Chapter 81 Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods

By Glenn W. Harrison, E Elisabet Rutström. 2008

369 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5ce8559d7851eee2456122e807482bc805497fbc

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

1. John M. Rose
2. Michiel C. J. Bliemer
3. Emily Lancsar
4. S. B. Olsen
5. Milad Haghani
6. Harmen Oppewal
7. Alvaro Sandroni
8. J. Ladenburg

In General Decision Sciences

1. Michiel C. J. Bliemer
2. John M. Rose
3. S. B. Olsen
4. Emily Lancsar
5. Milad Haghani
6. Harmen Oppewal
7. J. Ladenburg
8. Magnus Johannesson

In Safety Research

1. Sean Gailmard
2. J. Ladenburg
3. Emily Lancsar
4. John M. Rose
5. Magnus Johannesson
6. Alvaro Sandroni
7. Jonas Schmidt
8. Harmen Oppewal

Citations in the corpus

• Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment (2008, neutral): “reviews by Harrison and Rutstrom (2005) and Harrison (forthcoming)).”
• Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias (2019, methodology): “^ This hypothetical bias provides a measure of the hypothetical method’s accuracy (Harrison and Rutström 2008).”
• Moral Bias in Large Elections: Theory and Experimental Evidence (2009, background): ““Hypothetical bias” occurs when these elicited values are greater than values that individuals would reveal in nonhypothetical situations (Cummings, Harrison, and Rutström 1995; Harrison and Rutström 2008).”
• Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods (2021, result): “Similar promising findings were reported for other CV methods (Blumenschein et al., 2007; Harrison and Rutström, 2008), including referendums (Morrison and Brown, 2009), dichotomous choice experiments (Brouwer, 2011; Vossler et al., 2003) and auctions (Furno et al., 2019).”
• Preference Elicitation under Oath (2010, neutral): “…cedex 1. joule-rv@up.univ-aix.fr ‡GREQAM-CNRS, Centre de la Vieille Charité, 13236 Marseille Cedex 02. stephane.luchini@univmed.fr §Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071-3985, United States; and Department of Economics, Umeå University, S 901 87 Umeå, Sweden.”