Loading…
Values elicited from open-ended real experiments
The idea that preferences are only revealed by real incentives is deeply embedded in economists’ worldview. Consequently, evidence from hypothetical experiments has not readily permeated economic thinking. One method for determining whether hypothetical experiments provide useful information about p...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Journal of economic behavior & organization 2000-03, Vol.41 (3), p.221-237 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3 |
| container_end_page | 237 |
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 221 |
| container_title | Journal of economic behavior & organization |
| container_volume | 41 |
| creator | Horowitz, John K. McConnell, K.E. |
| description | The idea that preferences are only revealed by real incentives is deeply embedded in economists’ worldview. Consequently, evidence from hypothetical experiments has not readily permeated economic thinking. One method for determining whether hypothetical experiments provide useful information about preferences is to compare them to similar real-goods experiments.
This study looks at responses elicited by three real experiments. We examine the proportion of responses that meet a series of criteria that range from a broad appeal of plausibility to a narrow restriction based on quasi-concavity of preferences. We argue that these proportions are unreasonably low. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0167-2681(99)00074-8 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38827180</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0167268199000748</els_id><sourcerecordid>48973093</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkFFLHDEUhUOp0K36E4RFQezDaG4ymSRPRcRWZcGHVl_DbHKnzTI7M01mxf33veOKD0Lpw70h4TuHk8PYEfBz4FBd_KClC1EZOLP2C-dcl4X5wGZgtC1AK_jIZm_IJ_Y55xWfKGFnjD_W7QbzHNvo44hh3qR-Pe8H7ArsAt0T1u0cnwdMcY3dmA_YXlO3GQ9fz3328O3659VNsbj_fnt1uSi8quxYKPS1CqoxHD1XTYPAuVraqtFoBaCoQXstl7psgjRcmMBt0KYMS1EqUnm5z053vkPq_1DC0a1j9ti2dYf9JjtpjNBgOIHH78BVv0kdZXNCclMaqQxBJ_-CwEhrBEBZEaV2lE99zgkbN9Cv67R1wN1UtXup2k09OmvdS9Vucr_b6RIO6N9EiLjCZZ9-uScn6xJobWkEyeiINJJmmJ4EUFjtfo9rMvu6M0Nq9ylictlH7DyGmNCPLvTxP3H-AlMLnJE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1839821146</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Values elicited from open-ended real experiments</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Elsevier:Jisc Collections:Elsevier Read and Publish Agreement 2022-2024:Freedom Collection (Reading list)</source><creator>Horowitz, John K. ; McConnell, K.E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Horowitz, John K. ; McConnell, K.E.</creatorcontrib><description>The idea that preferences are only revealed by real incentives is deeply embedded in economists’ worldview. Consequently, evidence from hypothetical experiments has not readily permeated economic thinking. One method for determining whether hypothetical experiments provide useful information about preferences is to compare them to similar real-goods experiments.
This study looks at responses elicited by three real experiments. We examine the proportion of responses that meet a series of criteria that range from a broad appeal of plausibility to a narrow restriction based on quasi-concavity of preferences. We argue that these proportions are unreasonably low.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-2681</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1751</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0167-2681(99)00074-8</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEBOD9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Economic behaviour ; Economic theory ; Experimental economics ; Experiments ; Hypothetical experiments ; Preferences ; Public goods ; Real experiments ; Studies ; Valuation ; Values ; Willingness-to-accept ; Willingness-to-pay</subject><ispartof>Journal of economic behavior & organization, 2000-03, Vol.41 (3), p.221-237</ispartof><rights>2000 Elsevier Science B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Sequoia S.A. Mar 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,30999,33223,33224</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeejeborg/v_3a41_3ay_3a2000_3ai_3a3_3ap_3a221-237.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Horowitz, John K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McConnell, K.E.</creatorcontrib><title>Values elicited from open-ended real experiments</title><title>Journal of economic behavior & organization</title><description>The idea that preferences are only revealed by real incentives is deeply embedded in economists’ worldview. Consequently, evidence from hypothetical experiments has not readily permeated economic thinking. One method for determining whether hypothetical experiments provide useful information about preferences is to compare them to similar real-goods experiments.
This study looks at responses elicited by three real experiments. We examine the proportion of responses that meet a series of criteria that range from a broad appeal of plausibility to a narrow restriction based on quasi-concavity of preferences. We argue that these proportions are unreasonably low.</description><subject>Economic behaviour</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Experimental economics</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Hypothetical experiments</subject><subject>Preferences</subject><subject>Public goods</subject><subject>Real experiments</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Valuation</subject><subject>Values</subject><subject>Willingness-to-accept</subject><subject>Willingness-to-pay</subject><issn>0167-2681</issn><issn>1879-1751</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkFFLHDEUhUOp0K36E4RFQezDaG4ymSRPRcRWZcGHVl_DbHKnzTI7M01mxf33veOKD0Lpw70h4TuHk8PYEfBz4FBd_KClC1EZOLP2C-dcl4X5wGZgtC1AK_jIZm_IJ_Y55xWfKGFnjD_W7QbzHNvo44hh3qR-Pe8H7ArsAt0T1u0cnwdMcY3dmA_YXlO3GQ9fz3328O3659VNsbj_fnt1uSi8quxYKPS1CqoxHD1XTYPAuVraqtFoBaCoQXstl7psgjRcmMBt0KYMS1EqUnm5z053vkPq_1DC0a1j9ti2dYf9JjtpjNBgOIHH78BVv0kdZXNCclMaqQxBJ_-CwEhrBEBZEaV2lE99zgkbN9Cv67R1wN1UtXup2k09OmvdS9Vucr_b6RIO6N9EiLjCZZ9-uScn6xJobWkEyeiINJJmmJ4EUFjtfo9rMvu6M0Nq9ylictlH7DyGmNCPLvTxP3H-AlMLnJE</recordid><startdate>20000301</startdate><enddate>20000301</enddate><creator>Horowitz, John K.</creator><creator>McConnell, K.E.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>North-Holland Pub. Co</general><general>Elsevier Sequoia S.A</general><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>HFXKP</scope><scope>IOIBA</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000301</creationdate><title>Values elicited from open-ended real experiments</title><author>Horowitz, John K. ; McConnell, K.E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Economic behaviour</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Experimental economics</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Hypothetical experiments</topic><topic>Preferences</topic><topic>Public goods</topic><topic>Real experiments</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Valuation</topic><topic>Values</topic><topic>Willingness-to-accept</topic><topic>Willingness-to-pay</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Horowitz, John K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McConnell, K.E.</creatorcontrib><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 17</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 29</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of economic behavior & organization</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Horowitz, John K.</au><au>McConnell, K.E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Values elicited from open-ended real experiments</atitle><jtitle>Journal of economic behavior & organization</jtitle><date>2000-03-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>221</spage><epage>237</epage><pages>221-237</pages><issn>0167-2681</issn><eissn>1879-1751</eissn><coden>JEBOD9</coden><abstract>The idea that preferences are only revealed by real incentives is deeply embedded in economists’ worldview. Consequently, evidence from hypothetical experiments has not readily permeated economic thinking. One method for determining whether hypothetical experiments provide useful information about preferences is to compare them to similar real-goods experiments.
This study looks at responses elicited by three real experiments. We examine the proportion of responses that meet a series of criteria that range from a broad appeal of plausibility to a narrow restriction based on quasi-concavity of preferences. We argue that these proportions are unreasonably low.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/S0167-2681(99)00074-8</doi><tpages>17</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0167-2681 |
| ispartof | Journal of economic behavior & organization, 2000-03, Vol.41 (3), p.221-237 |
| issn | 0167-2681 1879-1751 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38827180 |
| source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Elsevier:Jisc Collections:Elsevier Read and Publish Agreement 2022-2024:Freedom Collection (Reading list) |
| subjects | Economic behaviour Economic theory Experimental economics Experiments Hypothetical experiments Preferences Public goods Real experiments Studies Valuation Values Willingness-to-accept Willingness-to-pay |
| title | Values elicited from open-ended real experiments |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T01%3A07%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Values%20elicited%20from%20open-ended%20real%20experiments&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20economic%20behavior%20&%20organization&rft.au=Horowitz,%20John%20K.&rft.date=2000-03-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=221&rft.epage=237&rft.pages=221-237&rft.issn=0167-2681&rft.eissn=1879-1751&rft.coden=JEBOD9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0167-2681(99)00074-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E48973093%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-5eca5d5f80ec05ffe1005b96f7e921e2a17c73b74fd38028d09d784db2455f8c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1839821146&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |