An experimental test of the solemn oath in eliciting sincere preferences

Wu, Hanxiao and Qin, Botao (2019): An experimental test of the solemn oath in eliciting sincere preferences.

Abstract

Hypothetical bias is the gap between the hypothetical willingness to pay and the real economic payment. Subjects may overstate or understate their willingness to pay due to strategic behaviour. This bias is common in contingent valuation studies. In this study, we attempt to use a commitment device to correct the bias, in order to elicit sincere preferences. We use a solemn oath in second-price auctions, using both induced valuations and homegrown valuations. Using a random effect panel data model, we draw three conclusions: (1) there is a gap between subjects' bids and their true willingness to pay due to the violation of both the budget constraint and the participation constraint; (2) oaths in the induced value experiment can increase subjects' bids towards the induced value only given real monetary incentives; (3) oaths can modestly correct the hypothetical bias in the homegrown valuation experiment.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Preference elicitation, Oath, Second-price auction, Induced-value experiment, Homegrown valuation
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C90 - General; D - Microeconomics > D4 - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design > D44 - Auctions; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q51 - Valuation of Environmental Effects

References

Aarts, A. A., Anderson, J. E., Anderson, C., Attridge, P. R., Attwood, A. S., Axt, J., Babel, M., Bahnik, S., Baranski, E., Barnettcowan, M., et al. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251):943{943.

Bishop, R. C. and Heberlein, T. A. (1986). Does contingent valuation work.

Bohm, P. (1972). Estimating demand for public goods: An experiment. European Economic Review, 3(2):111{130.

Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Forsell, E., Ho, T.-H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., Kirchler, M., Almenberg, J., Altmejd, A., Chan, T., Heikensten, E., Holzmeister, F., Imai, T., Isaksson, S., Nave, G., Pfei�er, T., Razen, M., and Wu, H. (2016). Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics. Science, 351(6280):1433{1436. 15

Carlsson, F., Kataria, M., Krupnick, A., Lampi, E., L�ofgren, �A., Qin, P., and Sterner, T. (2013). The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the trutha multiple country test of an oath script. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 89:105{121.

de Magistris, T. and Pascucci, S. (2014). The e�ect of the solemn oath script in hypothetical choice experiment survey: A pilot study. Economics Letters, 123(2):252{255.

Demagistris, T., Gracia, A., and Nayga, R. M. (2013). On the use of honesty priming tasks to mitigate hypothetical bias in choice experiments. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 95(5):1136{1154.

Ehmke, M. D., Lusk, J. L., and List, J. A. (2008). Is hypothetical bias a universal phenomenon? a multinational investigation. Land economics, 84(3):489{500.

Ellingsen, T. and Johannesson, M. (2004). Promises, threats and fairness. The Economic Journal, 114(495):397{420.

Fisher, R. A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd. Geller, E. S., Kalsher, M. J., Rudd, J. R., and Lehman, G. R. (1989). Promoting safety belt use on a university campus: An integration of commitment and incentive strategies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19(1):3{19.

Jacquemet, N., James, A., Luchini, S., and Shogren, J. F. (2017). Referenda under oath. Environmental and Resource Economics, 67(3):479{504.

Jacquemet, N., Joule, R.-V., Luchini, S., and Shogren, J. F. (2013). Preference elicitation under oath. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 65(1):110{132. 16

Kim, H. and Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? a cultural analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77(4):785{800.

Maniadis, Z., Tufano, F., and List, J. A. (2014). One swallow doesn't make a summer: New evidence on anchoring e�ects. American Economic Review, 104(1):277{290.

Murphy, J. J., Allen, P. G., Stevens, T. H., and Weatherhead, D. (2005). A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation. Environ- mental and Resource Economics, 30(3):313{325.

Ostrom, E., Walker, J., and Gardner, R. (1992). Covenants with and without a sword: Self-governance is possible. American political science Review, 86(2):404{417.

Wang, T. H. and Katzev, R. D. (1990). Group commitment and resource conservation: Two �eld experiments on promoting recycling. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20(4):265{275.