Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

create a website
Wider die Zahlengläubigkeit: Sind Befragungsergebnisse eine gute Grundlage für wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen?. (2018). Schimmelpfennig, Robin ; Fehr-Duda, Helga.
In: ECON - Working Papers.
RePEc:zur:econwp:297.

Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Cited: 0

Citations received by this document

Cites: 50

References cited by this document

Cocites: 26

Documents which have cited the same bibliography

Coauthors: 0

Authors who have wrote about the same topic

Citations

Citations received by this document

    This document has not been cited yet.

References

References cited by this document

  1. Ariely, D., and M. I. Norton (2008): “How actions create–not just reveal–preferences,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(1), 13–16.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  2. Barrage, L., and M. S. Lee (2010): “A penny for your thoughts: Inducing truth-telling in stated preference elicitation,” Economics Letters, 106(2), 140–142.

  3. Ben-Akiva, M., M. Bradley, T. Morikawa, J. Benjamin, T. Novak, H. Oppewal, and V. & Rao (1994): “Combining revealed and stated preferences data,” Marketing Letters, 5(4), 335–349.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  4. Botzen, W. W., and J. C. van den Bergh (2012): “Risk attitudes to low-probability climate change risks: WTP for flood insurance,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(1), 151–166.

  5. Brownstone, D., and K. A. Small (2005): “Valuing time and reliability: assessing the evidence from road pricing demonstrations,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(4), 279–293.

  6. Carlsson, F. (2010): “Design of stated preference surveys: Is there more to learn from behavioral economics?,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 46(2), 167–177.

  7. Carson, R. T., and R. C. Mitchell (1989): “Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method,” Resources for the Future, Washington DC, 82.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  8. Carson, R. T., and T. Groves (2007): “Incentive and informational properties of preference questions,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 37(1), 181–210.

  9. Carson, R. T., R. C. Mitchell, M. Hanemann, R. J. Kopp, S. Presser, and P. A. Ruud (2003): “Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 25(3), 257–286.

  10. Champ, P. A., R. Moore, and R. C. Bishop (2009): “A comparison of approaches to mitigate hypothetical bias,” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 38(2), 166– 180.

  11. Cummings, R. G., and L. O. Taylor (1999): “Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method,” American Economic Review, 89(3), 649–665.

  12. Dannenberg, A., S. Scatasta, and B. Sturm (2009): “Keine Chance für genetisch veränderte Lebensmittel in Deutschland? Eine experimentelle Analyse von Zahlungsbereitschaften, ” Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, 10(2), 214–234.

  13. Davies, S., and J. Loomis (2010): “An improved method for calibrating purchase intentions in stated preference demand models,” Journal of Agricultural & Applied Economics, 42(4), 679.

  14. Diamond, P. A., and J. A. Hausman (1994): “Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number?,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4), 45–64.

  15. Fehr, G., L. Geisseler, M. Jäger, and E. Günther (2016): “Der Mensch im Verkehr: ein Homo Oeconomicus?,” https://fehradvice.com/mobilitaet/.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  16. Fox, J. A., J. F. Shogren, D. J. Hayes, and J. B. Kliebenstein (1998): “CVM-X: calibrating contingent values with experimental auction markets,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(3), 455–465.

  17. Haab, T. C., M. G. Interis, D. R. Petrolia, and J. C. Whitehead (2013): “From hopeless to curious? Thoughts on Hausman’s “dubious to hopeless” critique of contingent valuation,” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 35(4), 593–612.

  18. Habib, K. N., A. Sasic, C. Weis, and K. & Axhausen (2013): “Investigating the nonlinear relationship between transportation system performance and daily activity–travel scheduling behaviour,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 49, 342– 357.

  19. Hammack, J., and G. M. Brown (1974): Waterfowl and wetlands: Toward bioeconomic analysis. Resources for the Future, Washington D.C.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  20. Harrison, G. W., and E. E. Rutström (2008): “Experimental evidence on the existence of hypothetical bias in value elicitation methods,” Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, 1, 752–767.

  21. Hausman, J. (2012): “Contingent valuation: from dubious to hopeless,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(4), 43–56.

  22. Hensher, D. A. (2010): “Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 44(6), 735–752.

  23. Hensher, D. A. (2015): “Data challenges: more behavioural and (relatively) less statistical –a think piece,” Transportation Research Procedia, 11, 19–31.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  24. John, L. K., G. Loewenstein, A. Acquisiti, and J. Vosgerau (2016): When and why randomized response techniques (fail to) elicit the truth. Harvard Business School.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  25. Kahneman, D. (2012): Schnelles Denken, langsames Denken. Siedler Verlag.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  26. Kling, C. L., D. J. Phaneuf, and J. Zhao (2012): “From Exxon to BP: Has some number become better than no number?,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(4), 3–26.

  27. Kroes, E. P., and R. J. Sheldon (1988): “Stated preference methods: an introduction,” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, pp. 11–25.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  28. Krutilla, J. V. (1967): “Conservation reconsidered,” The American Economic Review, 57(4), 777–786.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  29. Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J., J. J. Hox, P. G. Van der Heijden, and C. J. Maas (2005): “Meta-analysis of randomized response research: Thirty-five years of validation,” Sociological Methods & Research, 33(3), 319–348.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  30. List, J. A., and C. A. Gallet (2001): “What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values?,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 20(3), 241–254.

  31. List, J. A., and J. F. Shogren (1998): “Calibration of the difference between actual and hypothetical valuations in a field experiment,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 37(2), 193–205.

  32. Little, J., R. Berrens, et al. (2004): “Explaining disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values: further investigation using meta-analysis,” Economics Bulletin, 3(6), 1–13.

  33. Louviere, J. J. (2006): “What you don’t know might hurt you: some unresolved issues in the design and analysis of discrete choice experiments,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 34(1), 173–188.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  34. Louviere, J. J., T. N. Flynn, and R. T. Carson (2010): “Discrete choice experiments are not conjoint analysis,” Journal of Choice Modelling, 3(3), 57–72.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  35. Lusk, J. L., and F. B. Norwood (2009): “An inferred valuation method,” Land Economics, 85(3), 500–514.

  36. Lusk, J. L., and T. C. Schroeder (2004): “Are choice experiments incentive compatible ? A test with quality differentiated beef steaks,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86(2), 467–482.

  37. Manski, C. F., and D. McFadden (1981): Structural analysis of discrete data with econometric applications. MIT Press Cambridge, MA.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  38. Morwitz, V. G., J. H. Steckel, and A. Gupta (2007): “When do purchase intentions predict sales?,” International Journal of Forecasting, 23(3), 347–364.

  39. Murphy, J. J., P. G. Allen, T. H. Stevens, and D. Weatherhead (2005): “A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 30(3), 313–325.

  40. Portney, P. R. (1994): “The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4), 3–17.

  41. Prelec, D. (2004): “A Bayesian truth serum for subjective data,” Science, 306(5695), 462– 466.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  42. Rakotonarivo, O. S., M. Schaafsma, and N. Hockley (2016): “A systematic review of the reliability and validity of discrete choice experiments in valuing non-market environmental goods,” Journal of Environmental Management, 183, 98–109.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  43. Sichtmann, C., R. Wilken, and A. Diamantopoulos (2011): “Estimating Willingnessto -pay with Choice-based Conjoint Analysis–Can Consumer Characteristics Explain Variations in Accuracy?,” British Journal of Management, 22(4), 628–645.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  44. Tinch, D., S. Colombo, and N. Hanley (2015): “The impacts of elicitation context on stated preferences for agricultural landscapes,” Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(1), 87–107.

  45. Vossler, C. A., and M. F. Evans (2009): “Bridging the gap between the field and the lab: Environmental goods, policy maker input, and consequentiality,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 58(3), 338–345.

  46. Vossler, C. A., M. Doyon, and D. Rondeau (2012): “Truth in consequentiality: theory and field evidence on discrete choice experiments,” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 4(4), 145–71.

  47. Vrtic, M. (2005): “Ein hierarchisches („Nested “) Logit-Modell für die Analyse kombinierter Stated-und Revealed-Preference-Daten zur Verkehrsmittelwahl,” Deutsche Verkehrswissenschaftliche Gesellschaft e. V.(Hrsg.), 12.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  48. Weaver, R., and D. Prelec (2013): “Creating truth-telling incentives with the Bayesian truth serum,” Journal of Marketing Research, 50(3), 289–302.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  49. Weis, C., and K. W. Axhausen (2012): “Assessing Changes in Travel Behavior Induced by Modified Travel Times: A Stated Adaptation Survey and Modeling Approach,” disPThe Planning Review, 48(3), 40–53.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  50. Whitehead, J. C., S. K. Pattanayak, G. L. Van Houtven, and B. R. Gelso (2008): “Combining revealed and stated preference data to estimate the nonmarket value of ecological services: an assessment of the state of the science,” Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(5), 872–908.

Cocites

Documents in RePEc which have cited the same bibliography

  1. Incentivizing stated preference elicitation with choice-matching in the field. (2022). Krawczyk, Micha ; Zawojska, Ewa.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:war:wpaper:2022-04.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  2. The relative performance of ex?ante and ex?post measures to mitigate hypothetical and strategic bias in a stated preference study. (2022). Czajkowski, Mikolaj ; Budziski, Wiktor ; Colombo, Sergio ; Glenk, Klaus.
    In: Journal of Agricultural Economics.
    RePEc:bla:jageco:v:73:y:2022:i:3:p:845-873.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  3. Downward Hypothetical Bias in the Willingness to Accept Measure for Private Goods: Evidence from a Field Experiment. (2021). Liu, Pengfei ; Tian, Xiaohui.
    In: American Journal of Agricultural Economics.
    RePEc:wly:ajagec:v:103:y:2021:i:5:p:1679-1699.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  4. Digital piracy and the perception of price fairness: evidence from a field experiment. (2021). Tyrowicz, Joanna ; Krawczyk, Micha ; Kukla-Gryz, Anna.
    In: Journal of Cultural Economics.
    RePEc:kap:jculte:v:45:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10824-020-09390-4.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  5. Past and present outage costs – A follow-up study of households’ willingness to pay to avoid power outages. (2021). Martinsson, Peter ; Lampi, Elina ; Kataria, Mitesh ; Carlsson, Fredrik.
    In: Resource and Energy Economics.
    RePEc:eee:resene:v:64:y:2021:i:c:s0928765521000014.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  6. Experimental methods: Eliciting beliefs. (2021). gneezy, uri ; Charness, Gary ; Rasocha, Vlastimil.
    In: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization.
    RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:189:y:2021:i:c:p:234-256.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  7. Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods. (2021). Oppewal, Harmen ; Bliemer, Michiel ; Haghani, Milad ; Lancsar, Emily ; Rose, John M.
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:41:y:2021:i:c:s1755534521000555.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  8. Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods. (2021). Oppewal, Harmen ; Lancsar, Emily ; Haghani, Milad ; Rose, John M.
    In: Papers.
    RePEc:arx:papers:2102.02945.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  9. Hypothetical bias remains at the heart of controversy about the reliability and validity of value estimates from discrete choice experiments (DCEs). This especially applies to environmental valuation,. (2020). Czajkowski, Mikolaj ; Glenk, Klaus ; Budziski, Wiktor ; Colombo, Sergio .
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:war:wpaper:2020-20.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  10. Unraveling hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments. (2020). Raffaelli, Roberta ; Menapace, Luisa.
    In: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization.
    RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:176:y:2020:i:c:p:416-430.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  11. Digital piracy and the perception of price fairness. Evidence from a field experiment. (2019). Tyrowicz, Joanna ; Kukla-Gryz, Anna ; Krawczyk, Michal.
    In: GRAPE Working Papers.
    RePEc:fme:wpaper:39.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  12. Cheap talk efficacy under potential and actual Hypothetical Bias: A meta-analysis. (2019). Hu, Wuyang ; Penn, Jerrod.
    In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.
    RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:96:y:2019:i:c:p:22-35.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  13. Capitalizing on the (false) consensus effect: Two tractable methods to elicit private information. (2019). Schmidt, Robert J.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:awi:wpaper:0669.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  14. Wider die Zahlengläubigkeit: Sind Befragungsergebnisse eine gute Grundlage für wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen?. (2018). Schimmelpfennig, Robin ; Fehr-Duda, Helga.
    In: ECON - Working Papers.
    RePEc:zur:econwp:297.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  15. How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity. (2018). Quaife, Matthew ; Vickerman, Peter ; di Tanna, Gian Luca ; Terris-Prestholt, Fern.
    In: The European Journal of Health Economics.
    RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:19:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1007_s10198-018-0954-6.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  16. Hypothetical bias and decision-rule effect in modelling discrete directional choices. (2018). Haghani, Milad ; Sarvi, Majid.
    In: Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.
    RePEc:eee:transa:v:116:y:2018:i:c:p:361-388.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  17. Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products. (2017). Olsen, Søren ; Alemu, Mohammed Hussen.
    In: IFRO Working Paper.
    RePEc:foi:wpaper:2017_05.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  18. Rewarding truthful-telling in stated preference studies. (2016). Zawojska, Ewa ; Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre ; Crastes, Romain ; Louviere, Jordan.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:war:wpaper:2016-33.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  19. Making the Most of Cheap Talk in an Online Survey. (2016). Hu, Wuyang ; Penn, Jerrod.
    In: 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts.
    RePEc:ags:aaea16:236171.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  20. Digital piracy and the perception of price fairness. (2015). Tyrowicz, Joanna ; Krawczyk, Michal ; Kukla-Gryz, Anna.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:war:wpaper:2015-24.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  21. We all do it, but are we willing to admit? Incentivizing digital pirates confessions. (2015). Tyrowicz, Joanna ; Krawczyk, Michal ; Kukla-Gryz, Anna.
    In: Applied Economics Letters.
    RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:22:y:2015:i:3:p:184-188.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  22. We all do it, but are we willing to admit? Incentivizing digital pirates confessions. (2014). Tyrowicz, Joanna ; Krawczyk, Michal ; Kukla-Gryz, Anna ; Siwiski, Konrad .
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:war:wpaper:2014-10.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  23. Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys. (2014). Olsen, Søren ; Ladenburg, Jacob.
    In: Resource and Energy Economics.
    RePEc:eee:resene:v:37:y:2014:i:c:p:39-63.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  24. Testing the single opt-out reminder in choice experiments: An application to fuel break management in Spain. (2014). Soliño, Mario ; Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre ; Giergiczny, Marek ; Varela, Elsa ; Riera, Pere ; Solio, Mario.
    In: Journal of Forest Economics.
    RePEc:eee:foreco:v:20:y:2014:i:3:p:212-222.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  25. Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments: Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Bias on the Intensive and Extensive Margins of Choice?. (2012). Taylor, Laura ; Ryan, Bosworth ; Taylor Laura O., .
    In: The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy.
    RePEc:bpj:bejeap:v:12:y:2012:i:1:p:1-28:n:56.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  26. Testing the Effect of a Short Cheap Talk Script in Choice Experiments. (2010). Ladenburg, Jacob ; Dahlgaard, Jens Olav ; Bonnichsen, Ole .
    In: IFRO Working Paper.
    RePEc:foi:wpaper:2010_11.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Coauthors

Authors registered in RePEc who have wrote about the same topic

Report date: 2025-01-27 20:07:22 || Missing content? Let us know

CitEc is a RePEc service, providing citation data for Economics since 2001. Sponsored by INOMICS. Last updated October, 6 2023. Contact: CitEc Team.