Acceso usuarios
Tuba Tunçel, James K. Hammitt
This study reports a new meta-analysis of papers that elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) and willingness-to-accept compensation (WTA) measures of value for the same good. We investigate the effects of type of good and several survey-design features on the WTP/WTA disparity, measured as the logarithm of the ratio of mean WTA to mean WTP. Confirming pioneering meta-analysis, we find the disparity is smaller for ordinary private goods than for public and non-market goods, that it is not solely an artifact of using hypothetical transactions or other weak experimental or survey methods, and that it is smaller for studies using student subjects. In addition, we find that the disparity is smaller when subjects have experience valuing the good in real markets or through repeated experimental trials. In contrast to Horowitz and McConnell, we find the disparity is significantly smaller in studies using incentive-compatible elicitation mechanisms. The disparity is smaller in more recent studies, an effect that is attributable only in part to changes in study characteristics.
