Ankieta a eksperyment w kontekście WTA i WTP - rola bodźca urealniającego w procesie wyceny danych osobowych
Survey vs. experimental method in the context of WTA and WTP. The role of realigning incentive in the process of personal data valuation
Languages of publication
Social research is based in its dominant part on polls and surveys in which respondents declare how they would react in a particular situation in the future. It is not anything uncommon that when confronting the data previously gathered during the surveys with the actual situation visible and definite differences occur. They may be partly due to the false declarations, partly because of an unexpected change of behaviour just in the moment of taking a decision. One of the current problems in knowledge and information based economy is an issue of privacy protection. The value of private personal data is difficult to be priced objectively and unambiguously. In this context, an approach based on WTA (willingness to accept) and WTP (willingness to pay) seem to be most appropriate. It is commonly used when the values of non-standard and unique goods are trying to be estimated. In research described in the article a WTA/WTP concept was used to measure the value of personal data. The main purpose was to identify the differences between results obtained from the survey and from the use of a quasi-experimental method. For that purpose, several quasi-experiments with a real financial incentive (20, 40, 60 PLN; $5, $10, $15) have been introduced. The propensity to sell (or to buy back) the personal data was a subject of examination. Using analysis of proportions (testing differences in two proportions) and comparing the results from the surveys and the quasi-experiments, a set of detailed results was obtained. The comparison revealed visible discrepancies (in some situations statistically significant) between what was declared in the survey and what was shown in the experiment. At the same time, it has been indirectly shown (to some extent) that although surveys are not always the most accurate and reliable way to measure, they still might remain the optimal method of collecting research data due to their good cost-effectiveness ratio.
- Bizon W., Poszewiecki A., The willingness to trade privacy in the context of WTA and WTP, "International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance" 2016, Vol. 7, No. 4. s. 121-124, http://dx.doi.org/10.18178/IJTEF.
- Bjornstad D.J., Kahn J.R. (eds.), The Contingent Valuation of Environmental Resources, Edward Elgar, 1996.
- Brookshire D.S., Coursey D.L., Measuring the value of a public good: an empirical comparison of elicitation procedures, "American Economic Review" 1987, Vol. 77, No. 4, 554-566.
- Calo R., Privacy and Markets: A Love Story, "Notre Dame Law Review" 2015, Vol. 91, No. 2, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2640607.
- Calzolari G., Pavan A., On the optimality of privacy in sequential contracting, "Journal of Economic Theory" 2006, Vol. 130, No. 1, s. 168-204, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2005.04.007.
- Coursey D.L., Hovis J.L., Schulze W.D., The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value, "Quarterly Journal of Economics" 1987, Vol. 102, No. 3, s. 679-690, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1884223.
- Cummings R., Harrison G., Ruström E., Homegrown values and hypothetical surveys: is the dichotomous choice approach incentive compatible?, "American Economic Review" 1995, Vol. 85, No. 1, s. 260-266.
- Handel danymi osobowymi. Ile kosztuje Twoje nazwisko, 2013, http://finanse.wp.pl/kat,1037883,title,Handel-danymi-osobowymi-Ile-kosztuje-twoje-nazwisko,wid,15895792,wiadomosc.html?ticaid=1170c9.
- Hanemann W.M., Valuing the environment through contingent valuation, "Journal of Economic Perspective" 1994, Vol. 8, No. 4, s. 19-43.
- Hausman J.A. (ed.), Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment, North Holland, Amsterdam 1993.
- Johannesson M., Liljas B., Johansson P., An experimental comparison of dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions and real purchase decisions, "Applied Economics" 1998, Vol. 30, No. 5, s. 643-647, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/000368498325633.
- Kulawczuk P., Poszewiecki A., Bizon W. (ed.), Behavioral Finance of Entrepreneurship. How Can Framing Influence Financial Decisions of Entrepreneurs?, University of Gdansk, Gdansk 2011.
- Lenard T.M., Rubin P.H., In defense of data: Information and the costs of privacy, Technology Policy Institute, 2009.
- Loomis J., Brown T., Lucero B., Peterson G., Improving validity experiments of contingent valuation methods: results of efforts to reduce the disparity of hypothetical and actual willingness to pay, "Land Economics" 1996, Vol. 72, No. 4, s. 450-461.
- Loomis J., Brown T., Lucero B., Peterson G., Evaluating the validity of the dichotomous choice question format in contingent valuation, "Environmental and Resource Economics" 1997, Vol. 10, No. 2, s. 109-123, http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1026403916622.
- MacMillan D.C., Actual and hypothetical willingness to pay for environmental outputs: why are they different?, A report to SEERAD, Univeristy of Aberdeen, 2004.
- McClelland G.H., Schulze W.D., Coursey D.L., Insurance for low-probability hazards: a bimodal response to unlikely events, "Journal of Risk and Uncertainty" 1993, Vol. 7, No. 1, s. 95-116.
- Mitchell R.C., Carson R.T., Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method, Resource for the Future, Washington DC 1989.
- Neill H., Cummings R., Ganderton P., Harrison G., McGuckin T., Hypothetical surveys and real economic commitments, "Land Economics" 1994, Vol. 70, No. 2, s. 145-154, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3146318.
- Paradiso M., Trisorio A., The effect of knowledge on the disparity between hypothetical and real willingness to pay, "Applied Economics" 2001, Vol. 33, No. 11, s. 1359-1364, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036840152478039.
- Seip K., Strand J., Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods in Norway: A Contingent Valuation Study with Real Payment, "Environmental and Resource Economics" 1992, Vol. 2, No. 1, s. 91-106, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00324691.
- Shaughnessy J.J., Zechmeister E.B., Zechmeister J.S., Metody badawcze w psychologii, Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne, Gdańsk 2007.
- Shy O., Stenbacka R., Customer Privacy and Competition, "Journal of Economics & Management Strategy" 2015, Vol. 25, No. 3, s. 539-562, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jems.12157.
- Small Data: Do people lie in surveys?, BBC News Magazine, 2014, http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-29206289.
- Spiekermann S., Acquisti A., Böhme R., Hui K.L., The challenges of personal data markets and privacy, "Electronic Markets" 2015, Vol. 25, No. 2, s. 161-167, http://10.1007/s12525-015-0191-0.
- Thaler R., Toward A Positive Theory Of Consumer Choice, "Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization" 1980, Vol. 1, No. 1, s. 39-60, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7.
- Varian H.R., Economic Aspects of Personal Privacy, Technical report, University of California, Berkeley 1996.
Publication order reference