A criterion validity test of the contingent valuation method: comparing hypothetical and actual voting behavior for a public referendum

By Christian A. Vossler, Joe R. Kerkvliet. 2003

163 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Ocean Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b1fc7f19fa0a4c5dea1b20d7de06dd37c86d9810

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 Ocean Engineering

Citations in the corpus

How Closely Do Hypothetical Surveys and Laboratory Experiments Predict Field Behavior (2009, background): “A few studies have compared hypothetical contingent valuation survey responses to real field public referenda (e.g., Johnston 2006; Vossler and Kerkvliet 2003; Vossler et al. 2003).”
What's to Know About Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation Studies? (2011, unknown): “These hypotheses have been put forward to help explain the usual (but not universal, see – Carson et al., 1996; Vossler and Kerkvliet, 2003) finding of an overstatement of hypothetical WTP relative to respondents actual WTP (List and Gallet, 2001; Murphy et al.”
As You Sow, So Shall You Reap: The Welfare Impacts of Contract Farming (2012, background): “In this context, as in Vossler and Kerkvliet (2003), WTP is not constrained to be nonnegative.”
Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies (2017, background): “…and it is unclear how extant experimental payments compare to a “true” (or criterion) value.75 Moreover, research using actual voting behavior as the criterion for comparison suggests that hypothetical bias is not universal (Vossler and Kerkvliet 2003; Johnston 2006; Vossler and Watson 2013).”
2013WAEA Keynote Address: Strategies for Overcoming Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Surveys (2014, background): “A study by Vossler and Kerkvliet (2003) was one of the first to find similarity between an actual referendum (in Oregon) and a CVM study.”
Understanding the consequences of consequentiality: Testing the validity of stated preferences in the field (2012, result): “Evidence from previous studies based on public referenda is somewhat positive, providing unconditional support of external validity (Vossler and Kerkvliet, 2003; Johnston, 1 To maintain parallelism with the referendum, our SP survey necessarily provides a limited amount of information regarding the…”
Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Data to Estimate the Nonmarket Value of Ecological Services: An Assessment of the State of the Science (2008, unknown): “On the other hand, studies that compare willingness to pay from hypothetical and actual referendum votes have mixed results regarding convergent validity (Vossler and Kerkvliet, 2003; Schläpfer, Roschewitz and Hanley, 2004).”
Explaining Disparities between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values: Further Investigation Using Meta-Analysis (2004, background): “Haab, Huang, and Whitehead (1999), Taylor et al. (2001), and Vossler and Kerkvliet (2002) failed to find a significant disparity between”