Comparing contingent valuation and choice modeling using field and eye-tracking lab data

Jose Oviedo and Alejandro Caparrós

No 1401, Working Papers from Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC

Abstract: We compare contingent valuation and choice modeling with field and eye-tracker data. Contrary to previous research, results yield significantly different structural models. These divergences remain for modified formats that minimize visual and cognitive differences between formats. We also find divergent results concerning information processing. In choice modeling, respondents devote more time to attributes, including the bid, although total answering time does not vary. Presenting several questions with varying attribute levels works for choice modeling but not for contingent valuation. Using the attribute-stimulus format does not change contingent valuation results. Dominated alternatives increase the probability of paying in choice modeling.

Keywords: stated preferences; environmental valuation; elicitation formats; eye-tracking (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C91 Q23 Q51 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014-11
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://investigacion.cchs.csic.es/RePEc/ipp/wpaper ... p-2014-01_oviedo.pdf (application/pdf)

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:ipp:wpaper:1401

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Adelheid Holl ().