Preference Anomalies, Preference Elicitation and the Discovered Preference Hypothesis

By Jacinto Braga, C. Starmer. 2005

198 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c817bb623571dbb4e1902532f4b0db70c2e3cd0e

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 General Decision Sciences

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Choice Certainty and Consistency in Repeated Choice Experiments (2010, background): “The 'discovered preference hypothesis' (DPH) postulates that preferences may be ill-defined when respondents come to a hypothetical market, but that a set of stable intrinsic values already exists within each individual (Braga and Starmer 2005).”
Preference Uncertainty, Preference Learning, and Paired Comparison Experiments (2010, background): “In this paper we show that the increasing choice consistency observed by Brown et al. (2008) is accompanied by a significant reduction in the error variance of a random utility model fit to the paired comparison data.”
Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies (2017, background): “Behavioral anomalies are not unique to SP studies; they also occur in RP settings (Bateman et al. 1997a, 1997b; Braga and Starmer 2005; Bateman, Munro, et al. 2006; Bateman, Munro, and Poe 2008; Carson 2012).”
Learning design contingent valuation (LDCV): NOAA guidelines, preference learning and coherent arbitrariness (2008, background): “Plott notes that markets provide an ideal environment for such repetition and learning through which individuals can discover both how best to achieve goals within the operating rules of that real or hypothetical market (a process which Braga and Starmer [11] refer to as ‘institutional learning’) an”
How Much is Too Much? (2008, background): “As dicussed by Braga and Starmer (2005) if preferences are discovered, then anomalies can be expected to disappear when individuals become more experienced.”
The first time is the hardest: A test of ordering effects in choice experiments (2012, background): “Both preference learning and institutional learning suggest that one way to reduce uncertainty in SP surveys is to have respondents make repeated choices (Braga and Starmer 2005).”
Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study (2008, background): “In a literature review, Braga and Starmer [ 18 ] find some, but not unequivocal, support for the DPH.”
Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences (2011, background): “In order to assure robust results from cost-benefit analysis it is suggested to either “uncouple” cost-benefit analysis from the assumption of preference coherence (Sugden 2005)4 or incorporate “suitable controls” for the type of errors that may arise (Braga and Starmer 2005).”
Uncertainty and risk in wildland fire management: a review. (2011, background): “…with multiple, conflicting criteria, in turn limiting their ability to accurately articulate preferences (Ariely, 2009; Brown et al., 2008; Reiskamp et al., 2006; Braga and Starmer, 2005; Holmes and Boyle, 2005; Maguire and Albright, 2005; DeShazo and Fermo, 2002; Samuelson and Zeckhauser, 1988).”
Valuing cultural heritage in developing countries: comparing and pooling contingent valuation and choice modelling estimates (2007, background): “The recent literature also provides coping strategies in dealing with such anomalies, e.g., discovered preference; preference-dependent preferences; market simulation; ex ante cheap talk; ex post calibration; institutional learning; repeated experience and choice heuristics (Sugden 2005; Hanley and ”
METHODS, TRENDS AND CONTROVERSIES IN CONTEMPORARY BENEFIT TRANSFER (2009, unknown): “economics literature illustrates that different auction or preference elicitation mechanisms provide different economic incentives and elicit different behaviors (Poe et al., 2002; Braga and Starmer, 2005), and that similar behavioral anomalies manifest in both actual and hypothetical markets (Batem”
Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change (2009, background): “As Munro and Hanley (1999) highlight in their review of the issue, information plays a key role in the formation of preferences, particularly for the valuation of non-market goods where experience of the good and any hypothetical market may be low (see also Braga and Starmer, 2005). However, as Gree”
A parameter-free analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theory (2009, methodology): “…real incentives were implemented using the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak procedure (Becker, DeGroot, & Marschak, 1964), which has been shown to be prone to strategic behaviour by subjects (Braga & Starmer, 2005), and is fairly complex and not easy to understand (Halevy, 2007; Plott & Zeiler, 2005).”
What’s in a name? The use of quantitative measures versus ‘Iconised’ species when valuing biodiversity (2008, background): “Or if the structure instead inspires them to construct and express preferences, which they realise fit the purpose and form of the questionnaire, but preferences they do not truly hold (as discussed in general terms for stated preference studies in Braga and Starmer 2005; Knetsch 2005).”
Valuation Techniques for Social Cost-Benefit Analysis: (2011, background): “There are a number of studies that report reductions in the effects of arbitrary anchors and in the number of preference reversals as people become familiar with the good and the institutional payment arrangements in a contingent valuation context (Bateman et al., 2006; Braga and Starmer, 2005)7.”
Feelings and Consumer Decision Making: The Appraisal-Tendency Framework (2007, background): “To be sure, studies have attenuated and even eliminated the endowment effect (e.g., Braga & Starmer, 2005; Lerner, Small, & Loewenstein, 2004; Loewenstein & Issacharoff, 1994)—which may, on the surface, appear to be a close cousin of the status quo effect.”