| dc.contributor.author |
Stachtiaris, S |
en |
| dc.contributor.author |
Drichoutis, AC |
en |
| dc.contributor.author |
Klonaris, S |
en |
| dc.date.accessioned |
2014-06-06T06:52:46Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2014-06-06T06:52:46Z |
|
| dc.date.issued |
2013 |
en |
| dc.identifier.issn |
01651587 |
en |
| dc.identifier.uri |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbs030 |
en |
| dc.identifier.uri |
http://62.217.125.90/xmlui/handle/123456789/6160 |
|
| dc.subject |
Contingent valuation |
en |
| dc.subject |
Inferred valuation |
en |
| dc.subject |
preference reversals |
en |
| dc.subject |
willingness to pay |
en |
| dc.title |
Preference reversals in contingent and inferred valuation methods |
en |
| heal.type |
journalArticle |
en |
| heal.identifier.primary |
10.1093/erae/jbs030 |
en |
| heal.publicationDate |
2013 |
en |
| heal.abstract |
We examine inconsistencies in preference orderings using the Contingent valuation (CV) and the Inferred valuation (IV) methods. We find that in the context of a food market we do not observe strong inconsistencies. Weak inconsistencies are observed for the IV method, indicating that IV is slightly more susceptible to inconsistent preference orderings than the CV method. We also find that the IV method generates higher valuations than CV in the case of consumers with high commitment costs (that is, low familiarity with the product) but successfully mitigates social desirability bias in the case of low commitment costs and high normative motivations. © 2012 Oxford University Press and Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics all rights reserved. |
en |
| heal.journalName |
European Review of Agricultural Economics |
en |
| dc.identifier.issue |
2 |
en |
| dc.identifier.volume |
40 |
en |
| dc.identifier.doi |
10.1093/erae/jbs030 |
en |
| dc.identifier.spage |
379 |
en |
| dc.identifier.epage |
404 |
en |