Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBiel, Anders
dc.contributor.authorJohansson-Stenman, Olof
dc.contributor.authorNilsson, Andreas
dc.date.accessioned2011-04-28T06:49:07Z
dc.date.available2011-04-28T06:49:07Z
dc.date.issued2011-04
dc.identifier.issn1403-2465
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2077/25390
dc.description.abstractWhile 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.sv
dc.language.isoengsv
dc.relation.ispartofseriesWorking Papers in Economicssv
dc.relation.ispartofseries497sv
dc.subjectWillingness to pay-Willingness to accept gapsv
dc.subjectEndowment effectsv
dc.subjectEmotionssv
dc.subjectEthicssv
dc.subjectExperimentssv
dc.titleThe Willingness to Pay-Willingness to Accept Gap Revisited: The Role of Emotions and Moral Satisfactionsv
dc.typeTextsv
dc.type.svepreportsv


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record