Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/4098
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHey, John Denisen_US
dc.contributor.authorMorone, Andreaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, Ulrichen_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-01-28T14:18:08Z-
dc.date.available2009-01-28T14:18:08Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/4098-
dc.description.abstractIn the context of eliciting preferences for decision making under risk, we ask the question: "which might be the 'best' method for eliciting such preferences?". It is well known that different methods differ in terms of the bias in the elicitation; it is rather less well-known that different methods differ in terms of their noisiness. The optimal trade-off depends upon the relative magnitudes of these two effects. We examine four different elicitation mechanisms (pairwise choice, willingness-to-pay, willingness-to-accept, and certainty equivalents) and estimate both effects. Our results suggest that economists might be better advised to use what appears to be a relatively inefficient elicitation technique (i.e. pairwise choice) in order to avoid the bias in better-known and more widely-used techniques.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisher|aKiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) |cKielen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aKiel Working Paper |x1386en_US
dc.subject.jelC91en_US
dc.subject.jelC81en_US
dc.subject.ddc330-
dc.subject.keywordWTP
dc.subject.keywordWTA
dc.subject.keywordErrors
dc.subject.keywordNoise
dc.subject.keywordBiases
dc.subject.keywordPairwise choice
dc.subject.stwEntscheidung bei Risikoen_US
dc.subject.stwExperimenten_US
dc.subject.stwModell-Spezifikationen_US
dc.subject.stwStatistischer Fehleren_US
dc.subject.stwPräferenztheorieen_US
dc.titleNoise and bias in eliciting preferencesen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn549781129en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen-
dc.identifier.repecRePEc:zbw:ifwkwp:1386-

Files in This Item:
File
Size
223.77 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.