首页> 外文期刊>Environmental & Resource Economics >Eliciting Willingness to Pay without Bias using Follow-up Certainty Statements: Comparisons between Probably/Definitely and a 10-point Certainty Scale
【24h】

Eliciting Willingness to Pay without Bias using Follow-up Certainty Statements: Comparisons between Probably/Definitely and a 10-point Certainty Scale

机译:使用后续确定性陈述提高无偏差支付的意愿:可能/确定性与10点确定性量表之间的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Correction for hypothetical bias using follow up certainty questions often takes one of two forms: (1) two options, "definitely sure" and "probably sure", or (2) a 10-point scale with 10 very certain. While both have been successful in eliminating hypothetical bias from estimates of WTP by calibrating based on the certainty of yes responses, little is known about the relationship between the two. The purpose of this paper is to compare the two using data from three field experiments in a private good, dichotomous choice format. We compare four types of yes responses that differ in the criterion used to determine if there is sufficient certainty for a hypothetical yes response to be considered a true yes response. We make several comparisons, but focus on determining which values on the 10-point scale give the same estimates of WTP as "definitely sure" hypothetical yeses and real yeses (actual purchases). Values that produce equivalence are near 10 on the certainty scale.
机译:使用跟进确定性问题对假设偏差的校正通常采用以下两种形式之一:(1)两个选择,“绝对确定”和“可能确定”,或(2)10分制,十分确定。尽管两者都已成功地通过基于“是”响应的确定性进行了校准,从而消除了WTP估算中的假设偏差,但对两者之间的关系知之甚少。本文的目的是使用私人的,二分选择的格式,使用来自三个现场实验的数据来比较两者。我们比较了四种类型的“是”响应,它们在用于确定假设“是”响应是否被视为真实“是”响应的标准方面不同。我们进行了几次比较,但重点是确定在10点量表上的哪些值给出的WTP估计与“绝对确定”的假设是和实际(实际购买)相同。在确定性尺度上,产生等效性的值接近10。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号