Videos Improve Attention and Cheap Talk in Online Surveys

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 347-376
Author(s):  
Jerrod Penn ◽  
◽  
Wuyang Hu ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Online Surveys ◽  
Participant Engagement ◽  
Reducing Potential

Cheap Talk (CT) is a mainstay technique among stated preference practitioners to reduce Hypothetical Bias (HB). The usefulness of CT may be questionable in online surveys due to the limited control researchers have on participant engagement. In the context of an online choice experiment on hotels, we compare a control group of respondents who receives a CT script as a traditional passage of text versus a group who must answer an attention-check question to verify their comprehension of the script as well as another group who receives the CT script as a video and then answer the attention-check question. We find that compared to the control group, simply offering the attention-check question reduced willingness to pay (WTP), and those who answer the attention-check question correctly behaved differently to those who did not. Overall, video CT script is shown to improve attention and be more effective in reducing potential HB than a text-based script.

scholarly journals Comparing treatments to reduce hypothetical bias in choice experiments regarding organic food

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 1302-1337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adelina Gschwandtner ◽  
Michael Burton
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Organic Food ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Food Products ◽  
Choice Experiments ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Stated Preference Methods ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Hypothetical bias is one of the strongest criticisms brought to stated preference methods. We evaluate and compare the use of Cheap Talk and Honesty Priming as methods to mitigate such bias. Our study analyses the demand for organic food products in the UK, and the results reveal a core of consumers with positive willingness to pay (WTP) for organic. However, when correcting for hypothetical bias, consumers appear to be willing to pay even more for other attributes. Most importantly, the results show that implementing mechanisms to correct for hypothetical bias are efficient to reduce WTP, with Cheap Talk having a higher overall significance than Honesty Priming.

scholarly journals Improving Drinking Water Quality in South Korea: A Choice Experiment with Hypothetical Bias Treatments

Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 2569
Author(s):  
Adelina Gschwandtner ◽  
Cheul Jang ◽  
Richard McManus
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Latent Class ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Water Treatments

The objective of this present study is to use choice experiments and an extensive cost-benefit analysis (CBA) to investigate the feasibility of installing two advanced water treatments in Cheongju waterworks in South Korea. The study uses latent class attribute non-attendance models in a choice experiment setting in order to estimate the benefits of the two water treatments. Moreover, it explores strategies to mitigate potential hypothetical bias as this has been the strongest criticism brought to stated preference methods to date. Hypothetical bias is the difference between what people state in a survey they would be willing to pay and what they would actually pay in a real situation. The study employs cheap talk with a budget constraint reminder and honesty priming with the latter showing more evidence of reducing potential hypothetical bias. The lower bound of the median WTP (willingness to pay) for installing a new advanced water treatment system is approximately $2 US/month, similar to the average expenditures for bottled water per household in South Korea. These lower bounds were found using bootstrapping and simulations. The CBA shows that one of the two treatments, granular activated carbon is more robust to sensitivity analyses, making this the recommendation of the study.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Approaches to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias

2009 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 166-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia A. Champ ◽  
Rebecca Moore ◽  
Richard C. Bishop
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Contingent Valuation ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Hypothetical Bias

We compare two approaches to mitigating hypothetical bias. The study design includes three treatments: an actual payment treatment, a contingent valuation (CV) treatment with a follow-up certainty question, and a CV treatment with a cheap talk script. Our results suggest that both the follow-up certainty treatment and the cheap talk treatment produce willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates consistent with the actual payment treatment. However, the follow-up certainty treatment provides response distributions at all offer amounts that are statistically similar to the actual payment treatment, while the cheap talk treatment provides similar responses only at some offer amounts. Furthermore, the cheap talk treatment is effective only for inexperienced individuals. We conclude that the follow-up certainty approach is more consistent than the cheap talk approach for eliminating hypothetical bias.

A query theory account of a discrete choice experiment under oath

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 1133-1172
Author(s):  
Nathan P Kemper ◽  
Jennie S Popp ◽  
Rodolfo M Nayga
Keyword(s):  
Discrete Choice Experiment ◽  
Discrete Choice ◽  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Choice Experiments ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Discrete Choice Experiments ◽  
Thought Processes ◽  
Stated Preference Methods ◽  
Ex Ante

Abstract One limitation of stated-preference methods is the formation of hypothetical bias. To address this, the honesty oath has been used as an ex ante technique to reduce hypothetical bias. Our study provides a query account of the honesty oath in a discrete-choice experiment setting by using Query Theory to examine the mechanism behind the effectiveness of the honesty oath. Our results show that the honesty oath can change the content and order of queries; potentially reducing hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments. The study suggests the potential usefulness of Query Theory in examining thought processes of respondents in valuation studies.

Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments: Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Bias on the Intensive and Extensive Margins of Choice?

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Bosworth ◽  
Laura O. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Experimental Approach ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Choice Experiments ◽  
Nonmarket Valuation ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Extensive Margin ◽  
Empirical Regularities ◽  
Do So

Abstract We use an experimental approach to evaluate the effectiveness of the most commonly employed bias-mitigation tool in nonmarket valuation surveys: the cheap talk script. Our experimental design allows us to estimate treatment effects on two margins of choice separately: the decision to enter the market at all (the extensive margin) and the choices among alternatives offered (the intensive margin). The key result of this study is to show that a cheap talk script appears to affect both margins in ways distinctly different than when choices involve actual payments. Specifically, participants in hypothetical choice experiments including cheap talk are more inclined to enter the market but are also more price-sensitive as compared to when payments are real. Interestingly, the average influence of cheap talk on market participation and price-sensitiveness could result in total willingness to pay (WTP) estimates that are similar to real payment treatments since the two effects identified act in opposite directions when computing WTP. However, they may do so by inducing behavior that is distinctly different than those of consumers facing real choices. Our results highlight that future reliance on cheap talk as a bias mitigation tool requires extensive testing for empirical regularities to gain any confidence that the tool can be effective, and under what circumstances.

Non-Market Valuation: Stated Preference Methods

2011 ◽  
pp. 180-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredrik Carlsson
Keyword(s):  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Single Individual ◽  
Behavioral Aspects ◽  
Attribute Levels ◽  
Validity Tests ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Non Market Valuation

The purpose of this article is to give a detailed description of the steps involved in designing a choice experiment and analyzing the responses. It also discusses a number of behavioral aspects of stated preference surveys, with an emphasis on hypothetical bias. It briefly presents the underlying economic model that is used to analyze discrete choices. The main idea of a choice experiment is often to estimate the welfare effects of changes in attributes. The article discusses the three important parts of the design of a stated preference survey, namely, definition of attributes and attribute levels, experimental design, and survey context, behavioral aspects, and validity tests. This article discusses the incentive properties of different choice formats, then looks at the empirical evidence on hypothetical bias, and finally at methods for reducing hypothetical bias. It mentions the importance of social context where the decision maker is not one single individual.

scholarly journals Análisis de la metodología de los puntos de corte para la identificación de las respuestas “inconsistentes” en los modelos de elección discreta

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Sergio Colombo ◽  
Nick Hanley ◽  
Glenn Bush
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Selection Rule ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Rational Selection ◽  
Choice Data ◽  
Selection Rules ◽  
Experiment Method ◽  
Fitting Model

<p>In the choice experiment method respondents are typically assumed to hold a perfectly rational selection rule. However, individuals may use other selection rules when choosing the preferred alternative to simplify the choice. In this paper, we make use of the “cutoffs” model to as a way of handling the non-compensatory nature of choices. Furthermore, we extend it to allow consideration of inconsistencies in choice in stated preference choice data. We find that this allows a better fitting model to be estimated, and that it produces considerable effects on the implied willingness to pay.</p>

Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care

2009 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 894-901 ◽  
Author(s):  
Semra Özdemir ◽  
F. Reed Johnson ◽  
A. Brett Hauber
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Hypothetical Bias

scholarly journals Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. List ◽  
Paramita Sinha ◽  
Michael H. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Field Experiments ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Cheap Talk ◽  
Choice Experiments ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Hypothetical Bias ◽  
Purchase Decision ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Consumption Decisions

Abstract Critics of stated preference methods argue that hypothetical bias precludes survey techniques from providing reliable economic values for non-market goods and services, rendering estimation of the total economic benefits of public programs fruitless. This paper explores a relatively new methodology to obtain the total value of non-market goods and services—choice experiments—which conveniently provide information on the purchase decision as well as the characteristic value vector. The empirical work revolves around examining behavior in two very different field settings. In the first field study, we explore hypothetical bias in the purchase decision by eliciting contributions for a threshold public good in an actual capital campaign. To extend the analysis a level deeper, in a second field experiment we examine both the purchase decision and the marginal value vector via inspection of consumption decisions in an actual marketplace. In support of the new valuation design, both field experiments provide some evidence that hypothetical choice experiments combined with “cheap talk” can yield credible estimates of the purchase decision. Furthermore, we find no evidence of hypothetical bias when estimating marginal attribute values. Yet, we do find that the “cheap talk” component might induce internal inconsistency of subjects’ preferences in the choice experiment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document