Article ID Journal Published Year Pages File Type
885175 Journal of Economic Psychology 2011 10 Pages PDF
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.

► Many studies suggest that the WTP for a good is lower than the WTA for not having it. ► Recent evidence has questioned these findings. ► This paper hypothesizes that there is still a discrepancy for “moral goods”. ► The result from a real-money dichotomous-choice experiment confirms the hypothesis. ► The discrepancy is largely explained by measured emotions and moral perceptions.

Related Topics
Social Sciences and Humanities Business, Management and Accounting Marketing
Authors
, , ,