Mitigating hypothetical bias in stated preference methods: a case study on eyestalk ablated shrimp and hazardous waste recycling

Last registered on May 24, 2023

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Mitigating hypothetical bias in stated preference methods: a case study on eyestalk ablated shrimp and hazardous waste recycling
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0011412
Initial registration date
May 19, 2023

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
May 24, 2023, 1:36 PM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2023-05-22
End date
2023-06-26
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Hypothetical bias (HB) is widely observed in state preference studies, defined as the discrepancy between the monetary value that individuals are willing to pay for a good under hypothetical scenarios and their actual payment in real-world situations. This bias significantly impairs the external validity of stated preference studies, thereby restricting their generalizability.
Despite the abundant evidence suggesting the existence of HB, there is no consensus on the contributors of HB. Current studies suggest various potential contributors, include psychological factors, strategic behaviors, and elicitation mechanisms (Penn and Hu, 2018). Accordingly, methods to mitigate HB are proposed. Examples include the cheap talk, oath, honest priming, and incentive compatible elicitation mechanism.
Following this stream of literature, this study further investigates the connection between psychological factors and HB, and propose corresponding strategy to mitigate HB.
Specifically, we design three treatments. In Group 1, respondents are initially presented with a hypothetical Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) mechanism, which captures their willingness to pay (WTP) for non-eyestalk-ablated shrimp. Subsequently, an advisory referendum on hazardous waste recycling is administered, utilizing a payment card elicitation method. In Group 2, respondents finish a BDM task involving real payments, followed by the same advisory referendum as in the first group. In Group 3, respondents are only provided with the advisory referendum section. Eye-tracking techniques and phycological metrics are applied across all three treatments to collect psychological factors.
By comparing WTPs obtained from Group 1 and Group 2, we are able to identify potential psychological factors that contribute to HB. Accordingly, novel mitigation methods within the context of WTP elicitation for private good are proposed. Furthermore, by encompassing all tree treatments, we aim to investigate whether the introduction of real payments for a private good can serve as a priming and reduce the potential HB in the valuation of an unrelated public good. Our study design allows for a deeper understanding of the interplay between psychological factors and HB in the context of private and public good valuation.
The main contributions of our study are threefold. First, we apply more comprehensive and objective measurements to identify the possible contributors of HB, specifically the eye-tracking and phycological metrics. Second, based on findings from our investigation, we propose novel ex post mitigation methods that calibrate WTP using phycological metrics. Third, we utilize the real-payment priming to reduce HB in the valuation of public goods.


External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Shi, Longzhong. 2023. "Mitigating hypothetical bias in stated preference methods: a case study on eyestalk ablated shrimp and hazardous waste recycling." AEA RCT Registry. May 24. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.11412-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
This study investigates the connection between psychological factors and HB, and proposes corresponding method to mitigate HB.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2023-05-22
Intervention End Date
2023-06-26

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The HB in the WTP for both a private good (non-eyestalk-ablated shrimp) and a public good (hazardous waste recycling).
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
WTP for the private good is elicited with the BDM mechanism. WTP for the public good is valued with a payment card method.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We design three treatments. In Group 1, respondents are initially presented with a hypothetical BDM mechanism, which captures their WTP for non-eyestalk-ablated shrimp. Subsequently, an advisory referendum on hazardous waste recycling is administered, utilizing a payment card elicitation method. In Group 2, respondents finish a BDM task involving real payments, followed by the same advisory referendum as in the first group. In Group 3, respondents are only provided with the advisory referendum section. Eye-tracking techniques and phycological metrics are applied across all three treatments to collect psychological factors.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
480 university students.
Sample size: planned number of observations
480 university students.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
160 university students in each treatment.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Based on preliminary data collected from a pretest, the WTP for the private good is with a mean of 6.77 CNY and a standard deviation of 9.82. Similarly, the WTP for the public good is approximated by a normal distribution with a mean of 54.27 CNY and a standard deviation of 38.26. We aim at a significance level of 0.05 and a statistical power of 0.8. Accordingly, our sample size is sufficient to detect approximately a HB of 3.39 CNY (50%) in the private good and a difference of 10.85 CNY (approximately a 20% difference) in WTPs for the public good.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Huazhong Agricultural University
IRB Approval Date
2023-03-28
IRB Approval Number
HZAUHU-2023-0067

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials