Abstract
Respondents were shown brief statements (“headlines”) referring to various threats to the environment or to public health, and other public issues. An intervention to deal with each problem was also introduced by a single sentence. Some respondents were asked to indicate their willingness to pay for the interventions by voluntary contributions. Others indicated their opinion of the intervention on a conventional rating scale, rated the personal satisfaction of contributing to it, or rated the importance of the problem. Group averages of these response measures were obtained for a large set of issues. Computed over issues, the rank-order correlations between the different measures were very high, suggesting that group averages of WTP and of other opinion statements are measures of the same public attitudes. Observed preference reversals and violations of monotonicity in contributions are better explained by a concept of attitude than by the notion of economic value that underlies the contingent valuation method. Contributions and purchases do not follow the same logic. Possible implications for the contingent valuation method are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Andreoni, James. (1990). “Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods. A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving,”Economic Journal 100, 464–477.
Ajzen, Icek. (1988).Attitudes, Personality and Behavior. Chicago: Dorsey.
Arrow (1982). “Risk Perception in Psychology and in Economics,”Economic Inquiry 20, 1–9.
Baron, Jonathan. (1993). “Heuristics and Biases in Equity Judgments: A Utilitarian Approach.” In B.A. Mellers and J. Baron (eds.),Psychological Perspectives on Justice: Theory and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109–137.
Baron, Jonathan, and Ilana Ritov.(1993). “Intuitions About Penalties and Compensation in the Context of Tort Law,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7, 17–33.
Bazerman, Max H. (1990).Judgment in Managerial Decision Making, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.
Box, G.E.P., and G.S. Watson. (1962). “Robustness to Non-Normality of Regression Tests,”Biometrika 49, 93–106.
Carson, Richard T. et al. (1992).A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. A report for the Attorney General of the State of Alaska, November 1992.
Contingent Valuation Panel. (1993). “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation,”Federal Register 58 (10), January 15,1993.
D'Arge, Ralph C. (1989). “A Practical Guide to Economic Valuation of the Environment.” InThirty-Fourth Annual Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute Proceedings. New York: Matthew Bendier and Co.
Desvousges, William H. et al. (1992). “Measuring Non-Use Damages Using Contingent Valuation: An Experimental Evaluation of Accuracy,”Research Triangle Institute Monograph 92-1.
Diamond, Peter A., and Jerry A. Hausman. (1993). “On Contingent Valuation Measurement of Non-Use Values.” In J.A. Hausman (ed.),Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
Diamond, Peter A. et al. (1993). “Does Contingent Valuation Measure Preferences? Experimental Evidence.” In J.A. Hausman (ed.),Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
Eagly, Alice H., and Shelly Chaiken. (1993).The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Fischhoff, Baruch, and Lita Furby. (1988). “Measuring Values: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Transactions with Special Reference to Contingent Valuation of Visibility,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1, 147–184.
Fischhoff, B. et al. (1993). “Embedding Effects: Stimulus Representation and Response Mode,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 6 (3), 211–234.
Gilovich, Thomas. (1991).How We Know What Isn 't So: The Fallibility of Human Reasoning in Everyday Life. New York: Free Press.
Green, Donald P. (1992). “The Price of Elasticity of Mass Preferences,”American Political Science Review 86 (1), 128–148.
Hanemann, W. Michael. (1992). “Comments Concerning Non-Use Values and The Contingent Valuation Method.” Submitted to the NOAA panel on the CVM, July 22,1992.
Irwin, Julie R. et al. (1993). “Preference Reversals and the Measurement of Environmental Values,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 6, 5–18.
Kahneman, Daniel, and Jack L. Knetsch. (1992). “Valuing Public Goods: The Purchase of Moral Satisfaction,”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 22, 57–70.
Kahneman, Daniel et al. (1993). “Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Psychological Perspective,”Psychological Science 4, 310–315.
Kahneman, Daniel, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky. (1982).Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kemp, Michael A., and Christopher Maxwell. (1993). “Exploring a budget context for contingent valuation estimates.” In J.A. Hausman (ed.),Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
Lazo, Jeffrey K. et al. (1992). “Can Contingent Valuation Measure Non-Use Values?”American Journal of Agricultural Economics (December), 1126–1132.
Magat, Wesley A., W. Kip Viscusi, and John Huber. (1988). “Paired Comparison and Contingent Valuation Approaches to Morbidity Risk Valuation,”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 15, 395–411.
Margolis, H. (1982).Selfishness, Altruism and Rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
McClelland, Gary H. et al. (1992).Methods of Measuring Non-Use Values: A Contingent Valuation Study of Groundwater Cleanup. Center for Economic Analysis, University of Colorado.
McFadden, Daniel, and Gregory K. Leonard. (1993). “Issues in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods.” In J.A. Hausman (ed.),Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
Nickerson, Carol A.E. (1994). “Does Willingness-to-Pay Reflect the Purchase of Moral Satisfaction? A Reconsideration of Kahneman and Knetsch,”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, in press.
Petty, Richard E., and John T. Caccioppo. (1986). “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 19, 123–205. San Diego: Academic Press.
Randall, Alan, and John P. Hoehn. (1992). “Embedding Effects in Contingent Valuation: Implications for Natural Resource Damage Assessment.” Staff Paper No. 92-14, Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University.
Savage, Ian. (1993). “An Empirical Investigation on the Effect of Psychological Perceptions on the Willingness-To-Pay to Reduce Risk,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 6, (1), 75–90.
Schkade, David A., and John W. Payne. “How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions: A Verbal Protocol Analysis,”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, in press.
Seber, G.A.F. (1977).Linear Regression Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Smith, V. Kerry. (1992). “Arbitrary Values, Good Causes and Premature Verdicts,”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 22, 71–89.
Tolley, George S., and Alan Randall. (1983).Establishing and Valuing the Effects of Improved Visibility in the Eastern United States. Interim report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. (1986). “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions,”Journal of Business 59, S251-S278.
Tversky, Amos, Shmuel Sattath, and Paul Slovic. (1988). “Contingent Weighting in Judgment and Choice,”Psychological Review 95, 371–384.
Tversky, Amos, Paul Slovic, and Daniel Kahneman. (1990). “The Causes of Preference Reversal,”American Economic Review 80, 204–217.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kahneman, D., Ritov, I. Determinants of stated willingness to pay for public goods: A study in the headline method. J Risk Uncertainty 9, 5–37 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01073401
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01073401