Cognitive biases and design effects in experimental auctions

Cognitive biases and design effects in experimental auctions Purpose – Experimental auctions are widely used as a non-hypothetical value elicitation method to examine consumer preferences for novel, controversial foods. However, despite its advantages over hypothetical methods, its practice might lead to a wide variety of biases. The purpose of this paper is to provide a list of key cognitive biases and design effects in food auction research and to deliver scientifically underpinned procedures in order to assess, control and reduce them. Its applicability and relevance is examined in auctions on willingness-to-pay for folate (GM) biofortified rice. Design/methodology/approach – Based on auction literature, a list of 18 biases has been developed. Experimental auctions were conducted with 252 women from Shanxi Province, China to test the occurrence of eight biases, while demonstrating measures to reduce the risk of ten biases. Findings – The results lend support for three information-related effects, i.e. confirmation bias, conflicting product information effects and a primacy bias, but not for a multiple-good valuation effect, a panel size effect, a trial winner effect and time-related sampling biases. Furthermore, there are no clear indications of social desirability bias, auction fever and a false consensus effect. Research limitations/implications – This study emphasizes the need to take into account, and measure the risk of various biases when developing, organizing and interpreting experimental auctions. Future research should further extend the list of biases and validate the study findings. Originality/value – By using a highly topical subject, this study is one of the first to address the potential risk of cognitive biases and design effects in experimental (food) auctions. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png China Agricultural Economic Review Emerald Publishing

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/cognitive-biases-and-design-effects-in-experimental-auctions-s4KkTndB0a
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
1756-137X
DOI
10.1108/CAER-08-2013-0116
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – Experimental auctions are widely used as a non-hypothetical value elicitation method to examine consumer preferences for novel, controversial foods. However, despite its advantages over hypothetical methods, its practice might lead to a wide variety of biases. The purpose of this paper is to provide a list of key cognitive biases and design effects in food auction research and to deliver scientifically underpinned procedures in order to assess, control and reduce them. Its applicability and relevance is examined in auctions on willingness-to-pay for folate (GM) biofortified rice. Design/methodology/approach – Based on auction literature, a list of 18 biases has been developed. Experimental auctions were conducted with 252 women from Shanxi Province, China to test the occurrence of eight biases, while demonstrating measures to reduce the risk of ten biases. Findings – The results lend support for three information-related effects, i.e. confirmation bias, conflicting product information effects and a primacy bias, but not for a multiple-good valuation effect, a panel size effect, a trial winner effect and time-related sampling biases. Furthermore, there are no clear indications of social desirability bias, auction fever and a false consensus effect. Research limitations/implications – This study emphasizes the need to take into account, and measure the risk of various biases when developing, organizing and interpreting experimental auctions. Future research should further extend the list of biases and validate the study findings. Originality/value – By using a highly topical subject, this study is one of the first to address the potential risk of cognitive biases and design effects in experimental (food) auctions.

Journal

China Agricultural Economic ReviewEmerald Publishing

Published: Aug 26, 2014

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off