Abstract
We test for incentive incompatibility and starting-point bias to describe the effects of iterative valuation questions on willingness to pay. We compare double-, triple-, and multiple-bounded models with data from two surveys with similar designs of the valuation questions. We find that incentive incompatibility is present in both sets of data and starting-point bias is present in one. The efficiency of the willingness-to-pay estimate is improved in only one set of data. The potential loss from using iterative questions without controlling for both incentive incompatibility and starting-point bias is biased willingness-to-pay estimates. (JEL Q26)
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Log in using your username and password
Purchase access
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Valuing Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Control in Public Forests: Scope Effects with Attribute Nonattendance
- Factors influencing the willingness to pay for on-farm water infrastructure
- Changing with the Tide: Semiparametric Estimation of Preference Dynamics
- Modeling Shifts in Willingness to Pay from a Bayesian Updating Perspective
- Identifying Individual Discount Rates and Valuing Public Open Space with Stated-Preference Models