通过使用私人和公共产品的独立模型改进对假设偏差的元分析

IF 1.9 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy Pub Date : 2021-09-05 DOI:10.1080/21606544.2021.1971114
Baoubadi Atozou, Stéphane Bergeron, M. Doyon, L. Tamini
{"title":"通过使用私人和公共产品的独立模型改进对假设偏差的元分析","authors":"Baoubadi Atozou, Stéphane Bergeron, M. Doyon, L. Tamini","doi":"10.1080/21606544.2021.1971114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Previous meta-analyses examined hypothetical bias studies with the aim of identifying characteristics of stated preference (SP) design that potentially reduce hypothetical bias. However, previous meta-analyses combined observations for both public and private goods in their models. In this paper, we argue that eliciting values for public and private goods should be considered in separate models. Individuals’ behaviours, the choice of mechanism and the efficiency of mitigation techniques are specific to each type of good. Separating the models should allow more precise model specification and better identification of design effects. With two meta-regressions hierarchical mixed-effect models we provide the first meta-analysis for public and private goods separately. This approach provides specific information regarding SP design and better insight into the efficiency of mitigation techniques to reduce hypothetical bias.","PeriodicalId":44903,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving meta-analyses on hypothetical bias by using separate models for private and public goods\",\"authors\":\"Baoubadi Atozou, Stéphane Bergeron, M. Doyon, L. Tamini\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21606544.2021.1971114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Previous meta-analyses examined hypothetical bias studies with the aim of identifying characteristics of stated preference (SP) design that potentially reduce hypothetical bias. However, previous meta-analyses combined observations for both public and private goods in their models. In this paper, we argue that eliciting values for public and private goods should be considered in separate models. Individuals’ behaviours, the choice of mechanism and the efficiency of mitigation techniques are specific to each type of good. Separating the models should allow more precise model specification and better identification of design effects. With two meta-regressions hierarchical mixed-effect models we provide the first meta-analysis for public and private goods separately. This approach provides specific information regarding SP design and better insight into the efficiency of mitigation techniques to reduce hypothetical bias.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2021.1971114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2021.1971114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要先前的荟萃分析检查了假设偏差研究,目的是确定可能减少假设偏差的陈述偏好(SP)设计的特征。然而,之前的荟萃分析在其模型中结合了对公共和私人商品的观察。在本文中,我们认为公共和私人物品的启发价值应该在单独的模型中考虑。个人的行为、机制的选择和缓解技术的效率针对每种类型的商品。分离模型应允许更精确的模型规范和更好地识别设计效果。通过两个元回归层次混合效应模型,我们分别提供了第一个公共和私人商品的元分析。这种方法提供了关于SP设计的具体信息,并更好地了解了减少假设偏差的缓解技术的效率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Improving meta-analyses on hypothetical bias by using separate models for private and public goods
ABSTRACT Previous meta-analyses examined hypothetical bias studies with the aim of identifying characteristics of stated preference (SP) design that potentially reduce hypothetical bias. However, previous meta-analyses combined observations for both public and private goods in their models. In this paper, we argue that eliciting values for public and private goods should be considered in separate models. Individuals’ behaviours, the choice of mechanism and the efficiency of mitigation techniques are specific to each type of good. Separating the models should allow more precise model specification and better identification of design effects. With two meta-regressions hierarchical mixed-effect models we provide the first meta-analysis for public and private goods separately. This approach provides specific information regarding SP design and better insight into the efficiency of mitigation techniques to reduce hypothetical bias.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
26
期刊最新文献
Animal-welfare-labelled meat is not a stepping stone to animal-free diets: empirical evidence from a survey The fishing industry and the growing food insecurity in Africa: an empirical analysis with an instrumented quantile approach Costless CO 2 emissions abatement through improved government effectiveness The economics of waste oil recycling in the EU Innovation barriers as triggers of firms’ eco-innovations: the mediating role of public and market knowledge sourcing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1