On the Use of Honesty Priming Tasks to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments

155 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta‐Analysis (2018, methodology): “This enables us to incorporate more studies into the sample that did not specifically provide WTP, but did report proportions of responses that indicated yes to the valuation question from dichotomous choice or referenda elicitations, such as Landry and List (2007) and Ehmke et al. (2008). Using thi”
Get Real! Individuals Prefer More Sustainable Investments (2018, unknown): “…2001), trust (Terlau and Hirsch, 2015), the perceived effectiveness of one’s own choice (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002; Fowler III and Close, 2012; Salomon et al., 2017; Berger and Corbin, 1992), the seriousness of the task (De-Magistris et al., 2013), or whether people feel responsible (Blake, 1999).”
Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods (2021, background): “A pioneering application of honesty priming in CEs is reported in the study of De-Magistris et al. (2013).”