Research ArticleArticles

Information Videos Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in Discrete Choice Experiments

Wen Lin, Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr., David L. Ortega and Weibin Hu
Land Economics, October 2025, 101 (4) 463-481; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/le.101.4.072424-0065R1

References

  1. ↵
    1. Agossadou, M. A. J., and
    2. R. M. Nayga Jr.
    2023. “Information Effects in Discrete Choice Experiments: Does Type of Delivery Matter for Valuation Estimates and Attribute Nonattendance?” Journal of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association 2 (1): 51–66.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Andreoni, J.
    1995. “Warm-Glow versus Cold-Prickle: The Effects of Positive and Negative Framing on Cooperation in Experiments.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 110 (1): 1–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    1. Arentze, T.,
    2. A. Borgers,
    3. H. Timmermans, and
    4. R. DelMistro
    . 2003. “Transport Stated Choice Responses: Effects of Task Complexity, Presentation Format and Literacy.” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 39 (3): 229–44.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Bahety, G.,
    2. S. Bauhoff,
    3. D. Patel, and
    4. J. Potter
    . 2021. “Texts Don’t Nudge: An Adaptive Trial to Prevent the Spread of COVID-19 in India.” Journal of Development Economics 153: 102747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102747.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Balew, S.,
    2. E. Bulte,
    3. Z. Abro, and
    4. M. Kassie
    . 2023. “Incentivizing and Nudging Farmers to Spread Information: Experimental Evidence from Ethiopia.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 105 (3): 994–1010.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Ball, S.,
    2. B. Katz,
    3. F. Li, and
    4. A. Smith
    . 2023. “The Effect of Cognitive Load on Economic Decision-Making: A Replication Attempt.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 210: 226–42.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Banerjee, A.,
    2. M. Alsan,
    3. E. Breza,
    4. A. G. Chandrasekhar,
    5. A. Chowdhury,
    6. E. Duflo, E.,
    7. P. Goldsmith-Pinkham, and
    8. B. A. Olken
    . 2020. “Messages on COVID-19 Prevention in India Increased Symptoms Reporting and Adherence to Preventive Behaviors Among 25 Million Recipients with Similar Effects on Non-Recipient Members of Their Communities.” Working Paper 27496. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
  8. ↵
    1. Bartling, B., and
    2. N. Netzer
    . 2016. “An Externality-Robust Auction: Theory and Experimental Evidence.” Games and Economic Behavior 97: 186–204.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Bateman, I. J.,
    2. B. H. Day,
    3. A. P. Jones, and
    4. S. Jude
    . 2009. “Reducing Gain-Loss Asymmetry: A Virtual Reality Choice Experiment Valuing Land Use Change.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58 (1): 106–18.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  10. ↵
    1. Boissiere, M.,
    2. J. B. Knight, and
    3. R. H. Sabot
    . 1985. “Earnings, Schooling, Ability, and Cognitive Skills.” American Economic Review 75 (5): 1016–30.
    OpenUrlWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    1. Caputo, V., and
    2. R. Scarpa
    . 2022. “Methodological Advances in Food Choice Experiments and Modeling: Current Practices, Challenges, and Future Research Directions.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 14: 63–90.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Carlson, R.,
    2. P. Chandler, and
    3. J. Sweller
    . 2003. “Learning and Understanding Science Instructional Material.” Journal of Educational Psychology 95 (3): 629–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    1. Carlsson, F.,
    2. P. Frykblom, and
    3. C. J. Lagerkvist
    . 2005. “Using Cheap Talk as a Test of Validity in Choice Experiments.” Economics Letters 89 (2): 147–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  14. ↵
    1. Carson, R. T.,
    2. T. Groves, and
    3. J. A. List
    . 2014. “Consequentiality: A Theoretical and Experimental Exploration of a Single Binary Choice.” Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 1 (1–2): 171–207.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Castro-Alonso, J. C.,
    2. P. Ayres, and
    3. J. Sweller
    . 2019. “Instructional Visualizations, Cognitive Load Theory, and Visuospatial Processing.” In Visuospatial Processing for Education in Health and Natural Sciences, edited by J. C. Castro-Alonso, 111–43. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
  16. ↵
    1. Crippa, M.,
    2. E. Solazzo,
    3. D. Guizzardi,
    4. F. Monforti-Ferrario,
    5. F. N. Tubiello, and
    6. A. J. N. F. Leip
    . 2021. “Food Systems Are Responsible for a Third of Global Anthropogenic GHG Emissions.” Nature Food 2 (3): 198–209.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Cummings, R. G., and
    2. L. O. Taylor
    . 1999. “Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method.” American Economic Review 89 (3): 649–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Dahlstrom, M. F.
    2014. “Using Narratives and Storytelling to Communicate Science with Nonexpert Audiences.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (4): 13614–20.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. de Bekker-Grob, E. W.,
    2. B. Donkers,
    3. M. F. Jonker, and
    4. E. A. Stolk
    . 2015. “Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: A Practical Guide.” Patient—Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 8: 373–84.
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. De-Magistris, T.,
    2. A. Gracia, and
    3. R. M. Nayga Jr.
    2013. “On the Use of Honesty Priming Tasks to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 95 (5): 1136–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. ↵
    1. Depositario, D. P. T.,
    2. R. M. Nayga Jr.,
    3. X. Wu, and
    4. T. P. Laude
    . 2009. “Should Students Be Used as Subjects in Experimental Auctions?” Economics Letters 102 (2): 122–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  22. ↵
    1. DeShazo, J. R., and
    2. G. Fermo
    . 2002. “Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44 (1): 123–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    1. Dohmen, T.,
    2. A. Falk,
    3. D. Huffman, and
    4. U. Sunde
    . 2010. “Are Risk Aversion and Impatience Related to Cognitive Ability?” American Economic Review 100 (3): 1238–60.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. ↵
    1. Entem, A.,
    2. P. Lloyd‐Smith,
    3. W. V. L. Adamowicz, and
    4. P. C. Boxall
    . 2022. “Using Inferred Valuation to Quantify Survey and Social Desirability Bias in Stated Preference Research.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 104 (4): 1224–42.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Fang, D.,
    2. R. M. Nayga Jr.,
    3. G. H. West,
    4. C. Bazzani,
    5. W. Yang,
    6. B. C. Lok,
    7. C. E. Levy, and
    8. H. A. Snell
    . 2021. “On the Use of Virtual Reality in Mitigating Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 103 (1): 142–61.
    OpenUrl
  26. ↵
    1. Fiebig, D. G.,
    2. M. P. Keane,
    3. J. Louviere, and
    4. N. Wasi
    . 2010. “The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity.” Marketing Science 29 (3): 393–421.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    1. Grebitus, C.,
    2. B. Steiner, and
    3. M. M. Veeman
    . 2016. “Paying for Sustainability: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Consumers’ Valuations of Food and Non-Food Products Labeled for Carbon and Water Footprints.” Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 63: 50–58.
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Hallsworth, M.,
    2. J. A. List,
    3. R. D. Metcalfe, and
    4. I. Vlaev
    . 2017. “The Behavioralist as Tax Collector: Using Natural Field Experiments to Enhance Tax Compliance.” Journal of Public Economics 148: 14–31.
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Herriges, J.,
    2. C. Kling,
    3. C. C. Liu, and
    4. J. Tobias
    . 2010. “What Are the Consequences of Consequentiality?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 59 (1): 67–81.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. ↵
    1. Hess, S., and
    2. J. M. Rose
    . 2007. “Effects of Distributional Assumptions on Conditional Estimates from Mixed Logit Models.” Arbeitsberichte Verkehrs-und Raumplanung 423. https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-a-005378303.
    1. Hess, S., and
    2. K. Train
    . 2017. “Correlation and Scale in Mixed Logit Models.” Journal of Choice Modelling 23: 1–8.
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Höffler, T. N., and
    2. D. Leutner
    . 2007. “Instructional Animation Versus Static Pictures: A Meta-Analysis.” Learning and Instruction 17 (6): 722–38.
    OpenUrl
  33. ↵
    1. Howard, G.,
    2. B. E. Roe,
    3. E. C. Nisbet, and
    4. J. R. Martin
    . 2017. “Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Techniques in Choice Experiments: Do Cheap Talk and Honesty Priming Effects Fade with Repeated Choices?” Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 4 (2): 543–73.
    OpenUrl
  34. ↵
    1. Jacquemet, N.,
    2. R. V. Joule,
    3. S. Luchini, and
    4. J. F. Shogren
    . 2013. “Preference Elicitation under Oath.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 65 (1): 110–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Keane, M., and
    2. N. Wasi
    . 2013. “Comparing Alternative Models of Heterogeneity in Consumer Choice Behavior.” Journal of Applied Econometrics 28 (6): 1018–45.
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. Khaw, M. W.,
    2. Z. Li, and
    3. M. Woodford
    . 2021. “Cognitive Imprecision and Small-Stakes Risk Aversion.” Review of Economic Studies 88 (4): 1979–2013.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  37. ↵
    1. Kilders, V., and
    2. V. Caputo
    2024. “A Reference‐Price‐Informed Experiment to Assess Consumer Demand for Beef with a Reduced Carbon Footprint.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 106 (1): 3–20.
    OpenUrl
  38. ↵
    1. La Nauze, A., and
    2. E. Myers
    . 2023. “Do Consumers Acquire Information Optimally? Experimental Evidence from Energy Efficiency.” Working Paper 31742. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
  39. ↵
    1. Ladenburg, J., and
    2. S. B. Olsen
    . 2014. “Augmenting Short Cheap Talk Scripts with a Repeated Opt-out Reminder in Choice Experiment Surveys.” Resource and Energy Economics 37: 39–63.
    OpenUrl
  40. ↵
    1. Lancsar, E., and
    2. J. Louviere
    . 2008. “Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making: A User’s Guide.” Pharmacoeconomics 26: 661–77.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  41. ↵
    1. Lang, C.,
    2. C. J. Wichman,
    3. M. J. Weir, and
    4. S. Pearson‐Merkowitz
    . 2025. “Cost Misperception and Voting for Public Goods.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 107 (2): 558–82.
    OpenUrl
  42. ↵
    1. Li, X., and
    2. C. F. Camerer
    . 2022. “Predictable Effects of Visual Salience in Experimental Decisions and Games.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 137 (3): 1849–1900.
    OpenUrl
  43. ↵
    1. Li, X.,
    2. K. L. Jensen,
    3. C. D. Clark, and
    4. D. M. Lambert
    . 2016. “Consumer Willingness to Pay for Beef Grown Using Climate-Friendly Production Practices.” Food Policy 64: 93–106.
    OpenUrl
  44. ↵
    1. Lim, K. H., and
    2. W. Hu
    . 2023. “Contextual Reference Price in Choice Experiments.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 105 (4): 1288–1306.
    OpenUrl
  45. ↵
    1. Lin, W.,
    2. D.
    3. L. Ortega,
    4. D. Ufer,
    5. V. Caputo, and
    6. T. Awokuse
    , 2022. “Blockchain‐Based Traceability and Demand for US Beef in China.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 44 (1): 253–72.
    OpenUrl
  46. ↵
    1. Lin, W.
    2023. “The Effect of Product Quantity on Willingness to Pay: A Meta‐Regression Analysis of Beef Valuation Studies.” Agribusiness 39 (3): 646–63.
    OpenUrl
  47. ↵
    1. List, J. A., and
    2. C. A. Gallet
    . 2001. “What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?” Environmental and Resource Economics 20: 241–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  48. ↵
    1. Lusk, J. L., and
    2. F. B. Norwood
    . 2009. “An Inferred Valuation Method.” Land Economics 85 (3): 500–14. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.85.3.500.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. ↵
    1. Matthews, Y.,
    2. R. Scarpa, and
    3. D. Marsh
    . 2017. “Using Virtual Environments to Improve the Realism of Choice Experiments: A Case Study about Coastal Erosion Management.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 81: 193–208.
    OpenUrl
  50. ↵
    1. Mayer, R. E., and
    2. R. Moreno
    . 2003. “Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning.”Educational Psychologist 38 (1): 43–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  51. ↵
    1. McKenzie, D.
    2015. “Tools of the Trade: A Joint Test of Orthogonality When Testing for Balance.” Available at https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/impactevaluations/tools-trade-joint-test-orthogonality-when-testing-balance#comments.
  52. ↵
    1. Menapace, L., and
    2. R. Raffaelli
    . 2020. “Unraveling Hypothetical Bias in Discrete Choice Experiments.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 176: 416–30.
    OpenUrl
  53. ↵
    1. Meyerding, S. G.,
    2. A. Bauchrowitz, and
    3. M. Lehberger
    . 2019. “Consumer Preferences for Beer Attributes in Germany: A Conjoint and Latent Class Approach.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 47: 229–40.
    OpenUrl
  54. ↵
    1. Mokas, I.,
    2. S. Lizin,
    3. T. Brijs,
    4. N. Witters, and
    5. R. Malina
    . 2021. “Can Immersive Virtual Reality Increase Respondents’ Certainty in Discrete Choice Experiments? A Comparison with Traditional Presentation Formats.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 109: 102509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2021.102509.
    OpenUrl
  55. ↵
    1. Murphy,
    2. J. J.,
    3. P. G. Allen,
    4. T. H. Stevens, and
    5. D. Weatherhead
    . 2005. “A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 30: 313–25.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  56. ↵
    1. Ortega, D. L.,
    2. J. Sun, and
    3. W. Lin
    . 2022. “Identity Labels as an Instrument to Reduce Meat Demand and Encourage Consumption of Plant Based and Cultured Meat Alternatives in China.” Food Policy 111: 102307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102307.
    OpenUrl
  57. ↵
    1. Penn, J. M., and
    2. W. Hu
    . 2018. “Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta‐Analysis.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 100 (4): 1186–1206.
    OpenUrl
  58. ↵
    1. Penn, J. M., and
    2. W. Hu
    . 2021. “Videos Improve Attention and Cheap Talk in Online Surveys.” Frontiers of Economics in China 16 (2): 347–76.
    OpenUrl
  59. ↵
    1. Poe, G. L.,
    2. K. L. Giraud, and
    3. J. B. Loomis
    . 2005. “Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87 (2): 353–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  60. ↵
    1. Salomon, G.
    1979. “Media and Symbol Systems as Related to Cognition and Learning.” Journal of Educational Psychology 71 (2): 131.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  61. ↵
    1. Scarpa, R.,
    2. M. Thiene, and
    3. K. Train
    . 2008. “Appendix to Utility in WTP Space: A Tool to Address Confounding Random Scale Effects in Destination Choice to the Alps.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90 (4): 994–1010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  62. ↵
    1. Shepard, R. N.
    1967. “Recognition Memory for Words, Sentences, and Pictures.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 6 (1): 156–63.
    OpenUrl
  63. ↵
    1. Shr, Y. H. J.,
    2. R. Ready,
    3. B. Orland, and
    4. S. Echols
    . 2019. “How Do Visual Representations Influence Survey Responses? Evidence from a Choice Experiment on Landscape Attributes of Green Infrastructure.” Ecological Economics 156: 375–86.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  64. ↵
    1. Snowberg, E., and
    2. L. Yariv
    . 2021. “Testing the Waters: Behavior Across Participant Pools.” American Economic Review 111 (2): 687–719.
    OpenUrl
  65. ↵
    1. Townsend, C., and
    2. B. E. Kahn
    . 2014. “The ‘Visual Preference Heuristic’: The Influence of Visual versus Verbal Depiction on Assortment Processing, Perceived Variety, and Choice Overload.” Journal of Consumer Research 40 (5): 993–1015.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  66. ↵
    1. Train, K., and
    2. M. Weeks
    . 2005. “Discrete Choice Models in Preference Space and Willingness-to-Pay Space.” In Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics, edited by R. Scarpa and A. Alberini, 1–16. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
  67. ↵
    1. Uggeldahl, K.,
    2. C. Jacobsen,
    3. T. H. Lundhede, and
    4. S. B. Olsen
    . 2016. “Choice Certainty in Discrete Choice Experiments: Will Eye Tracking Provide Useful Measures?” Journal of Choice Modelling 20: 35–48.
    OpenUrl
  68. ↵
    1. Van Loo, E. J.,
    2. V. Caputo, and
    3. J. L. Lusk
    . 2020. “Consumer Preferences for Farm-Raised Meat, Lab-Grown Meat, and Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: Does Information or Brand Matter?” Food Policy 95: 101931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101931.
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Vossler, C. A.,
    2. M. Doyon, and
    3. D. Rondeau
    . 2012. “Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments.” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 4 (4): 145–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. ↵
    1. Vossler, C. A., and
    2. S. B. Watson
    . 2013. “Understanding the Consequences of Consequentiality: Testing the Validity of Stated Preferences in the Field.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 86: 137–47.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  71. ↵
    1. Wei, X., and
    2. H. Khachatryan
    . 2023. “How Consequential Is Policy Consequentiality? Evidence from Online Discrete Choice Experiment with Ornamental Plants.” Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 107: 102122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2023.102122.
    OpenUrl
  72. ↵
    1. Xie, L.,
    2. W. Adamowicz,
    3. M. Kecinski, and
    4. J. R. Fooks
    . 2022. “Using Economic Experiments to Assess the Validity of Stated Preference Contingent Behavior Responses.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 114: 102659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2022.102659.
    OpenUrl
  73. ↵
    1. Yang, Y., and
    2. J. E. Hobbs
    . 2020. “The Power of Stories: Narratives and Information Framing Effects in Science Communication.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 102 (4): 1271–96.
    OpenUrl
  74. ↵
    1. Zhao, Q.,
    2. X. Wang, and
    3. S. Rozelle
    . 2019. “Better Cognition, Better School Performance? Evidence from Primary Schools in China.” China Economic Review 55: 199–217.
    OpenUrl
  75. ↵
    1. Zhu, W. B.,
    2. Y. F. Chen,
    3. Z. H. A. O. Jing, and
    4. B. B. Wu
    . 2021. “Impacts of Household Income on Beef At-Home Consumption: Evidence from Urban China.” Journal of Integrative Agriculture 20 (6): 1701–15.
    OpenUrl
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Information Videos Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in Discrete Choice Experiments
Wen Lin, Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr., David L. Ortega, Weibin Hu
Land Economics Oct 2025, 101 (4) 463-481; DOI: 10.3368/le.101.4.072424-0065R1
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

Keywords