1 / 8

Obtaining Unbiased Contingent Values: Further Tests of Entreaties to Avoid Hypothetical Bias

Obtaining Unbiased Contingent Values: Further Tests of Entreaties to Avoid Hypothetical Bias. Thomas C. Brown, Icek Ajzen, and Daniel Hrubes. The Hypothetical Bias may comes from:.

ramona-gomez
Download Presentation

Obtaining Unbiased Contingent Values: Further Tests of Entreaties to Avoid Hypothetical Bias

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Obtaining Unbiased Contingent Values: Further Tests of Entreaties to Avoid Hypothetical Bias Thomas C. Brown, Icek Ajzen, and Daniel Hrubes

  2. The Hypothetical Bias may comes from: • First, some participants in hypothetical referenda may try to estimate their real willingness to pay but may over-estimate. • Second, some may ignore their budget constraint, thereby responding as if they faced none. • Third, some may use their vote to indicate whether or not they think the cause is worthy of support. • Fourth, some may use their vote to indicate whether or not they think such a referendum should be held for real.

  3. Introduction • Test method, similar to budget constrain reminder, to correct hypothetical bias • Generally the method instructs respondents that when responding WTP, they respond it as if were real payment.

  4. Method to correct hypothetical bias • “reminder” remind respondent clearly that please response as if you are really paying • “cheap talk” Instruct respondent that there is the hypothetical bias and they should self-correct for it

  5. Discussion • The Cummings and Taylor script is long and difficult to use on the phone or in the mail • The Loomis script is short and did not educate about the hypothetical bias • The testing has been conducted with the students at the University of Massachusets

  6. Discussion (con’t) • Only further research will determine whether the script can be shortened without loss of impact. • If further tests continue to show that the cheap talk script helps remove bias at all but insignificant small (e.g., $1) payment amounts, but works extremely well at higher payment amounts • If additional research shows that the script can be shortened in length without loss of effect, it would not appropriate to delay its application to dichotomous choice contingent valuation.

  7. Conclusion • The script worked well whether the vote was open or secret at higher payment levels, but inadequately corrected the bias at a lower payment level

  8. Group members • Mr. Pornpoj Roger Sangsuchat • Ms. Saranporn Rungreangsri • Ms. Tanyathon Phetmanee

More Related