IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea11/103707.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Practice Rounds Bias Experimental Auction Results?

Author

Listed:
  • Corrigan, Jay R.
  • Rousu, Matthew C.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Corrigan, Jay R. & Rousu, Matthew C., 2011. "Do Practice Rounds Bias Experimental Auction Results?," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103707, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103707
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.103707
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/103707/files/Corrigan%20and%20Rousu%20AAEA.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.103707?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Ariely & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2003. ""Coherent Arbitrariness": Stable Demand Curves Without Stable Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 73-106.
    2. Rousu, Matthew C. & Corrigan, Jay R., 2008. "Consumer Preferences for Fair Trade Foods: Implications for Trade Policy," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-3.
    3. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Panagiotis Lazaridis, 2011. "The Role of Training in Experimental Auctions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 521-527.
    4. repec:ken:wpaper:0803 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:feb:framed:0080 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Teresa Briz & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr, 2014. "Detecting false positives in experimental auctions: A case study of projection bias in food consumption," Working Papers 2014-4, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Corrigan, Jay R. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Depositario, Dinah Pura T., 2014. "Do practice rounds affect experimental auction results?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 42-44.
    3. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas & Shogren, Jason F., 2015. "Certainty and overconfidence in future preferences for food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 101-113.
    4. Goda, Gopi Shah & Levy, Matthew R. & Manchester, Colleen Flaherty & Sojourner, Aaron & Tasoff, Joshua, 2020. "Who is a passive saver under opt-in and auto-enrollment?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 301-321.
    5. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    6. Steffen Altmann & Armin Falk & Paul Heidhues & Rajshri Jayaraman & Marrit Teirlinck, 2019. "Defaults and Donations: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(5), pages 808-826, December.
    7. Ifcher, John & Zarghamee, Homa, 2020. "Behavioral economic phenomena in decision-making for others," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    8. Pascaline Dupas, 2014. "Short‐Run Subsidies and Long‐Run Adoption of New Health Products: Evidence From a Field Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 197-228, January.
    9. George Deltas & Thanasis Stengos & Eleftherios Zacharias, 2011. "Product line pricing in a vertically differentiated oligopoly," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(3), pages 907-929, August.
    10. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    11. Dan Ariely & Kristina Shampan'er, 2006. "How small is zero price? : the true value of free products," Working Papers 06-16, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    12. Yizhao Jiang, 2022. "The Influence of Payment Method: Do Consumers Pay More with Mobile Payment?," Papers 2210.14631, arXiv.org.
    13. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    15. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    16. Johannesson Magnus & Östling Robert & Ranehill Eva, 2010. "The Effect of Competition on Physical Activity: A Randomized Trial," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, September.
    17. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Georg D. Granic, 2023. "Does choice change preferences? An incentivized test of the mere choice effect," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(3), pages 499-521, July.
    18. Paul Dolan & Robert Metcalfe, 2012. "Valuing Health," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(4), pages 578-582, July.
    19. Joo Heon Park & Douglas L. MacLachlan, 2013. "Estimating willingness to pay by risk adjustment mechanism," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 37-46, January.
    20. François Cochard & Alexandre Flage & Gilles Grolleau & Angela Sutan, 2020. "Are individuals more generous in loss contexts?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(4), pages 845-866, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.