Testing for the survey mode effect on contingent valuation data quality: A case study of web based versus in-person interviews

被引:147
作者
Marta-Pedroso, Cristina
Freitas, Helena
Domingos, Tiago
机构
[1] Inst Super Tecn, Environm & Energy Sect, DEM, P-1049001 Lisbon, Portugal
[2] Univ Coimbra, Dept Bot, P-3001455 Coimbra, Portugal
关键词
contingent valuation; survey mode effect; internet; validity;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.005
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
This paper addresses the lack of empirical evaluation of the use of web based surveys in the context of contingent valuation surveys. We compare, using a case study, in-person interviews with web based surveys regarding response rate, information additivity effects and respondents' attitudes towards paying. The web based survey had a much lower response (5.1%) than the in-person interviewing (84%). We find the web based contingent valuation surveys to be neither more susceptible to information additivity effects nor more prone to zero protest responses. We conclude in favor of the use of web based surveys, namely in Portugal, where the number of Internet users is rapidly increasing, although further research efforts are required on their use. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:388 / 398
页数:11
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]   Electronic survey methodology: A case study in reaching hard-to-involve Internet users [J].
Andrews, D ;
Nonnecke, B ;
Preece, J .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION, 2003, 16 (02) :185-210
[2]   Testing the reliability and construct validity of a simple and inexpensive procedure to measure the use value of recreational fishing [J].
Arlinghaus, R ;
Mehner, T .
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND ECOLOGY, 2004, 11 (01) :61-64
[3]   First impressions count: interviewer appearance and information effects in stated preference studies [J].
Bateman, IJ ;
Mawby, J .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2004, 49 (01) :47-55
[4]  
BATEMAN LJ, 1992, RECREATION ENV PRESE
[5]   Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples [J].
Berrens, RP ;
Bohara, AK ;
Jenkins-Smith, HC ;
Silva, CL ;
Weimer, DL .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2004, 47 (02) :331-363
[6]   A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation [J].
Boxall, PC ;
Adamowicz, WL ;
Swait, J ;
Williams, M ;
Louviere, J .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 1996, 18 (03) :243-253
[7]   Contingent valuation of the public benefits of agricultural wildlife management: The case of Dutch peat meadow land [J].
Brouwer, R ;
Slangen, LHG .
EUROPEAN REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1998, 25 (01) :53-72
[8]   Which response format reveals the truth about donations to a public good? [J].
Brown, TC ;
Champ, PA ;
Bishop, RC ;
McCollum, DW .
LAND ECONOMICS, 1996, 72 (02) :152-166
[9]   Alternative non-market value-elicitation methods: Are the underlying preferences the same? [J].
Cameron, TA ;
Poe, GL ;
Ethier, RG ;
Schulze, WD .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2002, 44 (03) :391-425
[10]   Willingness to pay for improved air quality in Sweden [J].
Carlsson, F ;
Johansson-Stenman, O .
APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2000, 32 (06) :661-669