2012
DOI: 10.1257/mic.4.4.145
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments

Abstract: Résumé / AbstractCette étude s'intéresse à des aspects méthodologiques associés à l'utilisation d'expériences avec choix discrets pour évaluer des biens publics. Nous avons développé un modèle explicite de jeux théoriques pour des décisions individuelles à des séries de choix, avec conditions générales sous lesquelles un questionnaire avec des choix binaires répétés incite la révélation des valeurs. Ce développement théorique est suivi d'expériences terrains avec traitements qui couvrent le spectre des incitat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
81
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 230 publications
(83 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
2
81
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Respondents in a contingent choice experiment are provided with a series of choice sets with more than two alternatives that have comparable but different attributes, and each respondent is asked to repeatedly choose a preferred alternative out of each set of alternatives (Vermeulen et al 2008). One should note, however, that there are obvious limitations to the use of data derived from hypothetical markets or experiments (e.g., Hensher 2010) and concerns about the incentive compatibility of choice experiments featuring more than two choices per choice set (Carson and Groves 2007;Vossler et al 2012).…”
Section: Data and Survey Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Respondents in a contingent choice experiment are provided with a series of choice sets with more than two alternatives that have comparable but different attributes, and each respondent is asked to repeatedly choose a preferred alternative out of each set of alternatives (Vermeulen et al 2008). One should note, however, that there are obvious limitations to the use of data derived from hypothetical markets or experiments (e.g., Hensher 2010) and concerns about the incentive compatibility of choice experiments featuring more than two choices per choice set (Carson and Groves 2007;Vossler et al 2012).…”
Section: Data and Survey Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Respondents were told to answer each choice task independently of the previous one, so that each choice in the choice sequence could be interpreted as an independent vote (Vossler et al 2012). There was no mention of what would happen in the case of under-or overprovision of the public good (Rondeau et al 1999), in view of the fact that the design captured incremental changes in the existing provision level for which respondents were already paying.…”
Section: Choice Experiments Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conditions for a fully reliable mWTP estimation are consequentiality (choices resulting in real life consequences), coercive payment (respondents committing to paying a cost associated with their choices), and satisfying incentive compatibility conditions (where truthfully answering questions is the optimal strategy for a respondent) were not met in this study [60][61][62]. Therefore, attribute importance (see [63]) was considered next to WTP measures.…”
Section: Model Estimation: Econometric Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%