Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments

Campbell, Danny; Hutchinson, George; Scarpa, Raffaele

doi:10.1007/s10640-008-9198-8

Cited by 190 publications

(152 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

139

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Differences in scale between both the test and the retest might be caused by effects such as learning, fatigue, complexity and consistency as various studies have shown (e.g. Breffle and Rowe 2002;Holmes and Boyle 2005;Campbell et al 2008;Carlsson et al 2012). In the present case a learning effect might occur as respondents face the same choice sets a second time.…”

Section: Parametric Analysis and Willingness-to-pay Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…We present two pooled models, one without and one with scale parameter. The scale parameter is explicitly included (in contrast to using a grid-search procedure) and estimated by full information maximum likelihood (Campbell et al 2008;Olsen 2009). For the subset of choices monitored at the first point in time (the test) the scale parameter is arbitrarily normalised to one while the scale parameter for the subset of choices monitored at the second point in time (the retest) is allowed to vary.…”

Section: Parametric Analysis and Willingness-to-pay Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…DeShazo and Fermo 2002;Boxall et al 2009) or the non-attendance to choice attributes (e.g. Hensher et al 2005;Campbell et al 2008) on welfare estimates. These studies mainly examine the validity of the method, that is, the relation between the measure and the underlying construct.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Liebe

Meyerhoff

Hartje

2012

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents the results of the first test-retest study on choice experiments in environmental valuation. In a survey concerning landscape externalities of onshore wind power in central Germany, respondents answered the same five choice sets at two different points in time. Each choice set comprised three alternatives described by five attributes, and the time interval between the test and the retest was eleven months. The analysis takes place at three different levels, investigating choice consistency at the choice task level and repeatability of the latent construct utility at the level of parametric models as well as at the level of willingness-to-pay estimates. At the choice task level we observed 59 % identical choices. The parametric analysis shows that the test and retest estimates are not equal, even when we control for scale, that is, differences in the error variance. However, comparing the marginal willingness-to-pay estimates among test and retest reveals only a statistically significant difference for one of the attributes. Overall, this indicates a moderate test-retest reliability taking into account that consistency at the choice task level overlooks the stochastic nature of the process underlying discrete choice experiments.

show abstract

Section: Parametric Analysis and Willingness-to-pay Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Parametric Analysis and Willingness-to-pay Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Liebe

Meyerhoff

Hartje

2012

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…of rural landscape attributes, Campbell et al (2008) find that discontinuous preferences help explain the magnitude and robustness of willingness to pay estimates.…”

Section: Ecological Economicsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Threshold preferences and the environment

Schumacher

Zou

2015

Journal of Mathematical Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are grateful for comments from Cuong Le Van and Agustin Perez Barahona. The second author appreciates the support of COST Action IS1104 "The EU in the new economic complex geography: models, tools and policy evaluation". AbstractIn this article we study the implication of thresholds in preferences. To model this we extend the basic model of John and Pecchenino (1994) by allowing the current level of environmental quality to have a discrete impact on how an agent trades off future consumption and environmental quality. In other words, we endogenize the semi-elasticity of utility based on a step function. We motivate the existence of the threshold based on research from political science, from arguments based on regulation and standards, cultural economics as well as ecological economics.Our results are that the location of the threshold determines both the potential steady states as well as the dynamics. For low (high) thresholds, environmental quality converges to a low (high) steady state. For intermediate levels it converges to a stable p-cycle, with environmental quality being asymptotically bounded below and above by the low and high steady state. We discuss implications for intergenerational equity and policy making.As policy implications we study shifts in the threshold. Our results are that, in case it is costless to shift the threshold, it is always worthwhile to do so. If it is costly to change the threshold, then it is worthwhile to change the threshold if the threshold originally was sufficiently low. Lump-sum taxes may lead to a development trap and should be avoided if there are uncertainties about the threshold or the effectiveness of the policy. JEL classification: Q28, Q56.

show abstract

“…However, in focus groups and in pilot studies, we learned that there was a risk that some respondents would not pay proper attention to the cost-for-the-household attribute. There is a growing literature indicating that this is the case for many stated preference surveys (see, e.g., Gilbride Campbell, 2008;Hensher, 2008;Scarpa et al, 2009). Therefore, we chose to use a latent class model following Scarpa et al (2009).…”

Section: Econometric Modelmentioning

confidence: 96%

Is fairness blind?—The effect of framing on preferences for effort-sharing rules

Carlsson

Kataria²,

Lampi

et al. 2011

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By using a choice experiment, this paper focuses on citizens' preferences for effort-sharing rules of how carbon abatement should be shared among countries. We find that Swedes do not rank the rule favoring their own country highest. Instead, they prefer the rule where all countries are allowed to emit an equal amount per person, a rule that favors Africa at the expense of high emitters such as the U.S. The least preferred rule is reduction proportional to historical emissions. Using two different treatments, one where the respondents were informed about the country names and one where the country names were replaced with anonymous labels A-D, we also test whether people's preferences for effort-sharing rules depend on the framing of the problem. We find that while the ranking of the principles is the same in both treatments, the strength of the preferences is significantly increased when the actual names of the countries are used.

show abstract

Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments

Cited by 190 publications

References 50 publications

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

Threshold preferences and the environment

Is fairness blind?—The effect of framing on preferences for effort-sharing rules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About