Abstract
We extend the contingent valuation (CV) method to test three differing conceptions of individuals' preferences as either (i) a-priori well-formed or readily divined and revealed through a single dichotomous choice question (as per the NOAA CV guidelines [K. Arrow, R. Solow, P.R. Portney, E.E. Learner, R. Radner, H. Schuman, Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation, Fed. Reg. 58 (1993) 4601-4614]); (ii) learned or 'discovered' through a process of repetition and experience [J.A. List, Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? Q. J. Econ. (2003) 41-72; C.R. Plott, Rational individual behaviour in markets and social choice processes: the discovered preference hypothesis, in: K. Arrow, E. Colombatto, M. Perleman, C. Schmidt (Eds.), Rational Foundations of Economic Behaviour, Macmillan, London, St. Martin's, New York, 1996, pp. 225-250]; (iii) internally coherent but strongly influenced by some initial arbitrary anchor [D. Ariely, G. Loewenstein, D. Prelec, 'Coherent arbitrariness': stable demand curves without stable preferences, Q. J. Econ. 118(l) (2003) 73-105]. Findings reject both the first and last of these conceptions in favour of a model in which preferences converge towards standard expectations through a process of repetition and learning. In doing so, we show that such a 'learning design CV method overturns the 'stylised facts' of bias and anchoring within the double bound dichotomous choice elicitation format. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 127-141 |
Number of pages | 15 |
Journal | Journal of Environmental Economics and Management |
Volume | 55 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Nov 2008 |
Bibliographical note
Commissioning Body / Publisher: Journal of Environmental Economics and ManagementPagination / Size: 36
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics and Econometrics
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law