You are here: Home
/ Publication Information
Title: A comparison of approaches to mitigate hypothetical bias
Author: Champ, Patricia A.; Moore, Rebecca; Bishop, Richard C.;
Source: Agricultural and Resource Economics Review. 38(2): 166-180.
Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
Description: We compare two approaches to mitigating hypothetical bias. The study design includes three treatments: an actual payment treatment, a contingent valuation (CV) treatment with a followup certainty question, and a CV treatment with a cheap talk script. Our results suggest that both the follow-up certainty treatment and the cheap talk treatment produce willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates consistent with the actual payment treatment. However, the follow-up certainty treatment provides response distributions at all offer amounts that are statistically similar to the actual payment treatment, while the cheap talk treatment provides similar responses only at some offer amounts. Furthermore, the cheap talk treatment is effective only for inexperienced individuals. We conclude that the follow-up certainty approach is more consistent than the cheap talk approach for eliminating hypothetical bias.
Keywords: contingent valuation, hypothetical bias, follow-up certainty, cheap talk, nonmarket valuation
- We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
- This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.
- You may send email to email@example.com to request a hard copy of this publication. (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
XML: View XML
Champ, Patricia A.; Moore, Rebecca; Bishop, Richard C. 2009. A comparison of approaches to mitigate hypothetical bias. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review. 38(2): 166-180.
Get the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat reader or Acrobat Reader for Windows with Search and Accessibility