Arbitrary values, good causes, and premature verdicts

摘要: Abstract This paper offers an alternative interpretation of the conclusions Kahneman and Knetsch propose based on two contingent valuation (CVM) surveys. The evaluation argues that while framing is important to CVM estimates, design, implementation, empirical findings reported from these surveys do not support their judgments. Moreover, with exception temporal embedding, conventional economic descriptions individual behavior can explain response patterns they suggest are at variance standard value theory.