Abstract:

Sophisticated choice tasks have helped bridge the gap between expensive (and realistic) revealed preference models and less expensive (but less realistic) stated preference models. Our presentation presents a direct comparison between three methodologies. In order to better understand how to most effectively incentivize panelists, Opinion Outpost conducted both a survey research project and an experiment during the summer of 2008. The results of these experiments provided three sets of metrics regarding relative preference of incentives: Cross tabulated panelist responses when asked for first preference among incentive schemes. Utility and demand metrics derived from a conjoint choice task. Experimental results derived from offering the panelist an actual choice of incentive. Ultimately, comparing results from each set of metrics will show how accurately stated preference models predict actual behavior, and show the relative strength of each method for business decision makers.