Advanced

The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap revisited: The role of emotions and moral satisfaction

Biel, A; Johansson-Stenman, O and Nilsson, A (2011) In Journal of Economic Psychology 32(6). p.908-917
Abstract
While many earlier studies have found that people's maximum willingness to pay for having a good is often substantially lower than their minimum willingness to accept not having it, more recent experimental evidence suggests that this discrepancy vanishes for standard consumption goods when an incentive-compatible design without misconceptions is used. This paper hypothesises that there is nevertheless a discrepancy for goods with a perceived moral character, such as contributions to a good cause, and moreover that the reason for this discrepancy can largely be explained by differences in emotions and moral perceptions. The results from a real-money dichotomous-choice experiment, combined with measurements of emotions and morality, are... (More)
While many earlier studies have found that people's maximum willingness to pay for having a good is often substantially lower than their minimum willingness to accept not having it, more recent experimental evidence suggests that this discrepancy vanishes for standard consumption goods when an incentive-compatible design without misconceptions is used. This paper hypothesises that there is nevertheless a discrepancy for goods with a perceived moral character, such as contributions to a good cause, and moreover that the reason for this discrepancy can largely be explained by differences in emotions and moral perceptions. The results from a real-money dichotomous-choice experiment, combined with measurements of emotions and morality, are consistent with these hypotheses. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, Endowment effect, Emotions, Ethics, Experiments
in
Journal of Economic Psychology
volume
32
issue
6
pages
908 - 917
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:80052827684
ISSN
1872-7719
DOI
10.1016/j.joep.2011.07.010
project
BECC
language
English
LU publication?
no
id
cec69229-c57b-4946-8b2d-e05a9fb4f598 (old id 4448524)
date added to LUP
2014-05-23 12:11:13
date last changed
2017-01-01 03:29:56
@article{cec69229-c57b-4946-8b2d-e05a9fb4f598,
  abstract     = {While many earlier studies have found that people's maximum willingness to pay for having a good is often substantially lower than their minimum willingness to accept not having it, more recent experimental evidence suggests that this discrepancy vanishes for standard consumption goods when an incentive-compatible design without misconceptions is used. This paper hypothesises that there is nevertheless a discrepancy for goods with a perceived moral character, such as contributions to a good cause, and moreover that the reason for this discrepancy can largely be explained by differences in emotions and moral perceptions. The results from a real-money dichotomous-choice experiment, combined with measurements of emotions and morality, are consistent with these hypotheses. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
  author       = {Biel, A and Johansson-Stenman, O and Nilsson, A},
  issn         = {1872-7719},
  keyword      = {Willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap,Endowment effect,Emotions,Ethics,Experiments},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {6},
  pages        = {908--917},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {Journal of Economic Psychology},
  title        = {The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap revisited: The role of emotions and moral satisfaction},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2011.07.010},
  volume       = {32},
  year         = {2011},
}