Strategic response to a sequence of discrete choice questions
Jeffrey Bennett and
David Hensher ()
No 59102, 2010 Conference (54th), February 10-12, 2010, Adelaide, Australia from Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society
According to neoclassical economic theory, the only stated preference elicitation format that can feasibly be employed in field studies to which truthful response can be the dominant strategy for all respondents is a single binary choice between the status quo and one alternative. In studies where the objective is estimation of preferences for multiple attributes of a good, it is preferred (and, in some cases, necessary) based on econometric considerations, to present respondents with a sequence of choice tasks. Economic theory predicts that utility-maximising respondents may find it optimal to misrepresent their preferences in this elicitation format. In this paper, the effect on stated preferences of expanding the number of choice tasks per respondent from one to four is tested using a split sample treatment in an attribute-based survey relating to the undergrounding of overhead electricity and telecommunications wires in the Australian Capital Territory. We find evidence to suggest that presenting multiple choice tasks per respondent decreases estimates of total willingness to pay and that this effect is related to the ordering of cost levels presented over the sequence of choice tasks. Two behavioural explanations can be advanced - a weak cost minimisation strategy, which implies divergence between stated and true preferences, and a ‘good deal / bad deal’ heuristic, in which stated preferences reflect true preferences that change over the course of the sequence of choice tasks. Preferences stated in the first of a sequence of choice tasks are not significantly different from those stated in the incentive compatible single binary choice task. A key objective of future research will be to establish whether this effect becomes less prevalent as the number of attributes and alternatives per choice task are increased.
Keywords: Research; Methods/; Statistical; Methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-dcm
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
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:ags:aare10:59102
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in 2010 Conference (54th), February 10-12, 2010, Adelaide, Australia from Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().