Abstract
The paper argues that in the context of public choice for non-market goods, two assumptions of the simple model of the rational economic actor may not hold. The assumptions are that there is a direct connection between choice and outcome, and that preferences are not affected by the act of making a choice. Consequently, to understand people's preferences for public goods, it is important to measure their beliefs and values separately rather than simply to observe their choice behavior or to ask them what they would be willing to pay for the public good. In an example study, people's preferences for U.S. policies toward Nicaragua were measured and further analyzed into their beliefs about the effects of those policies on Nicaraguan outcomes, and their evaluations of the Nicaraguan outcomes. It was shown that the process of making a two-person choice changed the preferences, and that the separate measures or beliefs and values gave insight into the process of the change that would not have been available had only the preferences been measured. Implications for the contingent valuation method are explored and an alternative approach is proposed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, N.H. and Zalinski, J. (1988). Functional measurement approach to self-estimation in multi-attribute evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 1: 191–221.
Balke, W.M., Hammond, K.R. and Meyer, G.D. (1973). An alternative approach to labor-management negotiations. Administrative Science Quarterly 18: 311–327.
Boyce, R.R., McClelland, G.H., Schulze, W.D., Brown, T.C. and Peterson, G.L. (1990). An experimental examination of intrinsic environmental values. University of Colorado.
Cohen, J. and Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Coursey, D.L., Hovis, J.L. and Schulze, W.D. (1987). The disparity between willingness to accept andd willingness to pay measures of value. Quarterly Journal of Economics (August): 679–690.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. New York: Harper and Row.
Frank, R.H. (in press). Rethinking rational choice. In R. Friedland and A.F. Robertson (Eds.), Beyond the marketplace: Rethinking economy and society. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Goldstein, W.M. and Einhorn, H.J. (1987). Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomenon. Psychological Review 94: 236–254.
Gluck, R. (1975). An economic evaluation of the Rakaia Fishery as a recreation resource (Monograph No. 6). Melbourne: Monash University, Australian Recreation Research Association. (Cited in Sinden and Worrell, 1979.)
Grether, D.M. and Plott, C.R. (1979). Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon. American Economic Review 69: 623–638.
Hamm, R.M. (1979). The conditions of occurrence of the preference reversal phenomenon. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. (University Microfilms No. 80-12829.)
Hamm, R.M., Bennett, L., Wunderlich, K. and Howe, C. (1990). Stability and interpretation of survey respondents' unwillingness to pay for increases, or accept compensation for decreases, in water supply reliability. Boulder, CO: Environment and Behavior Program, Institute of Behavioral Sciences, University of Colorado.
Hamm, R.M., Miller, M.A. and Ling, R.S. (1989). Cognitive feedback in negotiations (Publication No. 89–1). Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.
Hammond, K.R. and Adelman, L. (1976). Science, values, and human judgment. Science 194: 389–396.
Hammond, K.R., Stewart, T.R., Brehmer, B. and Steinmann, D.O. (1975). Social judgment theory. In M.F. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (Eds.), Human judgment and decision processes, 271–312. New York: Academic Press. Reprinted in H.R. Arkes and K.R. Hammond (Eds.), Judgment and decision making: An interdisciplinary reader, 56–76. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
Haveman, R.H. and Knopf, K.A. (1970). The market system, 2nd Edition. New York: Wiley.
Kahneman, D. (1986). Comments on the contingent valuation method. In R.G. Cummings, D.S. Brookshire and W.D. Shultze (Eds.), Valuing environmental goods. Totawa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld.
Kahneman, D. and Knetsch, J.L. (1990). Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction. Paper presented at meeting of the Public Choice Society, Tucson, Arizona, 16–18 March.
Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P. (1971). Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 89: 46–55.
Lodge, M. (1981). Magnitude scaling: Quantitative measurement of opinions. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Milter, R.G. and Rohrbaugh, J. (1988). Judgment analysis and decision conferencing for administrative review: A case study of innovative policy making in government. In R.L. Cardy, S.M. Puffer and J.M. Newman (Eds.), Advances in information processing in organizations, 245–262. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Mitchell, R.C. and Carson, R.T. (1989). Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
Nisbett, R.E. and Wilson, T.D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review 84: 231–259.
Roose, J.E. and Doherty, M.E. (1976). Judgment theory applied to the selection of life insurance salesmen. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16: 231–249.
Silberman, J. and Klock, M. (1989). The behavior of respondents in contingent valuation: Evidence on starting bids. Journal of Behavioral Economics 18: 51–60.
Sinden, J.A. and Worrell, A.C. (1979). Unpriced values: Decisions without market prices. New York: Wiley.
Stewart, T.R. (1988). Judgment analysis: Procedures. In B. Brehmer and C.R.B. Joyce (Eds.), Human judgment: The SJT approach, 41–74. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Stewart, T.R. and Ely, D.W. (1984). Range sensitivity: A necessary condition and a test for the validity of weights (NCAR 3141–84/14). Boulder CO: National Center for Atmospheric Research.
White, P.A. (1989). A theory of causal processing. British Journal of Psychology 80: 431–454.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The research was partially supported by the Small Grant Program of the Conflict Resolution Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, which in turn was funded by the Hewlett Foundation. Dr. Hamm was a National Research Council Senior Research Associate at the Army Research Institute Field Unit, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, during part of the project. David Bartos helped run subjects and analyze data. Assistance finding subjects was provided by Major Steve Whitworth and Cadet Rosita Bachman of C.U. Army ROTC and by Professor Philip Langer. Assistance in evaluating the realism of the stimulus materials was provided by Martha Gibson, John Paul Lederach, and Professor Joel Edelstein.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hamm, R.M., Miller, M.A. & Ling, R.S. Preferences, beliefs, and values in negotiations concerning aid to Nicaragua. Public Choice 74, 79–103 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00175212
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00175212