Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment

By R. Ready, P. Champ, J. L. Lawton. Land Economics, 2010

162 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.

Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods (2021, background): “In another environmental valuation context where HB in WTP estimates was observed to be significant, Ready et al. (2010) suggests that they were able to largely mitigate this bias through respondent certainty calibration.”
Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta‐Analysis (2018, background): “Some authors (e.g., Blumenschein et al. 1998; Blomquist et al. 2009; Champ et al. 2009; Ready et al. 2010), are responsible for multiple studies such that clustering on certain authors is also reasonable, but this also had no meaningful effect on the results.19”
Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys (2014, background): “On the other hand, Ready et al. (2010), Taylor et al. (2007) and Broadbent et al. (2010) find evidence of both type 2 and type 3 hypothetical bias.”