Testing Distributional Dependence in the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak ...

Recommendations

Info

Table 8. Pairwise Distributional Tests: Change in the Shape of Distribution [N = 69] Panel A. Mass to the Left, Low Support #3 #7 #11 #3 #3 #7 Distributions Compared #1 #1 #1 #7 #11 #11 58 all subjects p-value for test of means basic instructions detailed instructions 0.0847* 0.0993* 0.2566 0.1499 0.0955* 0.4040 0.0356** 0.0628* 0.1441 0.3215 0.4241 0.3286 0.6469 0.5440 0.6599 0.8169 0.6344 0.8097 Notes: Reported p-values give the probability from the one-tailed test that the mean of the elicitations from the distribution with more mass to the left is greater than the mean of the elicitations from the matched paired distribution with more mass to the right. Distributions 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, and 14 each appeared twice during the 20 rounds. The tests reported here reflect only the observations when subjects submitted a valuation for a specified distribution for the last time. The symbols *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels respectively.
Panel B. Mass to the Left, High Support #5 #9 #13 #5 #5 #9 Distributions Compared Notes: See the notes of Panel A. #2 #2 #2 #9 #13 #13 59 all subjects p-value for test of means basic instructions detailed instructions 0.1827 0.1299 0.4357 0.4938 0.3241 0.6638 0.2568 0.1543 0.5374 0.1692 0.1979 0.2867 0.4028 0.4632 0.4038 0.7530 0.7635 0.6219
Page 1 and 2:
Testing Distributional Dependence i
Page 3 and 4:
compatibility and relative ease of
Page 5 and 6:
willing to accept (WTA) to sell the
Page 7 and 8: Hypothesis 3 (Comprehension): More
Page 9 and 10: effect of varying distributions (ap
Page 11 and 12: high-support distributions with mas
Page 13 and 14: esponses was recorded, so the infor
Page 15 and 16: different distribution—identical
Page 17 and 18: Since some of the subjects returned
Page 19 and 20: zero by instruction type, and it al
Page 21 and 22: Table 8 holds the support and the a
Page 23 and 24: The evidence presented in Figure 3,
Page 25 and 26: undesirably high prices when faced
Page 27 and 28: went dow[n] because i expected it t
Page 29 and 30: 5 Discussion As seen in Sections 4.
Page 31 and 32: maximum monetary compensation—reg
Page 33 and 34: test statistic of 0.6495 (with a co
Page 35 and 36: actual valuations for the item rema
Page 37 and 38: If the range or other attributes of
Page 39 and 40: 7 References Batemen, Ian J., Richa
Page 41 and 42: Mazar, Nina, Botond Kőszegi, and D
Page 43 and 44: Panel B. Round 2 WTP (Half of the s
Page 45 and 46: Figure 4. WTP Elicitations by Round
Page 47 and 48: Figure 6. Measured Risk Attitude an
Page 49 and 50: variance of first elicitations over
Page 51 and 52: Table 1. Summary of the Distributio
Page 53 and 54: Table 3. Summary of Categorical Sur
Page 55 and 56: Table 5. Number of Subjects with Si
Page 57: Table 7. Pairwise Distributional Te
Page 61 and 62: #2 #2 #2 Panel D. Mass to the Right
Page 63 and 64: Appendix A Screenshots of the Exper
Page 65 and 66: [Second page of the instructions. T
Page 67 and 68: Figure A.3. Screenshot of the Holt-
Page 69 and 70: Survey Questions 1. What is your fi
Page 82 and 83: Appendix C Subject responses to the
show all

Testing Distributional Dependence in the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?