A game of two halves? Incentive incompatibility, starting point bias and the bidding game contingent valuation method

Paul McNamee, Laura Ternent, Adjima Gbangou and David Newlands

Health Economics, 2010, vol. 19, issue 1, 75-87

Abstract: The bidding game (BG) method of contingent valuation is one way to increase the precision of willingness to pay (WTP) estimates relative to the single dichotomous choice approach. However, there is evidence that the method may lead to incentive incompatible responses and be associated with starting point bias. While previous studies in health using BGs test for starting point bias, none have also investigated incentive incompatibility. Using a sample of respondents resident in Burkina Faso, West Africa, this paper examines whether the BG method is associated with both incentive incompatibility and starting point bias. We find evidence for both effects. However, average WTP values remained largely unaffected after accounting for both factors in multivariate analyses. The results suggest that the BG method is an acceptable technique in settings where prices for goods are flexible. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1448

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:19:y:2010:i:1:p:75-87

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics is currently edited by Alan Maynard, John Hutton and Andrew Jones

More articles in Health Economics from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().