Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v98y2016i5p1486-1506..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Ex-Ante Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Methods on Attribute Non-Attendance in Choice Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammad Bello
  • Awudu Abdulai
Abstract
In this article, we use survey data from Nigeria on consumers' preferences for organic products to investigate the impact of ex-ante hypothetical bias mitigation methods (Cheap Talk and Honesty Priming) on respondents' attribute non-attendance. We employ a framework that allows us to jointly examine the response to the stated choice component and the response to the attribute processing questions, while avoiding the potential endogeneity bias and measurement error problems arising from some attribute non-attendance methods. Our results show that the incidence of attribute non-attendance varies across the treatments in general, with significant difference in attribute non-attendance rates between respondents exposed to the mitigation strategies (Honesty Priming and Cheap Talk) and the baseline group. We also find that the low willingness to pay values for the honesty priming task appear to correspond with the lowest attribute non-attendance rates reported for all the attributes (especially price) and might reflect a more realistic valuation of the attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammad Bello & Awudu Abdulai, 2016. "Impact of Ex-Ante Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Methods on Attribute Non-Attendance in Choice Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1486-1506.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:98:y:2016:i:5:p:1486-1506.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aav098
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:98:y:2016:i:5:p:1486-1506.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.