<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lloyd-Smith, Patrick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Zawojska, Ewa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adamowicz, Wiktor</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Moving beyond the Contingent Valuation versus Choice Experiment Debate: Presentation Effects in Stated Preference</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Land Economics</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020-02-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1-24</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.3368/le.96.1.1</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">96</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">We reexamine the literature comparing contingent valuation (CV) and choice experiments (CEs) in terms of stated preference design features, and empirically investigate an understudied dimension in these comparisons, namely, presentation effects. Structured analysis of the literature suggests that the comparisons of CV and CEs as broad descriptive terms may mask the many design and methodological differences seen in implementations of the approaches. In the empirical component, we find preference disclosure to be unaffected by text and table presentation formats in elicitation tasks, except when only the first task is considered. Implications of our findings for stated preference research are discussed. (JEL Q51)</style></abstract></record></records></xml>