nep-dcm New Economics Papers
on Discrete Choice Models
Issue of 2008‒06‒21
six papers chosen by
Philip Yu
Hong Kong University

  1. The Information Content of a Stated Choice Experiment By Jan Rouwendal; Arianne de Blaeij; Piet Rietveld; Erik Verhoef
  2. Does respondent uncertainty explain framing effects in double bounded contingent valuation? By Stephane Luchini; Verity Watson
  3. Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do? By Carlsson, Fredrik; Daruvala, Dinky; Jaldell, Henrik
  4. Valuing Biodiversity Enhancement in New Zealand By Richard Yao; Pamela Kaval
  5. Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiments method? By Rambonilaza, Tina
  6. A contingent ranking study on the preferences of tourists across seasons By Cuccia Tiziana

  1. By: Jan Rouwendal (VU University Amsterdam); Arianne de Blaeij (LEI, The Hague); Piet Rietveld (VU University Amsterdam); Erik Verhoef (VU University Amsterdam)
    Abstract: This paper presents a method to assess the distribution of values of time, and values of statistical life, over participants to a stated choice experiment, that does not require the researcher to make an a priori assumption on the type of distribution, as is required for example for mixed logit models. The method requires a few assumptions to hold true, namely that the valuations to be determined are constant for each individual, and that respondents make choices according to their preferences. These assumptions allow the derivation of lower and upper bounds on the (cumulative) distribution of the values of interest over respondents, by deriving for each choice set the value(s) for which the respondent would be indifferent between the alternatives offered, and next deriving from the choice actually made the respondent’s implied minimum or maximum value(s). We also provide an extension of the method that incorporates the possibility that errors are made. The method is illustrated using data from an experiment investigating the value of time and the value of statistical life. We discuss the possibility to improve the information content of stated choice experiments by optimizing the attribute levels shown to respondents, which is especially relevant because it would help in selecting the appropriate distribution for mixed logit estimates for the same data.
    Keywords: stated preferences; value of a statistical life
    JEL: C81 D12 D61 R41
    Date: 2008–05–22
  2. By: Stephane Luchini (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille II - Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille III - Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales - CNRS : UMR6579); Verity Watson (Health Economics Research Unit - University of Aberdeen)
    Abstract: Many stated preference studies have reported framing effects in responses to valuation questions. This occurs when respondents use irrelevant information contained in a question to help them value the good. We investigate if respondent uncertainty can explain two commonly observed framing effects in contingent valuation studies. Specifically using a double bounded dichotomous choice elicitation format, we investigate anchoring (or starting-point bias) and the shift effect, which may indicate if the method is incentive compatible. Respondent uncertainty is measured using a follow up question that asks respondents their certainty about their valuation. We ?nd evidence that the anchoring effect is stronger for respondents expressing uncertainty about their valuation compared to respondents expressing certainty. The shift effect is significant and negative only for respondents expressing certainty. Our findings suggest that anchoring can be reduced if respondents are certain of their valuation, and that iterative elicitation formats are not incentive compatible.
    Keywords: Contingent valuation, heterogeneous framing, self-reported uncertainty
    Date: 2008–06–06
  3. By: Carlsson, Fredrik (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Daruvala, Dinky (Department of Economics, Karlstad University); Jaldell, Henrik (Department of Economics, Karlstad University)
    Abstract: We design a donations vs. own money choice experiment comparing three different treatments. In two of the treatments the pay-offs are hypothetical. In the first of these, a short cheap talk script was used, and subjects were required to state their own preferences in this scenario. In the second, subjects were asked to state how they believed an average student would respond to the choices. In the third treatment the pay-offs were real, allowing us to use the results to compare the validity of the two hypothetical treatments. We find a strong hypothetical bias in both hypothetical treatments where the marginal willingness to pay for donations are higher when subjects state their own preferences but lower when subjects state what they believe are other students preferences. The explanation is probably a self-image effect in both cases. We find that it is mainly women who are prone to hypothetical bias in this study.<p>
    Keywords: Stated preferences; cheap talk; hypothetical bias; third person approach; choice experiment
    JEL: C91 D64 Q51
    Date: 2008–06–12
  4. By: Richard Yao (University of Waikato); Pamela Kaval (University of Waikato)
    Abstract: The value of biodiversity enhancement in New Zealand was estimated from a survey sample of 457 residents. We determined the willingness of respondents to financially support biodiversity programs on private and public lands, as well as determining which factors influence this willingness-to-pay. Our data indicates that an average respondent was willing-to-pay $42 (2007 NZD) annually in their rates (taxes) to support a government initiated private land biodiversity programme and $82 (2007 NZD) annually to support a biodiversity programme on public lands.
    Keywords: biodiversity; contingent valuation; native species; household residents; New Zealand
    JEL: Q51 Q56 Q57
    Date: 2008–06–11
  5. By: Rambonilaza, Tina
    Abstract: In this article we discuss the economic approach to evaluate landscape preferences for land-use planning. We then use the choice experiment method to examine public preferences for three landscape features – hedgerows, farm buildings and scrubland – in the Monts d’Arrée region (in Brittany, France), in the context of re-design of landscape conservation policy by the local environmental institute. Surveys were undertaken on two user groups, visitors and local residents. Our objective was to obtain empirical evidence of the difference between the preferences of tourists and residents, for landscape attributes. We then analysed the welfare changes of tourists and residents affected by different landscape programmes. Our results point out the strong divergence between the landscape preferences of the public and those of local public actors. The comparison of the estimated values of willingness to pay for single-attribute landscaping action shows some divergence between residents’ and tourists’ ranking of preferences for agricultural landscape areas.
    Keywords: landscape preferences; attributes; choice experiment; welfare estimates
    JEL: Q0 D61
    Date: 2005–05–23
  6. By: Cuccia Tiziana
    Abstract: This paper presents the results of a contingent ranking study carried out on a sample of tourists visiting the province of Ragusa (in South-Eastern Sicily,Italy), known for both its baroque heritage and its sea coasts. I focus only on two attributes of tourism products, namely the accommodation structures (which appear to have a large importance for tourists’ choice, according to similar previous analyses) and local attractions (sea and costs, cultural and natural heritage endowments, performing-arts, local wine&food products). I evaluate whether and how the weight attached by tourists to the attributes and their levels change across seasons.
    Date: 2008–05

This nep-dcm issue is ©2008 by Philip Yu. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.