Preference heterogeneity in experiments: Comparing the field and lab

By Steffen Andersen, Glenn W. Harrison, Morten I. Lau, E Elisabet Rutström. 2004

124 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/67cb3d2b6570469a17e942192c7adda5ff5b1bfd

How researchers see this paper

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

1. Arnaud Reynaud
2. Stéphane Couture
3. Garth Heutel
4. Baran Doda
5. C. Fischer
6. J. Schleich

Citations in the corpus

• Stability of risk preference measures: results from a field experiment on French farmers (2012, background): “Working on a representative sample of the Danish population, Andersen et al. (2010) find for instance that the mean CRRA coefficient in the field sample is 0.63 (with a 95% confidence interval between -0.49 and 1.87), while the mean coefficient is 0.79 in the laboratory sample (with a 95%…”
• Prospect theory and energy efficiency (2019, background): “Alternatively, a survey could focus solely on individuals who are considering buying a new appliance or car, for example (Andersen et al. 2010).”