individuals may be willing to pay a higher price premium for green products the more widespread green consumerism is in society. To investigate consumer preferences for environmentally friendly products, we conducted a choice experiment where the respondents were asked to choose among coffee products varying with respect to their share of ecological beans, share of fair trade beans, and price. Three treatments were used, differing only in the information given about the choices made by other consumers. More specifically, the respondents in the three subgroups were told that 10%, 50%, and 90% of all other consumers chose the alternative with 100% ecological beans. We find different responses to the treatments across individuals.In particular, we can only confirm our hypothesis of conformity for women, although men appear to have stronger preferences for ecological coffee than women. JEL Classification: C90; D12.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Econometric Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods

Carlsson

García

Löfgren

2010

Environ Resource Econ

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the weighting is asymmetric in terms of high and low cost levels, then WTP derived from the RB and SB formats may differ. Several similar theories have been termed anchoring or starting-point bias (Boyle et al, 1985;Flachaire and Hollard, 2007;Herriges and Shogren, 1996;Ladenburg and Olsen, 2008). In its simplest form, starting-point bias does not imply a difference in derived WTP from the two response formats since preferences are established prior to answering the first question (but after observing the first question).…”

Section: Elicitation Format and Stated Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of responses to single and repeated discrete choice questions

McNair

Bennett

Hensher

2011

Resource and Energy Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to neoclassical economic theory, a stated preference elicitation format comprising a single binary choice between the status quo and one alternative is incentive compatible under certain conditions. Formats typically used in choice experiments comprising a sequence of discrete choice questions do not hold this property.In this paper, the effect on stated preferences of expanding the number of binary choice tasks per respondent from one to four is tested using a split sample treatment in an attribute-based survey relating to the undergrounding of overhead electricity and telecommunications wires. We find evidence to suggest that presenting multiple choice tasks per respondent decreases estimates of expected willingness to pay. Preferences stated in the first of a sequence of choice tasks are not significantly different from those stated in the incentive compatible single binary choice task, but, in subsequent choice tasks, responses are influenced by cost levels observed in past questions. Three behavioural explanations can be advanced -weak strategic misrepresentation, reference point revision and cost-driven value learning. The evidence is contrary to the standard assumption of truthful response with stable preferences.

show abstract

“…However, the use of CE to test preference learning, preference stability and choice consistency is limited (e.g. Brazell and Louviere 1998;Dellaert et al 1999;DeShazo and Fermo 2002;Holmes and Boyle 2005;Ladenburg and Olsen 2008;Savage and Waldman 2008;Rose et al 2009). …”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Choice Certainty and Consistency in Repeated Choice Experiments

Brouwer

Dekker

Rolfe

et al. 2009

Environ Resource Econ

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this study is to examine how repeated choice affects preference learning in stated preference experiments. We test different hypotheses related to preference learning by analyzing response patterns and asking respondents in a choice experiment to report their experienced certainty when going through the choice tasks. In a split-sample test, we show that follow-up choice certainty questions are procedural invariant. The self-reported certainty results indicate that learning occurs, but econometric testing procedures do not identify any significant impact of learning effects on parameter estimates or variance across choice tasks. Additional tests of choice consistency suggest that preferences in the choice experiment are stable and coherent.

show abstract

Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study

Cited by 96 publications

References 67 publications

Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods

Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods

A comparison of responses to single and repeated discrete choice questions

Choice Certainty and Consistency in Repeated Choice Experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About