[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
create a website
The eyes have it: Using eye tracking to inform information processing strategies in multi‐attributes choices. (2018). Hermens, Frouke ; Krucien, Nicolas ; Ryan, Mandy.
In: Health Economics.
RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:27:y:2018:i:4:p:709-721.

Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Cited: 15

Citations received by this document

Cites: 71

References cited by this document

Cocites: 31

Documents which have cited the same bibliography

Coauthors: 0

Authors who have wrote about the same topic

Citations

Citations received by this document

  1. Consumer Preference for Fisheries Improvement Project: Case of Bigeye Tuna in Japan. (2024). Maruyama, Yuki ; Wakamatsu, Hiroki.
    In: Sustainability.
    RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2530-:d:1359898.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  2. Ordering effects in discrete choice experiments: A systematic literature review across domains. (2024). Boxebeld, Sander.
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:51:y:2024:i:c:s1755534524000216.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  3. Discrete choice experiments with eye-tracking: How far we have come and ways forward. (2024). Ozdemir, Semra ; Kim, Eui-Jin ; Bansal, Prateek.
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:51:y:2024:i:c:s1755534524000101.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  4. Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets. (2022). Quaife, Matthew ; Regier, Dean A ; Wordsworth, Sarah ; Vasavada, Vrinda ; Buckell, John.
    In: Health Economics.
    RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:31:y:2022:i:2:p:363-381.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  5. Being Informed or Getting the Product?. (2022). Wrabel, Andrea ; Kupfer, Alexander ; Zimmermann, Steffen.
    In: Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK.
    RePEc:spr:binfse:v:64:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s12599-022-00772-w.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  6. Exploring Different Assumptions about Outcome-Related Risk Perceptions in Discrete Choice Experiments. (2022). Mentzakis, Emmanouil ; Schaafsma, Marije ; Wu, Hangjian.
    In: Environmental & Resource Economics.
    RePEc:kap:enreec:v:81:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10640-021-00638-x.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  7. Preferences for in-kind and in-cash home care insurance. (2022). van Ooijen, Raun ; Knoef, Marike ; de Bresser, Jochem.
    In: Journal of Health Economics.
    RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:84:y:2022:i:c:s0167629622000455.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  8. Seen but not considered? Awareness and consideration in choice analysis. (2022). Orquin, Jacob L ; Luken, Malte ; Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan ; Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina.
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:45:y:2022:i:c:s175553452200032x.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  9. .

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  10. Measuring public preferences in France for potential consequences stemming from re-allocation of healthcare resources. (2020). Pelletier-Fleury, Nathalie ; Gafni, Amiram ; Heidenreich, Sebastian ; Krucien, Nicolas.
    In: Social Science & Medicine.
    RePEc:eee:socmed:v:246:y:2020:i:c:s0277953619307701.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  11. The role of heterogeneity of patients’ preferences in kidney transplantation. (2020). Pasini, Giacomo ; Genie, Mesfin G ; Nicolo, Antonio.
    In: Journal of Health Economics.
    RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:72:y:2020:i:c:s0167629619307222.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  12. An integrated modelling approach examining the influence of goals, habit and learning on choice using visual attention data. (2020). Swait, Joffre ; Dubey, Subodh ; Blake, Miranda R ; Ghijben, Peter ; Lancsar, Emily.
    In: Journal of Business Research.
    RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:117:y:2020:i:c:p:44-57.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  13. An analysis of process-tracing research on consumer decision-making. (2020). Zuschke, Nick.
    In: Journal of Business Research.
    RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:111:y:2020:i:c:p:305-320.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  14. The role of heterogeneity of patients’ preferences in kidney transplantation. (2019). Pasini, Giacomo ; Genie, Mesfin G ; Nicolo, Antonio.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:ven:wpaper:2019:25.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  15. Smokers’ Rational Lexicographic Preferences for Cigarette Package Warnings: A Discrete Choice Experiment with Eye Tracking. (2018). Triunfo, Patricia ; Gerstenbluth, Mariana ; Harris, Jeffrey E.
    In: Documentos de Trabajo (working papers).
    RePEc:ude:wpaper:0218.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

References

References cited by this document

  1. Özdemir, S., Johnson, F. R., & Hauber, A. B. (2009). Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care. Journal of Health Economics, 28(4), 894–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.04.004.

  2. Armel, C. K., Beaumel, A., & Rangel, A. (2008). Biasing simple choices by manipulating relative visual attention. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(5), 396–403.

  3. Böckenholt, U., & Hynan, L. S. (1994). Caveats on a process‐tracing measure and a remedy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7(2), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960070203.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  4. Balcombe, K., Fraser, I., & McSorley, E. (2015). Visual attention and attribute attendance in multi‐attribute choice experiments: DISCRETE‐CHOICE EXPERIMENTS AND EYE‐TRACKING. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 30(3), 447–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.2383.

  5. Bateman, I. J., Diane, B., George Hutchinson, W., & Matthews, D. I. (2008). Learning design contingent valuation (LDCV): NOAA guidelines, preference learning and coherent arbitrariness. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 55(2), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2007.08.003.

  6. Boeri, M., Longo, A., Grisolía, J. M., Hutchinson, W. G., & Kee, F. (2013). The role of regret minimisation in lifestyle choices affecting the risk of coronary heart disease. Journal of Health Economics, 32(1), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2012.10.007.

  7. Borjesson, M., & Fosgerau, M. (2015). Response time patterns in a stated choice experiment. Journal of Choice Modelling, 14(March), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2015.02.001.

  8. Butler, S., Gilchrist, I. D., Burt, D. M., Perrett, D. I., Jones, E., & Harvey, M. (2005). Are the perceptual biases found in chimeric face processing reflected in eye‐movement patterns? Neuropsychologia, 43(1), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.06.005.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  9. Campbell, D., Hensher, D. A., & Scarpa, R. (2011). Non‐attendance to attributes in environmental choice analysis: A latent class specification. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 54(8), 1061–1076. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2010.549367.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  10. Caplin, A., & Dean, M. (2008). Economic insights from ‘neuroeconomic’ data. American Economic Review, 98(2), 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.2.169.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  11. Carlsson, F., Frykblom, P., & Lagerkvist, C. J. (2005). Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments. Economics Letters, 89(2), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2005.03.010.

  12. Chorus, C. (2012). Random regret minimization: An overview of model properties and empirical evidence. Transport Reviews, 32(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2011.609947.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  13. Chorus, C. G. (2010). A new model of random regret minimization. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 10(2), 181–196.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  14. Chorus, C. G., Arentze, T. A., & Timmermans, H. J. P. (2008). A random regret‐minimization model of travel choice. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2007.05.004.

  15. Clark, M. D., Determann, D., Petrou, S., Moro, D., & de Bekker‐Grob, E. W. (2014). Discrete choice experiments in health economics: A review of the literature. PharmacoEconomics, 32(9), 883–902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273‐014‐0170‐x.

  16. Coast, J., Al-Janabi, H., Sutton, E. J., Horrocks, S. A., Vosper, A. J., Swancutt, D. R., & Flynn, T. N. (2012). Using Qualitative Methods for Attribute Development for Discrete Choice Experiments: Issues and Recommendations: ATTRIBUTE DEVELOPMENT FOR DCEs. Health Economics, 21(6), 730–741. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1739.

  17. Dawes, R. M. (1979). The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American Psychologist, 34(7), 571–582. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.7.571.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  18. Day, B., & Pinto Prades, J.‐L. (2010). Ordering anomalies in choice experiments. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 59(3), 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2010.03.001.

  19. Day, B., Bateman, I. J., Carson, R. T., Dupont, D., Louviere, J. J., Morimoto, S., … Wang, P. (2012). Ordering effects and choice set awareness in repeat‐response stated preference studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 63(1), 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2011.09.001.

  20. de Bekker‐Grob, E. W., & Chorus, C. G. (2013). Random regret‐based discrete‐choice modelling: An application to healthcare. PharmacoEconomics, 31(7), 623–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-013-0059-0.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  21. de Bekker‐Grob, E. W., Ryan, M., & Gerard, K. (2012). Discrete choice experiments in health economics: A review of the literature. Health Economics, 21(2), 145–172. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1697.

  22. DeShazo, J. R., & Fermo, G. (2002). Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: The effects of complexity on choice consistency. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44(1), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2001.1199.

  23. Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). London: Springer.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  24. Durgin, F. H., Doyle, E., & Egan, L. (2008). Upper‐left gaze bias reveals competing search strategies in a reverse Stroop task. Acta Psychologica, 127(2), 428–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.08.007.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  25. Everdell, I. T., Marsh, H., Yurick, M. D., Munhall, K. G., & Par, M. (2007). Gaze behaviour in audiovisual speech perception: Asymmetrical distribution of face‐directed fixations. Perception, 36(10), 1535–1545. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5852.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  26. Flynn, T. N., Bilger, M., Malhotra, C., & Finkelstein, E. A. (2016). Are efficient designs used in discrete choice experiments too difficult for some respondents? A case study eliciting preferences for end‐of‐life care. PharmacoEconomics, 34(3), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273‐015‐0338‐z.

  27. Foulsham, T., Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Henrich, J., & Kingstone, A. (2010). Gaze allocation in a dynamic situation: Effects of social status and speaking. Cognition, 117(3), 319–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.09.003.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  28. Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (2001). Simple heuristics that make us smart. 1. issued as an Oxford Univ. Press paperback. Evolution and Cognition. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  29. Guo, K., Meints, K., Hall, C., Hall, S., & Mills, D. (2009). Left gaze bias in humans, rhesus monkeys and domestic dogs. Animal Cognition, 12(3), 409–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071‐008‐0199‐3.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  30. Henry, P. J. (2008). Student sampling as a theoretical problem. Psychological Inquiry, 19(2), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400802049951.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  31. Hensher, D. A., & Truong, T. P. (1985). Valuation of travel time savings. Journal of Transport, Economics and Policy, 19(3), 237–261.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  32. Hensher, D. A., Collins, A. T., & Greene, W. H. (2013). Accounting for attribute non‐attendance and common‐metric aggregation in a probabilistic decision process mixed multinomial logit model: A warning on potential confounding. Transportation, 40(5), 1003–1020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116‐012‐9447‐0.

  33. Hess, S., Stathopoulos, A., Campbell, D., O'Neill, V., & Caussade, S. (2013). It's not that I don't care, I just don't care very much: Confounding between attribute non‐attendance and taste heterogeneity. Transportation, 40(3), 583–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116‐012‐9438‐1.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  34. Hole, A. R. (2011). A discrete choice model with endogenous attribute attendance. Economics Letters, 110(3), 203–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2010.11.033.

  35. Hole, A. R., Kolstad, J. R., & Gyrd‐Hansen, D. (2013). Inferred vs. stated attribute non‐attendance in choice experiments: A study of doctors? Prescription behaviour. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 96 (December), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.09.009.

  36. Holmqvist, Kenneth, ed. 2011. Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  37. Jacquemet, N., Joule, R.‐V., Luchini, S., & Shogren, J. F. (2013). Preference elicitation under oath. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 65(1), 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2012.05.004.

  38. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.193.

  39. Karmarkar, U. R., Shiv, B., & Knutson, B. (2015). Cost conscious? The neural and behavioral impact of price primacy on decision making. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(4), 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0488.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  40. Kjær, T., Bech, M., Gyrd‐Hansen, D., & Hart‐Hansen, K. (2006). Ordering effect and price sensitivity in discrete choice experiments: Need we worry? Health Economics, 15(11), 1217–1228. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1117.

  41. Knoepfle, D. T., Wang, J. T.‐y., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). Studying learning in games using eye‐tracking. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2–3), 388–398. https://doi.org/10.1162/JEEA.2009.7.2‐3.388.

  42. Krucien, N., Ryan, M., & Hermens, F. (2017). Visual attention in multi‐attributes choices: What can eye‐tracking tell us? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 135 (March), 251–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2017.01.018.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  43. Lahey, J. N., & Oxley, D. (2016). The power of eye tracking in economics experiments. American Economic Review, 106(5), 309–313. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20161009.

  44. Loetscher, T., Bockisch, C. J., & Brugger, P. (2008). Looking for the answer: The mind's eye in number space. Neuroscience, 151(3), 725–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2007.07.068.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  45. Manski, C. F. (1977). The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision, 8(3), 229–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133443.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  46. Mantonakis, A., Rodero, P., Lesschaeve, I., & Hastie, R. (2009). Order in choice: Effects of serial position on preferences. Psychological Science, 20(11), 1309–1312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐9280.2009.02453.x.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  47. McIntosh, E., & Ryan, M. (2002). Using discrete choice experiments to derive welfare estimates for the provision of elective surgery: Implications of discontinuous preferences. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(3), 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167‐4870(02)00081‐8.

  48. McNair, B. J., Hensher, D. A., & Bennett, J. (2012). Modelling heterogeneity in response behaviour towards a sequence of discrete choice questions: A probabilistic decision process model. Environmental and Resource Economics, 51(4), 599–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640‐011‐9514‐6.

  49. Meibner, M., Musalem, A., & Huber, J. (2016). Eye tracking reveals processes that enable conjoint choices to become increasingly efficient with practice. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0467.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  50. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge; New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  51. Peterson, R. A., & Merunka, D. R. (2014). Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 1035–1041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.010.

  52. Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 85(3), 618–660.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  53. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  54. Reutskaja, E., Nagel, R., Camerer, C. F., & Rangel, A. (2011). Search dynamics in consumer choice under time pressure: An eye‐tracking study. American Economic Review, 101(2), 900–926. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.2.900.

  55. Risko, E. F., & Kingstone, A. (2011). Eyes wide shut: Implied social presence, eye tracking and attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(2), 291–296. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-010-0042-1.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  56. Rosenberger, R. S., Peterson, G. L., Clarke, A., & Brown, T. C. (2003). Measuring dispositions for lexicographic preferences of environmental goods: Integrating economics, psychology and ethics. Ecological Economics, 44(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921‐8009(02)00221‐5.

  57. Ryan, M., Watson, V., & Entwistle, V. (2009). Rationalising the irrational: A think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses. Health Economics, 18(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1369.

  58. Ryan, M., Yi, D., Avenell, A., Douglas, F., Aucott, L., van Teijlingen, E., & Vale, L. (2015). Gaining pounds by losing pounds: Preferences for lifestyle interventions to reduce obesity. Health Economics, Policy, and Law, 10(2), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133114000413.

  59. Saelensminde, K. (2006). Causes and consequences of lexicographic choices in stated choice studies. Ecological Economics, 59(3), 331–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.11.001.

  60. Scarpa, R., Zanoli, R., Bruschi, V., & Naspetti, S. (2013). Inferred and stated attribute non‐attendance in food choice experiments. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 95(1), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aas073.

  61. Scott, A., & Vick, S. (1999). Patients, doctors and contracts: An application of principal‐agent theory to the doctor‐patient relationship. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 46(2), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467‐9485.00124.

  62. Shimojo, S., Simion, C., Shimojo, E., & Scheier, C. (2003). Gaze bias both reflects and influences preference. Nature Neuroscience, 6(12), 1317–1322. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1150.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  63. Shugan, S. M. (1980). The cost of thinking. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.1086/208799.

  64. Spinks, J., & Mortimer, D. (2015). Lost in the crowd? Using eye‐tracking to investigate the effect of complexity on attribute non‐attendance in discrete choice experiments. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 16(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911‐016‐0251‐1.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  65. Tatler, B. W., Baddeley, R. J., & Vincent, B. T. (2006). The long and the short of it: Spatial statistics at fixation vary with saccade amplitude and task. Vision Research, 46(12), 1857–1862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2005.12.005.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  66. Train, K. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation (2nd ed.). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.

  67. Uggeldahl, K., Jacobsen, C., Lundhede, T. H., & Olsen, S. B. (2016). Choice certainty in discrete choice experiments: Will eye tracking provide useful measures? Journal of Choice Modelling, 20 (September), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2016.09.002.

  68. van Belle, G. (2010). Fixation patterns during recognition of personally familiar and unfamiliar faces. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00020.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  69. Van Loo, E. J., Caputo, V., Nayga, R. M., Seo, H.‐S., Zhang, B., & Verbeke, W. (2015). Sustainability labels on coffee: Consumer preferences, willingness‐to‐pay and visual attention to attributes. Ecological Economics, 118 (October), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.07.011.

  70. Viney, R., Savage, E., & Louviere, J. (2005). Empirical investigation of experimental design properties of discrete choice experiments in health care. Health Economics, 14(4), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.981.

  71. Wang, J. T.‐y., Spezio, M., & Camerer, C. F. (2010). Pinocchio's pupil: Using eyetracking and pupil dilation to understand truth telling and deception in sender‐receiver games. American Economic Review, 100(3), 984–1007. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.3.984.

Cocites

Documents in RePEc which have cited the same bibliography

  1. Research on Residents’ Willingness to Pay for Promoting the Green Development of Resource-Based Cities: A Case Study in Chifeng. (2021). Wang, Chenxing ; Zhang, Xueqi ; Zhao, Meng ; Wu, Gang.
    In: Sustainability.
    RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2833-:d:511384.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  2. To pay or not to pay? Cost information processing in the valuation of publicly funded healthcare. (2021). Genie, Mesfin G ; Krucien, Nicolas ; Ryan, Mandy.
    In: Social Science & Medicine.
    RePEc:eee:socmed:v:276:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621001544.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  3. Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods. (2021). Oppewal, Harmen ; Bliemer, Michiel ; Haghani, Milad ; Lancsar, Emily ; Rose, John M.
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:41:y:2021:i:c:s1755534521000555.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  4. Social desirability bias in the environmental economic valuation: An inferred valuation approach. (2021). Alcon, F ; Lopez-Becerra, E I.
    In: Ecological Economics.
    RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:184:y:2021:i:c:s092180092100046x.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  5. Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods. (2021). Oppewal, Harmen ; Lancsar, Emily ; Haghani, Milad ; Rose, John M.
    In: Papers.
    RePEc:arx:papers:2102.02945.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  6. Can incentive-compatibility reduce hypothetical bias in smokers’ experimental choice behavior? A randomized discrete choice experiment. (2020). White, Justin S ; Buckell, John ; Shang, CE.
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:37:y:2020:i:c:s175553452030052x.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  7. Promoting demand-based pricing. (2019). Larson, Ron.
    In: Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management.
    RePEc:pal:jorapm:v:18:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41272-017-0126-9.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  8. Laboratory experimentation and simulation of discrete direction choices: Investigating hypothetical bias, decision-rule effect and external validity based on aggregate prediction measures. (2019). Sarvi, Majid ; Haghani, Milad.
    In: Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.
    RePEc:eee:transa:v:130:y:2019:i:c:p:134-157.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  9. Stubbing out hypothetical bias: improving tobacco market predictions by combining stated and revealed preference data. (2019). Hess, Stephane ; Buckell, John.
    In: Journal of Health Economics.
    RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:65:y:2019:i:c:p:93-102.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  10. The eyes have it: Using eye tracking to inform information processing strategies in multi‐attributes choices. (2018). Hermens, Frouke ; Krucien, Nicolas ; Ryan, Mandy.
    In: Health Economics.
    RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:27:y:2018:i:4:p:709-721.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  11. Women’s preferences for alternative financial incentive schemes for breastfeeding: A discrete choice experiment. (2018). Fox-Rushby, Julia ; Strong, Mark ; Relton, Clare ; Higgins, Ailish ; de Bekker-Grob, Esther W ; Anokye, Nana ; Becker, Frauke.
    In: PLOS ONE.
    RePEc:plo:pone00:0194231.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  12. Hypothetical bias and decision-rule effect in modelling discrete directional choices. (2018). Haghani, Milad ; Sarvi, Majid.
    In: Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.
    RePEc:eee:transa:v:116:y:2018:i:c:p:361-388.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  13. Designing capacity development activities of small-scale farmers in developing countries based on discrete choice experiments. (2018). Otter, V ; Lagerkvist, C J ; Feil, J.-H., ; Landmann, D.
    In: 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia.
    RePEc:ags:iaae18:277738.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  14. Discrete Choice Experiment Response Rates: A Meta‐analysis. (2017). Watson, Verity ; Bekkergrob, Esther ; Becker, Frauke.
    In: Health Economics.
    RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:26:y:2017:i:6:p:810-817.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  15. Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products. (2017). Olsen, Søren ; Alemu, Mohammed Hussen.
    In: IFRO Working Paper.
    RePEc:foi:wpaper:2017_05.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  16. Testing on-site sampling correction in discrete choice experiments. (2017). Liu, Tzu-Ming.
    In: Tourism Management.
    RePEc:eee:touman:v:60:y:2017:i:c:p:439-441.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  17. TRADE-OFFS BETWEEN CIVIL LIBERTIES AND NATIONAL SECURITY: A DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENT. (2017). Finkelstein, Eric Andrew ; Ozdemir, Semra ; Chay, Junxing ; Rowe, Brent ; Wood, Dallas ; Mansfield, Carol.
    In: Contemporary Economic Policy.
    RePEc:bla:coecpo:v:35:y:2017:i:2:p:292-311.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  18. Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. (2016). Raschky, Paul ; Leroux, Anke ; Gangadharan, Lata ; Brent, Daniel.
    In: Monash Economics Working Papers.
    RePEc:mos:moswps:2016-42.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  19. Towards a common standard – A reporting checklist for web-based stated preference valuation surveys and a critique for mode surveys. (2016). TSAGARAKIS, KONSTANTINOS ; Olsen, Søren ; Menegaki, Angeliki .
    In: Journal of choice modelling.
    RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:18:y:2016:i:c:p:18-50.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  20. Fair farming: Preferences for fair labor certification using four elicitation methods. (2015). Vassilopoulos, Achilleas ; Nayga, Rodolfo ; Lusk, Jayson ; Drichoutis, Andreas.
    In: MPRA Paper.
    RePEc:pra:mprapa:62546.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  21. Reference dependence, consequentiality and social desirability in value elicitation: A study of fair labor labeling. (2015). Vassilopoulos, Achilleas ; Nayga, Rodolfo ; Lusk, Jayson ; Drichoutis, Andreas ; Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., .
    In: 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy.
    RePEc:ags:eaa143:202705.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  22. Putting Ones Money Where Ones Mouth is: Increasing Saliency in the Field.. (2014). Raschky, Paul ; Leroux, Anke ; Gangadharan, Lata ; Brent, Daniel.
    In: Monash Economics Working Papers.
    RePEc:mos:moswps:2014-43.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  23. Task complexity and response certainty in discrete choice experiments: An application to drug treatments for juvenile idiopathic arthritis. (2014). Watson, Verity ; Regier, Dean A. ; Ungar, Wendy J. ; Burnett, Heather .
    In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics).
    RePEc:eee:soceco:v:50:y:2014:i:c:p:40-49.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  24. Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys. (2014). Olsen, Søren ; Ladenburg, Jacob.
    In: Resource and Energy Economics.
    RePEc:eee:resene:v:37:y:2014:i:c:p:39-63.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  25. QUALITY OF LIFE, TREATMENTS, AND PATIENTS WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR A COMPLETE REMISSION OF CERVICAL CANCER IN TAIWAN. (2012). Ying, YungHsiang ; Chang, Koyin ; Lang, HuiChu .
    In: Health Economics.
    RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:21:y:2012:i:10:p:1217-1233.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  26. Can perceived task complexity influence cheap talks effectiveness in reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice studies?. (2012). Park, John ; Campbell, Benjamin ; Nayga, Rodolfo ; Silva, Andres .
    In: Applied Economics Letters.
    RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:19:y:2012:i:17:p:1711-1714.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  27. Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment. (2012). Riise, Julie ; Hole, Arne ; Kolstad, Julie .
    In: Empirical Economics.
    RePEc:spr:empeco:v:42:y:2012:i:2:p:445-469.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  28. How does cost matter in health‐care discrete‐choice experiments?. (2011). zdemir, Semra ; Johnson, Reed F. ; Phillips, Kathryn A. ; Marshall, Deborah A. ; Mohamed, Ateesha F..
    In: Health Economics.
    RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:20:y:2011:i:3:p:323-330.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  29. Incentive Design to Enhance the Reach of Weight Loss Program. (2011). You, Wen ; Parmeter, Christopher ; Kanninen, Barbara ; Boyle, Kevin ; Estabrooks, Paul A. ; ChristopherF. Parmeter, ; Hashemi, Ali .
    In: 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
    RePEc:ags:aaea11:103669.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  30. Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment.. (2010). Riise, Julie ; Hole, Arne.
    In: Working Papers in Economics.
    RePEc:hhs:bergec:2010_003.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Coauthors

Authors registered in RePEc who have wrote about the same topic

Report date: 2024-12-24 14:45:34 || Missing content? Let us know

CitEc is a RePEc service, providing citation data for Economics since 2001. Sponsored by INOMICS. Last updated October, 6 2023. Contact: CitEc Team.