Revisiting Cheap Talk with New Evidence from a Field Experiment
By Andrés Silva, R. Nayga, Benjamin L. Campbell, John L. Park. 2011
117 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7cad3f2519696db4ed6e1b2e1870aa4ab4fffcb1
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- John M. Rose
- Michiel C. J. Bliemer
- Riccardo Scarpa
- Vincenzina Caputo
- Milad Haghani
- Emily Lancsar
- Wim Verbeke
- Lynn van Wezemael
Citations in the corpus
- Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta‐Analysis (2018, background): “While its efficacy is mixed, cheap talk continues to receive considerable attention (Silva et al. 2011; Mahieu et al. 2012).”
- European consumer preferences for beef with nutrition and health claims: A multi-country investigation using discrete choice experiments (2014, background): “Previous research has shown that cheap talk effectively lowers hypothetical bias for consumers (Carlsson et al., 2005; Cummings and Taylor, 1999; Lusk, 2002; Silva et al., 2011; Tonsor and Shupp, 2011).”
- Food miles or carbon emissions? Exploring labelling preference for food transport footprint with a stated choice study (2013, methodology): “Prior to facing the choice tasks, respondents were given a cheap talk script to mitigate the hypothetical bias often observed in this type of studies (see Cummings and Taylor 1999; Lusk 2003; Silva et al. 2011) (available as supplementary material at AJARE online).”
- Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods (2021, background): “Articles studying mitigation methods of HB in experimental settings other than CE, e.g., bias mitigation experiments in CV (Lawton et al., 2019; Silva et al., 2011) or auctions (Furno et al., 2019) or referendum voting (Mozumder and Berrens, 2007), were not included.”
- Grocery Shopping Preferences during the COVID-19 Pandemic (2020, methodology): “We followed the literature and included a cheap talk script to help mitigate hypothetical bias in our results by encouraging respondents to answer honestly to the choice scenarios [26].”