Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias

By P. Champ, R. Bishop. 2001

419 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8971879ef617a6250586a1d7a4006d6d29c3091b

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

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Eliciting Willingness to Pay without Bias using Follow-up Certainty Statements: Comparisons between Probably/Definitely and a 10-point Certainty Scale (2009, neutral): “Champ and Bishop (2001) have several variables that measure attitudes towards the environment.”
Get Real! Individuals Prefer More Sustainable Investments (2018, neutral): “2 The experimental design 2010), certainty of choices (Champ et al., 1997; Ethier et al., 2000; Champ and Bishop, 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,…”
Contingent Valuation, Hypothetical Bias, and Experimental Economics (2004, methodology): “Similar to Champ and Bishop (2001), models YES10, YES910, and YES810 convert “yes” responses to “no” if the level of certainty is 10, 9, and 8, respectively.”
Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan (2015, methodology): “…these studies have analyzed consumer WTP for renewable energy using contingent valuation (CV) methods, which is a method often used to estimate the economic value of non-market goods and services (e.g., Champ and Bishop, 2001; Whitehead and Cherry, 2007; Hite et al., 2008; Mozumder et al., 2011).”
Willingness to pay for a Green Energy program: A comparison of ex-ante and ex-post hypothetical bias mitigation approaches (2007, positive): “Champ and Bishop (2001) estimate the benefits of a voluntary wind energy program from the Madison Gas and Electric Company. The average annual hypothetical willingness to pay for wind power is $101 and actual willingness to pay is $59 (pre-2001 dollars). As described above, the hypothetical willingn”
Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods (2021, background): “This approach is based on follow-up questions that measure respondent certainty about their choices or stated WTP values on a numerical scale (Champ and Bishop, 2001; Champ et al., 1997; Ethier et al., 2000; Johannesson et al., 1999; Poe et al., 2002) or categorical scale (e.g., “fairly sure”,…”
Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies (2017, background): “…(c) whether respondents are willing to take an oath of honesty, and (d) respondents’ environmental beliefs or attitudes (Champ et al. 1997; Champ and Bishop 2001; Blumenschein et al. 2008; Blomquist, Blumenschein, and Johannesson 2009; Herriges et al. 2010; Ready, Champ, and Lawton…”
Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment (2010, background): “Johansson-Stenman and Svedsäter (2007) essentially repeated Carlsson and Martinsson’s experiment (with different money amounts and programs) but used a split-sample design with a realonly treatment and a hypothetical then real treatment.”
The internalization of externalities in the production of electricity: Willingness to pay for the attributes of a policy for renewable energy (2008, neutral): “Champ and Bishop (2001) use a mail questionnaire to elicit the WTP of 1,497 residents of Wisconsin for a voluntary pilot program to allow residents to purchase wind-generated electricity.”
Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment (2008, neutral): “(2000), Champ and Bishop (2001), Poe et al.”