Conference Agenda

This study revisits and extends the discussion by Bateman et al. (2008) regarding potential deviations from Rational Choice Theory (RCT), focusing on two hypotheses – Coherent Arbitrariness (CAH) and Discovered Preferences (DPH) – and their manifestations in Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs). Using data from 5,917 Polish respondents, we implemented multiple treatments varying the cost vector, choice set size, priming techniques, and the placement of a contingent valuation Willingness To Pay (WTP) question either before or after the DCE. Our findings show that the design of the cost vector systematically influences stated preferences and that attempts to mitigate this anchoring effect (e.g., by presenting an open-ended WTP question prior to the DCE) were unsuccessful. The persistence of cost vector effects over time aligns with CAH, while the lack of any discernible preference refinement challenges DPH. Further analyses reveal systematic variations in cost sensitivity and show that excluding respondents who violated the Weak and Strong Axioms of Revealed Preferences did not reduce cost vector effects. In light of these results, we recommend using diverse cost vectors to verify the robustness of DCE-based welfare estimates and call for further research into the broader impacts of heuristic behaviors in stated preference methods.