IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/ags/aaea14/177167.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Position bias in best-worst scaling surveys: a case study on trust in institutions

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Using virtual environments to improve the realism of choice experiments: A case study about coastal erosion management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 193-208.
  2. Qi, Danyi & Penn, Jerrod & Li, Ran & Roe, Brian E., 2022. "Winning ugly: Profit maximizing marketing strategies for ugly foods," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
  3. Boxebeld, Sander, 2024. "Ordering effects in discrete choice experiments: A systematic literature review across domains," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
  4. Huang, Lijuan & Mou, Jian & See-To, Eric W.K. & Kim, Jongki, 2019. "Consumer perceived value preferences for mobile marketing in China: A mixed method approach," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 70-86.
  5. Campbell, Danny & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2018. "The link between response time and preference, variance and processing heterogeneity in stated choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 18-34.
  6. Lin, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Green identity labeling, environmental information, and pro-environmental food choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
  7. Soto, José R. & Escobedo, Francisco J. & Khachatryan, Hayk & Adams, Damian C., 2018. "Consumer demand for urban forest ecosystem services and disservices: Examining trade-offs using choice experiments and best-worst scaling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 31-39.
  8. Mansaray, B. & Jin, S. & Yuan, R. & Li, H., 2018. "Farmers Preferences for Attributes of Seed Rice in Sierra Leone: A Best-Worst Scaling Approach," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277552, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  9. Danny Campbell & Seda Erdem, 2019. "Including Opt-Out Options in Discrete Choice Experiments: Issues to Consider," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, February.
  10. Erdem, Seda, 2018. "Who do UK consumers trust for information about nanotechnology?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 133-142.
  11. Seda Erdem & Danny Campbell & Tony McCarthy, 2022. "Can traffic light labelling nudge heuristical decision processes?," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(1), pages 37-45, December.
  12. McLeod, Alexandria N. & Yang, Wei & Fang, Di & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., 2022. "Aligning Values to Labels: A Best-Worst Analysis of Food Labels," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322163, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  13. Erdem, Seda & McCarthy, Tony, 2016. "The effect of front-of-pack nutrition labelling formats on consumers’ food choices and decision-making: merging discrete choice experiment with an eye tracking experiment," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235864, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  14. Boaitey, Albert K. & Lai, Yufeng, 2021. "Do Consumers Care About Early Calf-Mother Separation An Application Of Best Worst Scoring To Milk Choice," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313991, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  15. Alberto Longo & Danny Campbell, 2017. "The Determinants of Brownfields Redevelopment in England," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(2), pages 261-283, June.
  16. Lien Nguyen & Hanna Jokimäki & Ismo Linnosmaa & Eirini-Christina Saloniki & Laurie Batchelder & Juliette Malley & Hui Lu & Peter Burge & Birgit Trukeschitz & Julien Forder, 2022. "Valuing informal carers’ quality of life using best-worst scaling—Finnish preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for carers (ASCOT-Carer)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(3), pages 357-374, April.
  17. Muunda, Emmanuel & Mtimet, Nadhem & Schneider, Franziska & Wanyoike, Francis & Dominguez-Salas, Paula & Alonso, Silvia, 2021. "Could the new dairy policy affect milk allocation to infants in Kenya? A best-worst scaling approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
  18. Erlend Dancke Sandorf & Danny Campbell, 2019. "Accommodating satisficing behaviour in stated choice experiments," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(1), pages 133-162.
  19. Phillips, Yvonne & Marsh, Dan, 2015. "Virtual Reality and Scope Sensitivity in a Choice Experiment About Coastal Erosion," 2015 Conference (59th), February 10-13, 2015, Rotorua, New Zealand 202571, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  20. Vincenzina Caputo & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "What agricultural and food policies do U.S. consumers prefer? A best–worst scaling approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 75-93, January.
  21. Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan & Lüken, Malte & Orquin, Jacob L., 2022. "Seen but not considered? Awareness and consideration in choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
  22. He, Ke & Zhang, Junbiao & Zeng, Yangmei, 2020. "Households’ willingness to pay for energy utilization of crop straw in rural China：Based on an improved UTAUT model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
  23. Soto, José R. & Adams, Damian C. & Escobedo, Francisco J., 2016. "Landowner attitudes and willingness to accept compensation from forest carbon offsets: Application of best–worst choice modeling in Florida USA," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 35-42.
  24. Lusk, Jayson L. & Crespi, John M. & McFadden, Brandon R. & Cherry, J. Bradley C. & Martin, Laura & Bruce, Amanda, 2016. "Neural antecedents of a random utility model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 132(PA), pages 93-103.
  25. Elizabeth S. Byrd & Nicole J. Olynk Widmar & Benjamin M. Gramig, 2018. "Presentation matters: Number of attributes presented impacts estimated preferences," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 377-389, March.
  26. Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy & Campbell, Danny, 2020. "Does attribute order influence attribute-information processing in discrete choice experiments?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
  27. Yeongmin Kwon & Suji Kim & Hyungjoo Kim & Jihye Byun, 2020. "What Attributes Do Passengers Value in Electrified Buses?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, May.
  28. Ivan Sever & Miroslav Verbič & Eva Klaric Sever, 2020. "Estimating Attribute-Specific Willingness-to-Pay Values from a Health Care Contingent Valuation Study: A Best–Worst Choice Approach," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 97-107, February.
  29. Shaosheng Jin & Bashiru Mansaray & Xin Jin & Haoyang Li, 2020. "Farmers’ preferences for attributes of rice varieties in Sierra Leone," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(5), pages 1185-1197, October.
  30. Campbell, Danny & Boeri, Marco & Doherty, Edel & George Hutchinson, W., 2015. "Learning, fatigue and preference formation in discrete choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 345-363.
  31. Gómez, Patricia & Shaikh, Nazrul I. & Erkoc, Murat, 2024. "Continuous improvement in the efficient use of energy in office buildings through peers effects," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 360(C).
  32. Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Crastes dit Sourd, Romain & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre, 2018. "The effect of attribute-alternative matrix displays on preferences and processing strategies," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 113-132.
  33. Hajji, Assma & Trukeschitz, Birgit & Malley, Juliette & Batchelder, Laurie & Saloniki, Eirini & Linnosmaa, Ismo & Lu, Hui, 2020. "Population-based preference weights for the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) for service users for Austria: Findings from a best-worst experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).
  34. Seda Erdem & Danny Campbell, 2017. "Preferences for public involvement in health service decisions: a comparison between best-worst scaling and trio-wise stated preference elicitation techniques," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(9), pages 1107-1123, December.
  35. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Stability of Willingness-to-Pay for Coastal Management: A Choice Experiment Across Three Time Periods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 64-73.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.