Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments
Maurice Doyon and
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 2012, vol. 4, issue 4, 145-71
This paper explores methodological issues surrounding the use of discrete choice experiments to elicit values for public goods. We develop an explicit game theoretic model of individual decisions, providing conditions under which surveys with a single binary choice question, or sequence of binary choice questions, are incentive-compatible. We complement the theory with a framed field experiment, with treatments that span the spectrum from incentive-compatible, financially binding decisions to decisions with no direct financial consequences. The results suggest truthful preference revelation is possible, provided that participants view their decisions as having more than a weak chance of influencing policy. (JEL C83, C93, H41, Q23)
JEL-codes: C83 C93 H41 Q23 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Note: DOI: 10.1257/mic.4.4.145
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations View citations in EconPapers (94) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
Working Paper: Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments (2010)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:aejmic:v:4:y:2012:i:4:p:145-71
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics is currently edited by Johannes Hörner
More articles in American Economic Journal: Microeconomics from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael P. Albert ().