SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Ami, D., Aprahamian, F., Chanel, O. and Luchini, S. (2011) A Test of Cheap Talk in Different Hypothetical Contexts: The Case of Air Pollution. Environmental and Resource Economics, 50, 111-130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9464-z

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Hypothetical Bias for Private Goods: Does Cheap Talk Make a Difference?

    AUTHORS: Maurice Doyon, Laure Saulais, Bernard Ruffieux, Denise Bweli

    KEYWORDS: Experimental Economics, Willingness-to-Pay, Cheap Talk, Hypothetical Bias

    JOURNAL NAME: Theoretical Economics Letters, Vol.5 No.6, December 29, 2015

    ABSTRACT: Economists and market researchers often need to accurately gauge consumers’ willingness-to-pay for private goods. The experimental literature has identified a problem of hypothetical bias when using stated preferences techniques, such as open-ended questions. It has been suggested that using a cheap talk script has the potential to resolve this bias. Yet, few empirical studies on the efficiency of cheap talk for private goods exist. This study uses a between-subjects experimental design to compare consumers’ willingness-to-pay for DHA-enriched milk using three elicitation methods: 1) Hypothetical open-ended stated preference question, without monetary consequence for the respondent; 2) Idem to the first with the addition of a cheap talk script; and 3) A Vickrey auction with real monetary consequences. In this experiment subjects have the choice to participate, or not, at each period. Our results indicate a significant hypothetical bias. While the use of cheap talk has no impact on this bias, it does however increase the level of participation to the market.