Constructed preference stability: a test–retest

Preference construction has been argued to undermine the use of stated preference results like willingness to pay (WTP) values in policy evaluations. Preferences constructed at the time of the valuation task are expected to be unstable and hence unreliable. Choice repetition and experience have been shown to stabilize preferences and increase choice consistency. The objective of this article is twofold. First, to examine the effect of self-reported construction bias on stated preferences during a repeated choice contingent valuation (CV) study. Second, to test the effect of choice repetition on the stability of the articulated preferences in a test–retest experiment using a single and double bound CV referendum elicitation format. As expected, unfamiliarity with the environmental good in question results in a significant impact of the survey instrument on preference construction. This in turn influences the respondent decision to participate in the contingent market, but after controlling for self-selection, cognitive and motivational characteristics, not the size of the WTP value. Evidence is found that choice experience filters out possible construction bias. In the test–retest experiment, choice repetition furthermore generates more stable and consistent preferences compared to the results of the NOAA endorsed ‘one-shot’ single bound approach in CV.